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

December 8, 1997

36th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

L257a - Mon 8 Dec 1997 / Lun 8 Déc 1997

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

EDUCATION FINANCING

NURSING CONFERENCE

GIRL GUIDES

SERVICES FOR THE DISABLED

NORTHERN ONTARIO DEVELOPMENT

LAND TRANSFER TAX REBATE

NORTHWESTERN ONTARIO ASSOCIATED CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE

TVONTARIO

JAMES SHAW

VISITORS

CONSIDERATION OF LEGISLATION

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

TORONTO HOSPITAL ACT, 1997 / LOI DE 1997 SUR L'HÔPITAL DE TORONTO

JAMAICAN CANADIAN ASSOCIATION ACT, 1997

MOTIONS

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

DEFERRED VOTES

DEVELOPMENT CHARGES ACT, 1997 / LOI DE 1997 SUR LES REDEVANCES D'AMÉNAGEMENT

ORAL QUESTIONS

HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING

CHARITABLE GAMING

EDUCATION FINANCING

YOUTH UNEMPLOYMENT

WINTER HIGHWAY MAINTENANCE

WOMEN'S SHELTERS

MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES' PENSIONS

YOUTH UNEMPLOYMENT

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

TELEMARKETING PRACTICES

MALDEN PARK CONTINUING CARE CENTRE

HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING

NATIONAL UNITY

PETITIONS

CHIROPRACTIC HEALTH CARE

EDUCATION REFORM

COURT DECISION

CERTIFIED GENERAL ACCOUNTANTS

ABORTION

PAY EQUITY

MALDEN PARK CONTINUING CARE CENTRE

CERTIFIED GENERAL ACCOUNTANTS

EDUCATION FINANCING

ANIMAL WELFARE

MALDEN PARK CONTINUING CARE CENTRE

COURT DECISION

CHOICE IN HEALTH CARE

PAY EQUITY

CHIROPRACTIC HEALTH CARE

BEAR HUNTING

ROYAL ASSENT / SANCTION ROYALE

ORDERS OF THE DAY

TAX CREDITS TO CREATE JOBS ACT, 1997 / LOI DE 1997 ACCORDANT DES CRÉDITS D'IMPÔT POUR CRÉER DES EMPLOIS

The House met at 1331.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

EDUCATION FINANCING

Mrs Lyn McLeod (Fort William): We are beginning to see the future of public education under a Mike Harris government, and what we see is truly frightening. It is a future where there is so little money for textbooks and school supplies and equipment that private citizens and parents feel they must contribute money out of their own pockets to keep their local schools going.

Toni Skarica knows how bad things are already. As the former parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Education, he became so concerned about the sad state of equipment in a secondary school he visited that he is donating $5,000 to help address what he describes as a desperate situation.

Mr Skarica is not the only one who is concerned. Many parents across the province are planning to donate the $40 a day that they can claim in protest compensation money to their local schools to buy much-needed textbooks and supplies.

Thunder Bay parent councils have been encouraging parents to make a contribution. The parents of the Mississauga People's Forum have started the First Forty campaign to put funds into breakfast programs and art and music supplies that they believe are at risk with the Harris cutbacks. The idea is spreading across the province, being taken up by concerned parents in all parts of Ontario.

The parents' concern is understandable. Mr Skarica's generosity and his concern is admirable, but the Harris government should not be counting on private individuals and parents to make up for the damage caused by their cuts. The Harris government must stop the cuts and provide adequate funding to public education.

NURSING CONFERENCE

Mrs Marion Boyd (London Centre): I was very pleased to have been invited to join with the Registered Nurses' Association of Ontario in their two-day conference entitled Health Care Reform: Where Are We Going? As you may know, Madam Speaker, the Registered Nurses' Association takes the point of view that nurses are the most important part of our health care system. They are the advocates for parents and those who deliver most of the care in the system. They have had the courage the last two years to have an invited conference in which they work with those in the political and in the medical field to look at what is happening with health care reform.

I want to give my congratulations to the president of the RNAO, Charlotte Noesgaard, and the executive director, Doris Grinspun, who this year delivered a conference that was second to none. It allowed the nurses of Ontario, by themselves, to look at all of the issues that face health care today as it undergoes reform, to determine for themselves what is rhetoric and what is real about the promises around reform, not only from the political sphere but also from the various aspects of the medical system itself, the OHA, the OMA and other nurses' associations. I congratulate them on a wonderful conference and look forward to next year.

GIRL GUIDES

Mr Joseph Spina (Brampton North): I am pleased and proud to inform the members today about a dinner that I went to recently that was hosted by the Bramalea Division Girl Guides where they announced their adoption of a killer whale named Ripple through the Vancouver Aquarium.

Using photographic identification of physical characteristics, researchers at the aquarium are able to identify individual whales and therefore determine how they hunt, socialize and communicate with each other.

In order to help defray the costs of such research, the Guides donated $25 a year for which they receive an adoption certificate, a photograph of their adopted whale, an audio tape of the whale communication sounds and a copy of the aquarium newsletter, The Blackfish Sounder, to keep them up to date about killer whale research.

I commend the Bramalea Division Girl Guides for their involvement in this program and for their eagerness to learn everything they can about these whales, including how they live and socialize and some of the potential dangers faced by them and their marine environment.

I also commend their efforts to promote the program among other Guide divisions so that they too can share in the knowledge and the feeling of satisfaction which this program provides.

If there are any groups in other members' ridings that you feel would be interested in participating in this program, I urge you to please contact my office and we'll be happy to put you in touch with Donna McLean of the Bramalea Girl Guides.

SERVICES FOR THE DISABLED

Mr Michael Gravelle (Port Arthur): For almost two years now, I've been fighting on behalf of Veronica Manuel and her multi-disabled son Dylan, two constituents in my Port Arthur riding. I've been fighting for this hard-hearted government to acknowledge that their vicious cuts to social assistance, health care and the disabled in our province will eventually leave people like Ms Manuel no choice but to have their children institutionalized.

Dylan was born with cerebral palsy and a number of medical conditions that require extensive medication, complex equipment and 24-hour care. Dylan cannot walk, talk or hold his head up by himself. His mother, Veronica, who is a registered nurse, spends most of her time caring for her son.

The point is that Veronica loves her son a great deal and wants to keep him at home, because she believes that the love and support he receives at home are what are keeping him alive. But she needs more from this government in order to do that.

Later today Veronica and Dylan will be in the Legislature sitting in the Speaker's gallery. I am standing here now to make a plea to Community and Social Services Minister Ecker that she find some time to meet with Veronica and Dylan, if only briefly, so that Veronica can tell Dylan's story to her face to face. She deserves that, Minister.

Although the minister coldly noted in a recent letter to Veronica that she wished to bring closure to Veronica's concerns, the minister needs to understand that Veronica cannot talk about closure because this is her child. There is no closure for a mother and a child.

Minister, will you show some compassion and meet with Veronica and Dylan today?

NORTHERN ONTARIO DEVELOPMENT

Mr Bud Wildman (Algoma): On Friday last, the Minister of Northern Development and Mines visited Algoma and Sault Ste Marie for two important meetings, among other things. In the morning he attended at the Garden River to join with Chief Lyle Sayers and former chief Dennis Jones and others in a cheque presentation for the transfer of the lands from the Garden River reserve for the construction of the four-lane highway across the reserve from the Echo Bay area to Sault Ste Marie.

This is a project that has been debated and negotiated and talked about for over 20 years, and I'm glad to see that it's going forward. Unfortunately, I was unable to attend because I was not informed of the meeting until two days previously when I had already committed to be in Chapleau.

The minister also met with Reeve Jim Aquino of the township of Michipicoten, Wawa, in the afternoon in Sault Ste Marie to discuss how the provincial government might respond initially to the crisis in Wawa as a result of the decision of Algoma Steel Inc to close down the Algoma Ore division in June 1998. The minister presented Mr Aquino with a cheque for $50,000 as a provincial contribution, along with the federal government and the company -

The Deputy Speaker (Ms Marilyn Churley): Statements.

LAND TRANSFER TAX REBATE

Mr Dan Newman (Scarborough Centre): I'm pleased to rise in the House today as the member for Scarborough Centre to inform the House of the tremendous support I have received from residents across the province regarding our government's land transfer tax rebate program.

Our government is working to create jobs, hope, growth and opportunity for all Ontarians, and the land transfer tax rebate program is an initiative that is indeed working to achieve those goals.

The land transfer tax constitutes a significant portion of the closing costs that all first-time home buyers face.

Our government, through this program, is working to ensure that our economy is spurred by the sale of homes. A 1994-95 study commissioned by the Canadian Real Estate Association and the Ontario Real Estate Association reported that $16,200 is generated by the average housing transaction. Recently an update of that report put the figure at well over $17,000.

As well, the purchase and sale of homes also generates fees to professionals such as lawyers, appraisers, real estate agents and surveyors, all of which create significant economic activity and jobs. In addition, when individuals move, they typically purchase new appliances, furnishings and other durable goods, as well as undertake renovations to the home, all of which create significant economic activity and, most important, jobs.

Finally, whenever a first-time home buyer purchases a resale home, the seller has to move somewhere, which creates further economic activity in our communities.

My office has been contacted by many Ontarians who want to share -

The Deputy Speaker (Ms Marilyn Churley): Thank you.

NORTHWESTERN ONTARIO ASSOCIATED CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE

Mr Frank Miclash (Kenora): My statement is directed to the Premier. The Premier will know that the Northwestern Ontario Associated Chambers of Commerce has worked closely with provincial governments of all political stripes for the past 62 years.

From 1952 to 1995, NOACC has personally met with the Premier and cabinet of the day, a tradition this current Premier and government have decided to ignore.

Premier, NOACC wrote to you to seek a meeting with them in January or February of next year, as other governments have done since 1952. I must request on their behalf that you agree to this request.

Premier, NOACC's reputation is one of providing well-thought-out briefs on issues of concern to our region.

You stated in the last election that you would provide the opportunity for northern groups and organizations such as NOACC to "play an important role in making the decisions which affect their lives." Thus far, all they have received from you is your Minister of Northern Development's fluffy acknowledgement letters to their position papers.

They believed you when you stated that they and others would be involved in the policy-making process. Now they are calling upon you to keep your promise.

Premier, take this opportunity to show that your commitment in terms of meaningful consultation with northerners was not just political rhetoric. I call on you to set up a meeting between your cabinet and NOACC's executive and directors, as they have requested, this coming January or February.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms Marilyn Churley): The member for Nickel Belt.

TVONTARIO

Mr Floyd Laughren (Nickel Belt): Thank you, Madam Speaker. I congratulate you on your elevation.

On November 24, the privatization of TVO road show came to Sudbury. My colleague from Sudbury East and I went to the same hotel where that road show was being held and held a press conference of our own to talk to people about the perils of privatizing TVO.

Imagine our surprise when constituents kept coming up to us and saying, "Where is the official TVO privatization road show meeting being held?" We said, "Why don't you ask at the desk of this fine hotel." They said, "We did ask at the desk and we were told, `We can't tell you.'" I said, "That can't be true." So I went to the desk myself and I said, "Where's the TVO meeting?" "We can't tell you." "What do you mean you can't tell us?" "We were told by the Toronto office of the privatization secretariat that we couldn't let the news out as to where the meeting was being held until just about an hour before the meeting begins."

I ask you, what kind of government is it that holds a road show to hear people's views on an issue such as the privatization of TVO and then doesn't tell anybody where it is, refuses to tell anybody where it is? We're told the instructions for that came directly from the minister's office, not from the hotel but right from the minister's office. It's a joke.

JAMES SHAW

Mr John O'Toole (Durham East): I will be brief. I want to take this opportunity to congratulate one of my special constituents, Mr James Shaw of Newcastle. Mr Shaw, a discus, javelin and shot-put competitor, recently was named the recipient of a prestigious Ontario award as the top athlete with a disability.

Multi-sport athlete James Shaw earned two gold medals and a bronze at the Paralympics in Atlanta and three gold medals in the Ontario Games for the Physically Disabled in Peterborough.

At the Paralympics Mr Shaw set a world record with a heave of 41.24 metres in the discus, won a gold medal in the shot-put and a bronze in the javelin - truly remarkable. At the Ontario Games he won three gold medals on each of the discus, javelin and shot-put.

Our Ontario government renewed its commitment to sport and recreation for all athletes in the province by honouring its amateur athletes for sports achievements in 1996 at the 30th annual Ontario Sports Awards ceremony held this fall.

I ask the members of the Legislature and the assembly to join with me today in recognizing and congratulating Jim Shaw and the other exceptional individuals for their outstanding achievements as amateur athletes. Jim is truly an inspiration for each and every one of us in this House today.

VISITORS

The Deputy Speaker (Ms Marilyn Churley): I would like to inform the members of the Legislative Assembly that we have in the Speaker's gallery today the Honourable Umberto Aimola, Speaker of the Regional Parliament of Abruzzo, Italy. Also, please welcome Mr Odoardo Di Santo, former member of the provincial Parliament for Downsview. Please join me in welcoming our guests.

CONSIDERATION OF LEGISLATION

The Deputy Speaker (Ms Marilyn Churley): Last week, the member for Algoma (Mr Wildman) raised a point of order with respect to the admissibility of Bill 164,

An Act to implement job creation measures and other measures contained in the 1997 Budget and to make other amendments to statutes administered by the Ministry of Finance or relating to taxation matters, in light of the pending consideration of Bill l49. The member for Scarborough-Agincourt (Mr Phillips) and the government House leader contributed to the discussion of this issue. In addition, later that same week, the member for Fort William (Mrs McLeod) raised a similar point concerning the relationship of Bill 164 to Bill 160, and this week the Chair received additional written and oral submissions.

Members cited standing order 51, which states: "No motion, or amendment, the subject matter of which has been decided upon, can be again proposed during the same session." The

interpretation of this standing order is that the House may not revisit substantially the same question twice in the same session. That is, having decided upon something once, the matter cannot again be raised. The

interpretation of this standing order, however, is quite restrictive and there are many examples of debates on variations of the same or similar subject matters being debated more than once in a session.

Indeed, on April 22, the Chair ruled on a similar question being raised relating to a time allocation motion on Bill 104. Allowing a second time allocation motion at that time underscores the very tight and restrictive

interpretation that standing order 51 undergoes when these questions are raised.

In short, if a matter before the House is not substantially the same, or identical, to one already decided upon, it is not prohibited from being considered. What the House cannot do under this standing order is put itself in a position of voting on a question that is, for all intents and purposes, identical to one already dealt with.

Now let me relate the standing order to the passage of legislation.

Section 3 of the Statutes Act states that,

"Any act may be amended, altered or repealed by

an act passed in the same session of the Legislature." Further, in the 21st edition of Erskine May on page 470 it states: "There is now no rule against the amendment or repeal of

an act of the same session. Formerly it was expressly disallowed, but it has been permissible since 1850." These references are not incompatible with standing order 51. Standing order 51 seeks to prevent two bills that are substantially the same from being considered in the same session. Its purpose is not to prevent consideration of legislation which further amends any bill passed in the same session.

The Chair has also reviewed the 1968 ruling of Speaker Lamoureux at the House of Commons of Canada. In that case, the Speaker found a bill out of order because certain of its clauses were identical to those defeated in a previous bill at third reading. This ruling served as a guideline to the Chair because, while he found the bill out of order based on the identical clauses, he also stated that in at least one case the fact that a clause contained similar provisions to those in the previous bill "is not sufficient to justify a ruling that they are out of order."

In view of the foregoing, with respect to Bill 164, the Chair had to determine whether Bill 164 or any part of it is substantially the same as Bill 149 or Bill 160. The Chair has reviewed Bill 164 and cannot find that the changes it seeks to make to Bills 149 and 160, in their eventual existence as statutes, are changes that revisit prior decisions of this House. While Bill 164 certainly makes amendments to other bills, the Chair is not convinced that it is virtually the same bill or indeed that it contains identical clauses.

Finally, I want to address the point that since both Bill 149 and Bill 160 were time-allocated, the deadline for amendment had passed, thereby rendering legislation that seeks to make further amendments out of order. The Chair disagrees. The deadlines set by the time allocation motions were specific to the consideration of the various stages of those bills. The deadlines were not imposed in perpetuity for any future consideration of the legislation.

An act can be amended by subsequent legislation regardless of the terms of the passage of the original act. Obviously, this new legislation is subject to the usual scrutiny and opportunity for debate or amendment.

For these reasons, I find that Bill 164 is in order.

Mr Bud Wildman (Algoma): On a point of order, Madam Speaker: I thank the Speaker for the ruling and I just ask if you would entertain a question that you might like to consider. In your ruling, Speaker, you have repeated in terms of the standing orders and Erskine May the statement that

an act can be amended subsequently by a bill in the same session, as long as they are not identical, and I understand your ruling.

The small point I would like to raise a question about is that when Bill 164 was introduced on the order paper the legislation it was attempting to modify and to amend was not acts, not statutes. It was bills before this House that could then be amended in the House by referring the matter to committee of the whole House, and you might argue that that was precluded because of the time allocation motions. Time allocation motions, as you indicated in your ruling, could be superseded by a subsequent time allocation motion.

My question simply is, while citing that acts can be amended by further bills in the same session, are you also saying that bills that have not been passed into law can also be amended prior to actually being law by another bill?

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): On the same point of order, Madam Speaker: Timing obviously is everything in the contention that is being made by the opposition in this particular case. As my friend the member for Algoma has aptly pointed out, we fully understand that when a bill has already passed the Legislature, when it is

an act of the Ontario Legislature, a subsequent bill would be able to amend that. That's understandable.

The contention we come back to as an opposition is that those bills had not been passed by the Legislature and in fact all the government was doing was using a device, that is, an omnibus bill, in which they could include many unrelated matters, as I think some of these are unrelated in this particular case, to avoid going to committee of the whole, which is the appropriate venue to make amendments to the two bills that were in question, Bill 160 and Bill 149.

It seems to me what we have in this Legislature, if this ruling is as I understand it, is that the government is now going to be able to avoid going to committee of the whole simply by starting anew another bill to amend bills which have not yet passed the Legislature. To me, that's a rather backward way of doing it and an inappropriate way of doing it and, I would suggest, somewhat undemocratic.

The Deputy Speaker: Just give me a moment here.

The House is recessed for 10 minutes.

The House recessed from 1358 to 1411.

The Deputy Speaker: Thank you very much for your indulgence while I conferred with the Clerk. As I understand it, the question raised by the member for Algoma and the member for St Catharines was whether Bill 164 is out of order because it was introduced prior to royal assent being given to Bills 160 and 149. After careful consideration and discussions, I've come to the conclusion that this would only be an impediment to Bill 164 passing before the enactment of Bills 149 and 160, but it does not prevent Bill 164 from being introduced and considered.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

TORONTO HOSPITAL ACT, 1997 / LOI DE 1997 SUR L'HÔPITAL DE TORONTO

Mr Gilchrist moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 172,

An Act to amalgamate The Toronto Hospital and The Ontario Cancer Institute and to amend the Cancer Act / Projet de loi 172, Loi visant à fusionner l'Hôpital de Toronto et l'Institut ontarien du cancer et à modifier la

Loi sur le cancer.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms Marilyn Churley): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

Mr Steve Gilchrist (Scarborough East): The purpose of the bill will be to amalgamate the Toronto Hospital and the Ontario Cancer Institute, otherwise known as the Princess Margaret Hospital, under the name of the Toronto Hospital. It's my understanding that we have all-party support to give second and third reading for this bill later today.

I would just like to point out to the members that we have Dr Alan Hudson, the president and CEO of the Toronto Hospital and Princess Margaret, as well as Ms Bella Martin, legal counsel and director of medical affairs of the two hospitals, with us in the gallery here today.

I look forward to the members' comments on this bill later this afternoon.

JAMAICAN CANADIAN ASSOCIATION ACT, 1997

Mr Sergio moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill Pr94,

An Act respecting the Jamaican Canadian Association.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms Marilyn Churley): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

MOTIONS

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

Hon Chris Hodgson (Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet, Minister of Northern Development and Mines): I move, notwithstanding standing order 96(d), Mr Guzzo and Mr Grimmett exchange places in the order of precedence for private members' public business.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms Marilyn Churley): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

DEFERRED VOTES

DEVELOPMENT CHARGES ACT, 1997 / LOI DE 1997 SUR LES REDEVANCES D'AMÉNAGEMENT

Deferred vote on the motion for third reading of Bill 98,

An Act to promote job creation and increased municipal accountability while providing for the recovery of development costs related to new growth / Projet de loi 98, Loi visant à promouvoir la création d'emplois et à accroître la responsabilité des municipalités tout en prévoyant le recouvrement des coûts d'aménagement liés à la croissance.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms Marilyn Churley): There will be a five-minute bell. Call in the members.

The division bells rang from 1416 to 1421.

The Deputy Speaker: All those in favour of the motion, please rise one at a time.

Ayes

Arnott, Ted

Baird, John R.

Barrett, Toby

Beaubien, Marcel

Brown, Jim

Carr, Gary

Chudleigh, Ted

Clement, Tony

Cunningham, Dianne

Danford, Harry

DeFaria, Carl

Doyle, Ed

Ecker, Janet

Eves, Ernie L.

Fisher, Barbara

Flaherty, Jim

Ford, Douglas B.

Fox, Gary

Froese, Tom

Galt, Doug

Gilchrist, Steve

Grimmett, Bill

Guzzo, Garry J.

Hardeman, Ernie

Harnick, Charles

Hastings, John

Hodgson, Chris

Hudak, Tim

Jackson, Cameron

Johns, Helen

Johnson, Bert

Johnson, David

Johnson, Ron

Jordan, W. Leo

Kells, Morley

Klees, Frank

Leach, Al

Leadston, Gary L.

Marland, Margaret

Martiniuk, Gerry

McLean, Allan K.

Munro, Julia

Mushinski, Marilyn

Newman, Dan

O'Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Palladini, Al

Parker, John L.

Pettit, Trevor

Preston, Peter

Rollins, E.J. Douglas

Runciman, Robert W.

Saunderson, William

Shea, Derwyn

Sheehan, Frank

Skarica, Toni

Smith, Bruce

Snobelen, John

Spina, Joseph

Stewart, R. Gary

Tilson, David

Tsubouchi, David H.

Turnbull, David

Wettlaufer, Wayne

Wilson, Jim

Witmer, Elizabeth

Wood, Bob

Young, Terence H.

The Deputy Speaker: All those opposed, please stand one at a time.

Nays

Bartolucci, Rick

Boyd, Marion

Bradley, James J.

Caplan, David

Cleary, John C.

Colle, Mike

Conway, Sean G.

Curling, Alvin

Duncan, Dwight

Gerretsen, John

Gravelle, Michael

Hampton, Howard

Hoy, Pat

Kennedy, Gerard

Kwinter, Monte

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Laughren, Floyd

Lessard, Wayne

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

McLeod, Lyn

Miclash, Frank

Morin, Gilles E.

Patten, Richard

Phillips, Gerry

Pupatello, Sandra

Ramsay, David

Sergio, Mario

Silipo, Tony

Wildman, Bud

Clerk of the House (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 68; the nays are 30.

The Deputy Speaker: I declare the motion carried. Resolved that the bill do now pass and be entitled as in the motion.

ORAL QUESTIONS

HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING

Mr Gerard Kennedy (York South): I have a question for the Minister of Health. The people of northwest Toronto today got information about their hospital services and they got it in an unusual form, Minister. You'll be aware there was a full-page ad telling the people who use North York Branson that if they arrive in the night hours by car, will they be treated by the emergency department? The answer is no.

Minister, 18 months ahead of the time that your hospital closing commission said, North York Branson is forced to close its overnight emergency services. It is forced to close it not because of the board of the hospital, which held an emergency meeting yesterday, another one today, I understand with your officials, but because of the chaos that your ministry has created. There is no plan to ensure the doctors and nurses needed to provide emergency services will have a place once this hospital eventually closes or changes itself to ambulatory services. There is no plan -

The Deputy Speaker (Ms Marilyn Churley): Question, please.

Mr Kennedy: - for these services to go elsewhere because those other hospitals haven't done their renovations. Will you be able to guarantee emergency services for the people who had to read that ad this weekend?

Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Minister of Health): Yes, we certainly are fully aware of the situation at North York Branson Hospital and the fact that it has closed the night-time emergency department. In fact, as you know, last week they issued a press release indicating that indeed was going to happen. That was part of their efforts to ensure that people in that community know of the change in the treatment that is going to be available to them and that during the nights, from 10 to 8, they will not be open.

As you've just indicated, officials from the Ministry of Health have been meeting with the North York Branson Hospital and they will be continuing to meet today. Certainly we will do everything possible to ensure that first-class quality patient care will continue to be delivered as we go through the transition stage.

Mr Kennedy: Minister, that quality care is only possible if people know what to expect in terms of the hospital. The blue sign is being taken down outside North York Branson. I don't know how you can ensure that quality care is going to be there. It's not going to be a hospital 18 months ahead of the time that your hospital closing commission said it should shut down. You had correspondence from this hospital in April of this year and September of this year. They told you it was because of the great uncertainty caused by the decisions that you made, and no doubt the 12% cuts in their budget don't help either.

Minister, will you act to deal with these problems? You know that in Windsor closing of emergency rooms created great problems and you have a report to tell you how serious those problems were, that the facilities were inadequate, inefficient and unsafe.

The surrounding hospitals have not had time to do their renovations. Part of Branson will shut down. You're told by the head of the board that you ought not presume stability.

The Deputy Speaker: Question, please.

Mr Kennedy: Can you tell us specifically how you will take responsibility and make sure that those quality services are there for the people who had to read this ad in the paper this weekend?

Hon Mrs Witmer: Again I indicate to you that the ad in the paper was simply part of the ongoing communication to ensure that people knew about the changes that were taking place.

I just want to stress again that patients will still be able to access full-service emergency facilities at the York-Finch site of the Humber River Regional and the North York General as well. I think we also need to remember that the Humber River Regional has already increased its emergency room capacity from 54 stretchers to 67 stretchers in order to deal with the conversion. So there are some changes already going on, but as you know as well, the commission has also taken the opportunity to review the human resource report, a draft they have received from Mr Pathe.

Again, it's going to be up to them to direct hospitals how to continue to deal with the staffing problems, so I am very confident that quality patient care will continue to be provided to those patients who use the hospitals.

Mr Kennedy: It's not good enough for you to be confident down here at Queen's Park. Out there in the real world, people are not able to access emergency services the way they need to. Your ministry knew about this in April. They knew about it in September. You have told 30 hospitals across this province to close, and there is no plan to tell doctors and nurses, whom people are depending on, where they will go, what their careers will be, and some of them are now acting and they are moving to other hospitals.

The situation in Branson can be happening over and over again in this province. Two specific things: Will you assure the people who are served by Branson, many disproportionately elderly, in telling them there's a hospital somewhere away? It may look good on a map, but it's not real for them. Will you do something about Branson? Will you provide some funding? Will you make sure the staff get appointments to hospitals so that this uncertainty can be lifted? As you have been told, they could be unstable, the whole emergency could close, and many other services could close as well.

Will you announce the date when we will have a human resources adjustment strategy so that this chaos that you and Premier Harris and your predecessor have brought to this province can be dealt with properly?

Hon Mrs Witmer: I certainly understand the concerns of the individuals who use North York Branson. Again I would indicate to you that was part of the communication that was received this weekend. We will continue to monitor the situation at Branson very closely; in fact, as I said before, our staff are meeting with them, and as I said to you in my last answer, and now you've made reference to it, there is a human resource report. It is a draft at the present time, and there will be directions coming very soon as to how to deal with all those issues, so there is a plan in place that is being developed, and I can assure you we will have quality patient care for each and every individual.

CHARITABLE GAMING

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): I have a question for the Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations. In response to a question I asked you last week, you stated you would not force the new Mike Harris gambling halls on to municipalities that did not want them. Since then, we have learned that your former aide and Mike Harris employee Paul Burns, acting on behalf of RPC Gaming, arranged to meet with Toronto councillor Judy Sgro and told her that RPC Gaming already has a contract with the Harris government and that charitable casinos in Metro were a done deal. In fact, the councillor said the following:

"She said she told Burns that since voters had indicated in the referendum that they didn't want charity casinos anywhere in the city, she wasn't inclined to work with him on a location.

"`So he said to me, "You don't understand. We have a contract with the province to put a casino into North York and since it's going to happen, I'd like to work with you."'"

How do you square that with the answer you gave in the House the other day, that you do not intend to force upon municipalities these new permanent gambling halls?

Hon David H. Tsubouchi (Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations): First of all, I'll just reiterate what I have said before and what I have been saying for the last several months, and I don't think it's new news to anybody: We have clearly said we wouldn't force any communities to take a charity gaming club that didn't want one.

Second, I suppose I should comment on the

article the member for St Catharines was reading. I guess this is a wonderful piece of work of journalistic reporting. Instead of going to the source, I suppose Mr Burns, who apparently denies he said that - it says here, "So he said to me...." Here's hearsay, I guess. It certainly wouldn't be admissible in a court. It's gossipy and certainly rumoury.

Interjection.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms Marilyn Churley): Order, please, member for Oakwood.

Hon Mr Tsubouchi: I can only reiterate our position, which is very clear. We've said clearly we will not force any community to take a charity gaming club that did not want one.

Mr Bradley: I think it's quite clear what Mr Burns is up to. First of all, we have to know that Mr Burns is a former employee of yours, a former aide to you as Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations. He also worked for Mike Harris when he was the leader of the Conservative Party. He obviously has a lot of clout and a lot of connections, so when he speaks, it must mean that he has those connections with the government and he knows of what he speaks.

Will you today reveal to the hundreds of thousands of Ontarians who voted against gambling expansion, that is, against the charity casinos in the last municipal election, what commitment you have made to RPC Gaming as it relates to the new Mike Harris gambling halls?

Hon Mr Tsubouchi: The member keeps asking the same question over and over again in different ways. Once again the short answer to all of this is the answer we've been saying all along. We will not force any community to take a charity gaming club that does not want one.

Mr Burns doesn't work for me right now. Mr Burns, when he left - and this was a question that was raised about three or four times in the House. I'll answer it the same way as I did before; apparently it's not new news again. Mr Burns spoke to the Integrity Commissioner. The Integrity Commissioner gave him a clean bill of health. Mr Burns does not speak on behalf of this government; we do.

Applause.

Mr Bradley: Obviously you get applause for a non-answer because he didn't tell me what was in the contract. I thought you people in the family values coalition of the government would want to know what's in that gambling contract to set up the new Mike Harris gambling halls across Ontario.

Right across the country there is a lot of concern being expressed, not just in this province, but in other provinces, in other jurisdictions, about the proliferation of new and different gambling opportunities that really affect those who are the most desperate in our society or those who are addicted. Isn't it time that the Mike Harris government decided to embark upon a moratorium on this new expansion of video lottery terminals across the province, of these charity casinos for which I believe you are trying to go over the electorate who expressed their views in the referendum, to go and try to persuade the local councillors to approve?

You're putting pressure on through the charities. You're trying to intimidate, you're trying to bribe by saying they're going to $1,500 per video lottery terminal. Isn't it time to call a moratorium and reassess this policy and look at the damage that is being done by this expansion of gambling opportunities in our province?

Hon Mr Tsubouchi: I guess I should refer to last Thursday, which wasn't such a long time ago, where I said we're very clear. We've been very clear all along that we would not force any community that did not want to have a charity gaming club to have a charity gaming club. That's pretty clear.

Let's put this in perspective again. The member for St Catharines is referring to a former employee, but let's look at who gave the quote.

Interjections.

The Deputy Speaker: Order, please.

Hon Mr Tsubouchi: Judy Sgro, who gave the quote, ran for the Liberal cousins in the last federal election and lost to John Nunziata. Here's a really objective person who's talking here. Let's also bring this into a little perspective again. I think the member is familiar with what Jennifer Patrick of the St Catharines Downtown Association said, that, "A charity gaming casino anywhere in the region will probably help all of Niagara."

EDUCATION FINANCING

Mr Howard Hampton (Rainy River): My question is for the Minister of Education and Training. In just three short weeks, the 72 new boards of education have to assume responsibility for the schools in their geographic area, yet they still don't know what their budgets will be, an incredibly absurd situation. They have to be up and running in three weeks and you still haven't told them what their budgets will be.

Minister, will you tell the parents, the students and the teachers today what funding you're going to provide those new boards in the new year and will you guarantee to them today that you're not going to be cutting their budgets from what they otherwise would have been?

Hon David Johnson (Minister of Education and Training): The leader of the third party knows well that on January 1 the school boards will be receiving stable funding. This has been announced by the previous minister and I have reiterated that support. I quote again from the letter that was sent out in April that for the 1997-98 school year - that is, the year ending August 1998 - the government will continue to provide in grants and taxes the level of funding the system was receiving in 1997.

Once that period of time is completed, then on September 1, 1998, the new funding formula will kick in. The government is working on that new formula and that new formula will be announced over the next short period of time. But that doesn't begin until September 1998, which is many months from now.

If the formula is as it was, if there aren't going to be any cuts, why haven't you told the 72 boards of education across this province exactly what their funding formula is and exactly what their budget is? Can you tell us, Minister, why your government insists on keeping this behind closed doors, why you're trying to keep the boards in the dark? If you know the numbers, announce them so that the boards of education will know what they have to finance the education of children. Tell them today.

Hon David Johnson: The government did release earlier this year the booklet entitled Excellence in Education: Student-focused Funding for Ontario. There has been a consultation process before that time, during that time and after that time with the various school boards. The government has outlined its initiative in terms of a foundation grant which includes learning materials, classroom teachers, teachers' assistants, classroom computers, preparation time, library services, guidance and other professionals, which would include psychologists or psychiatrists or speech pathologists, for example. There are special purpose grants that are outlined in this document.

The precise amounts of money are being worked with the various school board officials. This formula does not kick in until September 1998.

Interjections.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms Marilyn Churley): Order. Answer, please.

Hon David Johnson: The school boards will have that level of detail. We're working with them. They'll have that level of detail in plenty of time for September 1998.

Mr Hampton: Here is the absurdity of the situation: The minister stands here day after day and says that the funding will be as it was. But he is creating a situation where the new boards of education, which have to be up and running within 23 days, still don't know how much money they're going to have to work with. Does the minister not see the absurdity of the situation? Do you not see how unfair this is to parents, how unfair it is to students, how unfair it is to teachers to not tell people what funding they are going to have to work with?

Minister, it's a simple question. You say it's not a problem. If it's not a problem, stand on your feet today, tell the 72 boards of education what the funding formula is, show them how much money they have and guarantee them that you're not cutting the budgets, cutting the funding that they otherwise would have. If you have all the answers, tell the people. Tell the people who care about education what those answers are, and tell them today.

Hon David Johnson: It's apparent that the leader of the third party is talking about the stub year, and again I will say that this government has committed to stable stub-year funding in terms of the taxes, the grants, but there are different circumstances. One of his colleagues, from Fort York I guess it was, outlined some of the slightly different circumstances that vary from board to board.

While the boards can be guaranteed stable funding, we are in the midst right now and coming to the final stages of fine-tuning to determine fairness for all the boards right across Ontario, that indeed the stub-year funding does reflect that stability, those grants, those taxes that each board, under slightly different circumstances, should have access to. The government is working on that. They can be guaranteed the amount of money they need to carry on the programs, and the details will be out very shortly. But the boards know they have that stable funding.

They've been planning on that right from the word go earlier in the year, through their whole calendar and fiscal year.

YOUTH UNEMPLOYMENT

Mr Howard Hampton (Rainy River): I have a question for the Minister of Economic Development, Trade and Tourism. As I understand it, he also now assumes some responsibility especially with respect to the unemployment situation among younger workers.

Minister, I understand the Premier is going to go to a first ministers' conference at the end of this week and he is supposed to be putting some ideas on the table as to how you're going to address the very high rate of unemployment among young people.

I held a little conference a couple of weeks ago where we brought together about 200 young people from across the province and they put some ideas on the table. They said, for one, the province could implement a better employment standards law, better enforcement of the employment standards laws and a provincial bad-boss hotline to prevent the exploitation of young workers. Second, they said that the government should find a way to create a better balance between stressed-out, overworked older workers and work-starved younger workers.

Minister, can you tell us, is the Premier going to put any ideas like this on the table at the premiers' conference? Is he going to put any new ideas on the table and can you tell us what they are?

Hon Al Palladini (Minister of Economic Development, Trade and Tourism): I would like to thank the member for the question, but I also want to share some information that he should know, but obviously he does not. First of all, the youth unemployment rate has been steadily dropping for the past eight months and we're certainly on the right track. But even where it is right now, it's still unacceptable and I agree with the member.

We recently launched a program for young entrepreneurs which our government is very proud of. We believe we're on the right track to certainly stimulate youth employment. There's a lot to do and I think there is a lot to talk about with the federal government.

I am willing to work with the federal government to see how we can work together to see how we can eliminate youth unemployment. It's definitely a problem. I know my Premier will be discussing with the federal counterparts to see how we can address that. The previous government did not address this issue, and we are.

Mr Hampton: I asked the minister if this government had any new ideas for dealing with youth unemployment and what I think I got was the minister believes that 15% unemployment among young people is doing better. I think that's what he said. Other than that, I didn't hear any new ideas.

Minister, I want to take you up on one of the things that's happening out there under your government. This morning in Sault Ste Marie my colleague Tony Martin, the member for Sault Ste Marie, attended a news conference to protest that Sears is laying off full-time workers with seniority of 25 to 30 years and they're going to hire young workers on a part-time basis to replace the permanent employees they're putting out the door.

You know what that does, Minister. That allows you to say that unemployment is coming down, because your government can then say, "Well, we created two jobs for young people." Are these your new ideas, your good ideas? You lay off permanent older workers and bring younger workers in on a part-time basis. Is that your new idea for younger workers?

Hon Mr Palladini: I'm really disappointed in the leader of the third party because he was part of the government that totally destroyed employment in Ontario. Youth employment in the province is up by 43,000.

Interjection.

Hon Mr Palladini: Yes, it has been declining in the past six months because of the initiatives this government is taking. But I want to agree with the member that it's not good enough. We want to do better and we are going to do better.

Mr Hampton: Once again a minister who believes that 15% unemployment among young people is acceptable I think indicates the true thinking of this government.

I hoped I would hear from you some new ideas about how you're going to deal with the problem of young people who are graduating from college and university with $25,000 in education debts and can't get a job. Instead, when I read what your government is doing, I find you're going the other way. I find that you're actually cutting funding for training and apprenticeships, and Veronica Lacey's performance contract indicates that you're going to start charging young people tuition fees to even get involved in apprenticeships.

Minister, these aren't new ideas; these are wrong ideas. They are ideas that will make it more difficult for young people to get into the job market. Can you tell us, do you have any new ideas whatsoever that you're going to take to the Prime Minister's conference? Do you have any ideas whatsoever that are going to help young people get the training they need, the apprenticeships they need and, most of all, the jobs they need? Give us the new ideas.

Hon Mr Palladini: New ideas I shared with the member. The one we just launched, the young entrepreneur program, is certainly a new idea where we get buy-ins from the private sector, the young entrepreneur and the provincial government. That's a new idea. There is more that we can do, but contrary to what you did while you were the government, our job creation programs are going to create jobs.

Interjection.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms Marilyn Churley): Member for Oriole, come to order, please.

Hon Mr Palladini: At the end of our mandate we're going to create those jobs that we said we would in the Common Sense Revolution.

Mr John Gerretsen (Kingston and The Islands): Oh, never mind. That's going to help young people, isn't it.

The Deputy Speaker: Member for Kingston and The Islands, come to order.

Hon Mr Palladini: That is 725,000 jobs that we are going to create, contrary to what you did in five years in government. You lost 10,000 net jobs. We're not going to do that.

The Deputy Speaker: Thank you.

Mr Hampton: Madam Speaker, on a point of order: The minister should go back to transportation. He talked more about potholes.

The Deputy Speaker: That is not a point of order.

WINTER HIGHWAY MAINTENANCE

Mr Sean G. Conway (Renfrew North): My question is to the Minister of Transportation. Now that winter has arrived, I, like a number of my colleagues from northern and rural Ontario, am receiving calls about winter highway maintenance. In the Ottawa Valley over the last number of days, I've had several calls from heads of councils, from motorists, from commercial drivers who are extremely upset and concerned about what they believe to be the deterioration in the winter maintenance of Highway 17, particularly through the Pembroke, Renfrew and Arnprior area.

Minister, what do you have to say to my constituents and other motorists who believe, on the basis of a lot of good evidence, that Ontario's winter road maintenance is not as good as it used to be and not as good as it must be to protect the security and safety of the travelling public?

Hon Tony Clement (Minister of Transportation): I thank the honourable member for the question. I would like to assure him that highway winter maintenance is one of the top priorities of my ministry. We understand that safety, getting from point A to point B in a safe manner, is one of the critical issues for people who are on the provincial highways. We have committed an extensive array of resources to sanding and salting. In fact, we're investing in new technologies to do the job better for less.

I would assure the honourable member that Pembroke is not being unduly badly done by. We are expending the resources that are necessary to get the job done. We are looking at overhead. We want to make sure the resources go to the actual roads involved. We are doing the job that has to be done, given the climatic conditions in Ontario.

Mr Conway: This is a deadly serious matter. A 19-month-old constituent of mine was killed near Arnprior last week and there are a lot of knowledgeable and thoughtful people who believe that the Highway 17 maintenance was not as good as it ought to have been.

This past July - July 24, 1997, to be specific - Mr Justice Joseph O'Brien, in the Ontario Supreme Court (General Division), awarded $4.5 million worth of damages to Penny Roberts, a 16-year-old Ontarian who was tragically and seriously hurt on the 401 just east of Toronto five years ago. Mr Justice O'Brien found the Ministry of Transportation for Ontario 50% liable for those conditions: bad, substandard winter maintenance conditions.

I say to the minister, what particular assurances is he prepared to give my constituents and the travelling public of Ontario that on the King's highways, 17 and 62 and 28 and 41, the ones we're keeping after downloading, there is going to be an adequate, proper and safe level of winter maintenance?

Hon Mr Clement: Again, I thank the honourable member for the question and assure him that the government is committed to spending $130 million to ensure that winter maintenance is up to the standard we are expecting in this province. We will ensure that that money is spent in the best way possible for the taxpayers of Ontario. If winter conditions are such that they are worse this year, our government always assures that we spend the money that has to be spent to ensure that our roads are the safest possible under the circumstances, given the conditions in Ontario.

I want to assure the honourable member that that will continue under this government this year, next year and in future years as well.

WOMEN'S SHELTERS

Mr Howard Hampton (Rainy River): I have a question for the Minister of Community and Social Services. In 23 days, your government will assume 100% funding responsibility for the emergency women's shelters across the province, yet from one end of the province to the other the women's shelters don't know what their budgets are going to be. In fact, this is what they say: "We, the people who run women's emergency shelters, do not know if we will have money for counselling programs. We don't know if we will get money to cover the full per diem. We don't know if the government will cover victims' personal needs allowances."

Minister, can you tell us why, with only 23 days left, you haven't told these people who do this very important work what their budgets will be, and can you guarantee them that you won't be cutting their budgets as well?

Hon Janet Ecker (Minister of Community and Social Services): I thought I heard the honourable member say something about the municipalities assuming responsibility. I'm not sure if that was accurate or not, if that's what he said, but the municipalities are not assuming responsibility; the province is assuming 100% responsibility. The province will be assuming that and the province will be funding that 100%.

We've also received recommendations from the shelters that the way the funding has currently gone to them on the per diems creates significant problems for their budget process. That's one of the reasons why we are reforming that. We are looking at a budget that will be much easier administratively for them to deal with and that meets the commitment to fund them at 100%.

Mr Hampton: I asked the minister if your government would be covering victims' personal needs allowances, if you'd be covering the full per diem. I asked you if you would be covering the cost of counselling programs. Everyone knows that in the tradeoff with municipalities and the downloading effort, you're now going to take 100% responsibility for this. I didn't get an answer to any of those three questions.

What we do know, Minister, is this: Women's shelters have been shown a memo which says that you are not going to cover the cost of pay equity. After you were ordered by the Supreme Court of Ontario to live up to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and to follow through on pay equity, you're now out there telling women's shelters that you're not going to cover the cost of pay equity.

Minister, is it your idea that women who work in emergency shelters should be paid less? Is that your idea, that women who work in emergency shelters should be paid less, should accept lower pay? When are you going to tell them their funding, and when are you going to guarantee there will be no funding cuts?

Hon Mrs Ecker: I appreciate the honourable member's attempt to play politics with this, but I'm very surprised that there would be any memo out there saying we are not paying for pay equity when the government has made no final decisions on that. So I would think that's inaccurate, whatever memo he's talking about. There are a number of factors that have been raised around that court decision, and certainly the government is considering very carefully any potential changes in response, if necessary.

Second, I would repeat that 100% responsibility for funding is 100% responsibility for that funding, and we do not back away from that commitment.

MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES' PENSIONS

Mr Gary L. Leadston (Kitchener-Wilmot): My question is to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. I recently noted that the government has accepted the changes proposed by the Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement Board, commonly referred to as OMERS. I know that the OMERS plan manages about $30 billion in pension funds on behalf of approximately 250,000 members, so any changes that are made are going to affect a great deal of people. Could the minister please tell the House what implications these changes to the OMERS pension plan will have on Ontario municipalities and also on Ontario taxpayers?

Hon Al Leach (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): I would like to thank the member for Kitchener-Wilmot for the question. It's true that the government has recently accepted the changes from the OMERS board, which are going to be very positive for municipalities in Ontario. These changes will amount to $1.5 billion in savings for the taxpayers and plan members over the next five years. As a matter of fact, David Griffin, the OMERS board chair, recently stated that when local government wins, taxpayers also win and it's a win-win for all levels.

It's estimated that the changes will result in savings of $600 million for the GTA alone, another $120 million for Ottawa-Carleton and $125 million in the London-Windsor-Sarnia area. Local governments will be able to incorporate these great savings in their 1998 budgets, which is good news for both the municipalities and the taxpayers in this province.

Mr Leadston: The good news is not only for the municipalities in my riding but for all the taxpayers in Ontario. However, I am sure that my constituents would like to know more about the specific changes to the OMERS pension plan. Could the minister please provide the House with some specific details of the OMERS plan that the government has accepted?

Hon Mr Leach: The main change to the plan is a 2% contribution by both the employer and the employees, which means it's a great benefit to the municipalities in doing their 1998 budget, but it's also a 2% savings for the employees. It's like a 2% wage increase.

The OMERS board was able to propose this reduction due to high investment returns, a large surplus and low inflation rates over the past few years. Other changes include enhancing early retirement provisions for OMERS board members who retire over the next five years. These provisions will also help municipalities in their restructuring plans across Ontario. This is just another example of how this government is working with our stakeholders to make sure that the municipalities and taxpayers across this province get the best return for their investment.

YOUTH UNEMPLOYMENT

Mr David Caplan (Oriole): My question is for the Minister of Education. I've been hearing a lot of rhetoric from your government about what it's doing to address the tragedy of youth unemployment in this province. Statistics Canada figures will confirm that 17% of our youth are unemployed versus 15.5% only one year ago.

In April your ministry changed the Futures program, a program focused on youth job placement, to the career and employment preparation program. I'm interested in knowing what are the successes of this new program. I know that on October 10 of this year the Ministry of Education reduced the target for this program to 60% of the expected placements, from 94,000 to 50,000.

Can you tell us what the overall target numbers are for the on-the-job-placement portion of the program, and since the ministry does monthly reviews with the employment agencies, how many young people have been placed to date?

Hon David Johnson (Minister of Education and Training): I'm pleased to say that the province of Ontario over the course of this year is looking at an investment of some $180 million in total in the youth employment situation, and that will serve about 141,000 young people. As the minister in a previous question has indicated, there are some 43,000 new youth jobs just over this last seven months alone, and Ontario certainly leads Canada in that regard.

In terms of the career and employment preparation program, there are some $110 million allocated to this particular program. I think this is the information the member was seeking. The program will serve about 94,000 people and the vast majority of them, about 85,000, will be youth. In the transition period for this year - this year is a transition period, 1997-98 - some 50,000 young people will be served through that program.

Mr Caplan: The minister's answer was quite inadequate. Minister, I think you should be clear on what your commitment is to providing adequate job programs for our young people.

Your deputy minister's performance contract states, "The implementation of the new career and employment preparation program is key," and her expected results are "to reduce costs, to improve participant placement and to increase employer satisfaction."

So far you have reduced moneys to the program. You've cut almost $42 million from this part of the budget, almost 17.5%. In fact, your participation numbers have not gone up; your own ministry has reduced them to 60% of your target.

When you gave your opening remarks to the estimates committee, and I was there, employment preparation and placement were never mentioned as priorities for your ministry. Minister, this speaks volumes about your government's commitment to youth unemployment in this province. Tell us, what are you planning to do to address the crisis in youth unemployment?

Hon David Johnson: I think I indicated one of the activities in terms of the career and employment preparation program, but the main thing that this government is going to do, as it promised to do during the election, is remove the impediments to the creation of jobs: lowering taxes, getting rid of red tape, overhauling the WCB system.

Between 1985 and 1990, the government represented by the member opposite, the Liberal government, put taxes up some 32 times, I believe it was, in the province of Ontario. If there's anything that kills jobs for young people, for people of all ages, it's that kind of tax increase. That's the problem.

In terms of our investment here in Ontario, I'm pleased to say that this government, the government I represent, is investing some $180 million in the youth employment situation. The federal government, by comparison, is investing less than half of that amount. Your Liberal federal colleagues in Ottawa -

The Deputy Speaker (Ms Marilyn Churley): Answer, please.

Hon David Johnson: - are investing less than $80 million.

I plead with you. Talk to your federal colleagues in Ottawa. Get them to put in the same support that we are -

The Deputy Speaker: Thank you.

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

Mr Wayne Lessard (Windsor-Riverside): My question is to the Minister of Education and Training as well. With all the attention being paid to the damage to education caused by Bill 160, it's been easy to overlook what's been happening to colleges and universities in Ontario. In a recent speech the Premier suggested that graduates in humanities have little chance to make a contribution to society and that liberal arts education wasn't a practical area of study for the future.

Funding to universities is continuing to decline and, as a result, universities are having to make damaging decisions. We've heard that on Friday, Carleton University decided to close undergraduate programs in classics, German, Italian, Spanish, and comparative literature studies, and master's programs in German and in Spanish. This is likely to lead to the first dismissals of tenured faculty as a result of this government's cuts to post-secondary education. Minister, is this what the Premier wanted? Is this what he had in mind?

Hon David Johnson (Minister of Education and Training): I think what the Premier had in mind was simply a system that is accountable, efficient and relevant to the needs of our students today. The universities and colleges are independent. I might say that in terms of our universities, for example, and the kind of test - I guess "test" isn't the right word but the kind of relationships - Maclean's does a scoring system on the universities across Canada, and I'm really delighted that the universities in Ontario score extremely high. They scored extremely high this year and have over the years.

We are privileged to have leaders at the university level, at the college level, who are providing courses, but can the courses be changed to be more relevant, to be more accountable, to be more efficient? I believe we all here today would say yes, they could be, to serve the students, to get jobs and to lead lives in the international world we live in today.

Mr Lessard: From your answer, it appears to me you may agree with the decision by Carleton to cut some of these programs. We believe your approach to post-secondary education is both short-sighted and anti-intellectual. If your budget cuts force universities to slash these kinds of programs, it will have long-term impacts on Ontario's competitiveness and the quality of the society within which we live. We believe those are going to be negative impacts. Is that what you want, Minister?

Hon David Johnson: We simply want the moneys spent at the university level, at the colleges, to be spent in a most effective and efficient manner, and that they involve courses that are relevant to the new century we're embarking upon in the very near future. We must bear in mind that we need to train our young people, equip our young people with the kind of education that will serve them in their life and in the workforce.

At the same time we must realize it is the taxpayers - and most of the taxpayers do not attend university - who pay for it, so there must be an accountable and efficient system so that indeed all society benefits from the kind of training they get in universities and colleges, and that's all we're asking for.

TELEMARKETING PRACTICES

Mr Peter L. Preston (Brant-Haldimand): My question is directed to the minister -

Interjections.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms Marilyn Churley): I'm not sure what's happening here. I missed it, but if you could continue with your question.

Mr Preston: I'd like to get started. My question is directed to the minister responsible for seniors. Over the past few days there have been several newspaper articles in my riding of Brant-Haldimand, and indeed across the province, mentioning the very serious danger seniors face every day from telephone fraud. Telephone fraud is expected to cost Ontario seniors $3.5 million this year. Can the minister tell the House what the government is doing to protect seniors from these con artists?

Hon Cameron Jackson (Minister without Portfolio [Seniors Issues]): I want to thank my colleague for the question, and I want to inform members of the House that last week my colleague the Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations, his parliamentary assistant and I participated in a special program to talk to seniors in this province and warn them about fraud that is continuing on the rise in this province and in this country. It was conducted at Baycrest Centre for Geriatric Care. It involved various members of the community who came in and assisted in this reverse boiler room set up to call seniors and warn them.

The Hang Up On Fraud program that was initiated in this province is in response to a very serious crime that's going on in this country. OPP Detective Staff Sergeant Barry Elliott noted that over the last three years seniors represent about 70% of all of the fraud, which is estimated at $200 million. The worst case was a senior here in Ontario, which was almost $2 million taken from one senior citizen.

I'm pleased to report that in initiating this program we talked to over 2,000 seniors; 160 volunteers performed that. I was pleased the Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations hosted that event.

Mr Preston: It's encouraging to hear that this program went on, and that's great for Baycrest. But still, fraud is an ongoing problem. Telemarketing fraud is a problem for our seniors particularly. Can you tell me and my constituents in Brant-Haldimand what the government is going to do to help the seniors?

Hon Mr Jackson: First of all, I might point out that after three successive governments, it was this government that brought in the first Victims' Bill of Rights so that we can move towards lessening the victimization of citizens, including seniors. Our Solicitor General has made fraud awareness a major focus of Crime Prevention Week with a combination of educational videos, training and in-service for police officers and additional supports for seniors' groups across the province.

As well, my colleague the Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations has provided leadership at the national forum of ministers to lobby for stiffer penalties with federal legislation, which is involved here. He has begun providing interprovincial agreements so that we can stop these fraud artists who set up shop in Quebec and phone in Ontario and set up in other parts of the country and victimize our seniors.

Anyone with questions about telemarketing fraud can call Phonebusters toll free. That number is 1-888-495-8501. I'm sure all the members will be interested.

MALDEN PARK CONTINUING CARE CENTRE

Mrs Sandra Pupatello (Windsor-Sandwich): My question is for the Minister of Health. Minister, $44 million was spent on a chronic care centre, and we called that centre Malden Park. We keep our most sickly patients there. Why will you not now fund it as a chronic care hospital?

Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Minister of Health): I would certainly take the question under advisement, and I will certainly respond to you as to the status as to what is going on.

Mrs Pupatello: I'm going to take that as a sign that you are not aware of what your own commission that you sent to Windsor is recommending. Instead of continuing to fund a building that you spent $44 million on as a chronic care facility, you're prepared to spend millions to renovate some other beds to become chronic care. What you're really doing to our Malden Park Centre is reducing the operating cost per bed from $208 for a chronic care bed to $58 as a nursing home. May I remind you and all other members in this House that this is a very sneaky way of getting around properly funding chronic care beds which, as this minister knows, we desperately need in Ontario.

I look forward to a very specific answer to explain why on earth you would change that kind of funding when you know, as the last government did, that it always should have been designated a chronic care facility and it was built as such.

Hon Mrs Witmer: The facility was built, as you know, as a long-term-care facility, and it is being funded accordingly at the present time, but I will certainly get the information for you.

HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING

Mrs Marion Boyd (London Centre): My question is also for the Minister of Health. You've been going around the province since your appointment talking about the need to slow down and look at what the effect of all the restructuring has been. That's given rise to hope in some communities that you may not follow through with some of the recommendations of the hospital restructuring commission.

In particular, I've had approaches, as I'm sure the member for Elgin has, from members of our communities in St Thomas and London around the proposed devolution of the London Psychiatric Hospital and the St Thomas Psychiatric Hospital to the St Joseph's Hospital corporation. I understand that there is some delay happening in terms of that devolution and I'm asking you today, will the timetable suggested by the restructuring commission go ahead with that devolution occurring as of December 31, 1997?

Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Minister of Health): We are continuing to look at all of those time lines in order to ensure that the steps that need to be taken can be taken within those time lines, and obviously if there is a need for some adjustment, then the appropriate steps will be taken accordingly.

Mrs Boyd: I think the minister ought to understand that this is a very important question for the people who work in those facilities, for the people who supply those facilities and indeed for the hospitals that may be the recipients of those services. Again, we're talking about a time frame that is very short. It is unbelievable to all of us that whether it's education or health care or any of the other areas, none of the ministers of the government can give us any information about what's going to be happening only 23 days from now.

Minister, would you make it clear? Are you planning, first of all, for the government of Ontario to devolve those services to St Joseph's, and are you intending to go ahead with the recommendation that those two facilities close and the services be shifted to other communities?

Hon Mrs Witmer: As you know, the Ministry of Health is working very closely with the district health councils and they, in turn, are working very closely with the providers and all those involved in the devolution. We are endeavouring to meet those time lines, and obviously if there is a reason to make some changes, we are prepared to do so. We are working actively each day with all those that are impacted to ensure that the appropriate services are in place when the change takes place. I can understand your concern and certainly the concern of those individuals who are going to be impacted by this decision, but let me assure you that we are very closely monitoring that situation.

NATIONAL UNITY

Mr Doug Galt (Northumberland): My question is to the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs. My constituents are keenly interested in the public consultation process on national unity. I've already held one public meeting, which was well attended, this past Saturday and plan to hold another public meeting on December 13, this coming Saturday.

Many who attended the meeting had not received one of the brochures that had been sent out in the mail. I know that home delivery of the questionnaires on the issue was delayed by the recent postal strike. I'm wondering about the status of these brochures and when the public might expect to receive them.

Hon Dianne Cunningham (Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, minister responsible for women's issues): The member for Northumberland should be congratulated on the work he's doing. It gives me an opportunity to advise everyone in the House, including my friend from Algoma, that we're taking every opportunity we can to get the message out with regard to Ontario Speaks, a questionnaire where families are given the opportunity to let us know how they feel about the unity of our country. We really want their opinions.

They can telephone 1-800-695-4045 or fax 1-888-258-1940, and hopefully by the end of this week the other two million questionnaires will be distributed throughout Ontario, which will make it almost four million households that will have this opportunity. So it's Web site www.ontariospeaks.com.

Mr Galt: Minister, there are many ways of getting information back to the government. Are there any other ways, and could you tell the House and my constituents how successfully these consultations are going across the province?

Hon Mrs Cunningham: This is a different kind of response, only to remind the members that we in Ontario - the members of the committee from all three parties - have made the decision on this consultation process, because it is so important to the future of the country, that we will continue after the new year with our public meetings throughout our communities.

For all of you who have not taken that opportunity, I hope you will call the Ministry of Intergovernmental Affairs, speak to the member for Downsview, the member for Algoma and myself. Most of us are keenly interested in hearing from the public with regard to their feelings about the future of our country. This is an opportunity that hasn't been made available to them in the past.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms Marilyn Churley): This is probably out of order, but before we move on to petitions, I want to thank you all for your indulgence today and being patient with me. It's the first time as your new Deputy Speaker that I've done question period.

Applause.

The Deputy Speaker: Thank you. I want particularly to thank those who noticed that I am indeed female - I want to reassure you all of that - and you may call me Madam Speaker. Thank you for your indulgence today.

PETITIONS

CHIROPRACTIC HEALTH CARE

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): I have a petition that reads as follows:

"To the Ontario Legislature, Premier Mike Harris, Health Minister Elizabeth Witmer and members of the Ontario Legislature:

"Whereas the Ministry of Health has recently strengthened its reputation as the Ministry of Medicine through its $1.7-billion three-year agreement with the Ontario Medical Association; and

"Whereas the Mike Harris government is restricting access to alternative cost-saving treatments for patients of the province; and

"Whereas two recent reports commissioned by the Ministry of Health called for increased OHIP funding to improve patient access to chiropractic services on the grounds of safety, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness; and

"Whereas over one million Ontario adults now use chiropractic services annually, increasingly those with higher incomes because of the cost barrier caused by government underfunding; and

"Whereas the Mike Harris government has shown blatant disregard for the needs of the citizens of Ontario in restricting funding for chiropractic services;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to recognize the contribution made by chiropractors to the good health of the people of Ontario, to recognize the taxpayer dollars saved by the use of low-cost preventive care such as that provided by chiropractors and to recognize that to restrict funding for chiropractic health care only serves to limit access to a needed health care service."

I affix my signature to this petition.

EDUCATION REFORM

Mr Bud Wildman (Algoma): I have a petition signed by 120 teachers in independent schools in Ontario in support of their colleagues in the public education system. The teachers in the independent schools of Ontario endorse the public school teachers' concern for maintaining the quality of public schooling in Ontario and as taxpayers they are grateful for the teachers' sacrifice and their service to young people in the province.

I agree with the petition and I am affixing my name thereto.

COURT DECISION

Mr R. Gary Stewart (Peterborough): I have a petition that reads:

"We, the undersigned residents of Canada, draw the attention of the House to the following:

"That the decision to allow women to appear topless in public is offensive; and

"That children should not be exposed to public displays of nudity which contradicts values taught in the Canadian school system; and

"That there are laws and regulations in Canada to protect children against nudity in the media but currently there are no laws protecting children from nudity in public places; and

"That allowing women to appear topless in public encourages poor behaviour which may lead to increased incidence of violence against women;

"Therefore, the undersigned petitioners humbly pray and call upon Parliament to amend the indecent act and public nudity provisions of the Criminal Code to clearly state that it is an indecent act for a woman to expose her breasts in a public place, with the exception of women who are breast-feeding."

To this I affix my signature.

CERTIFIED GENERAL ACCOUNTANTS

Mr Gerard Kennedy (York South): To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, a petition:

"Whereas it is in the best interests of the public to have open market competition among professional accountants; and

"Whereas, under the Public Accountancy Act, only chartered accountants have full access to public accounting licences in the province of Ontario; and

"Whereas the province of Ontario restricts certified general accountants more than all other provinces, with the exception of Prince Edward Island; and

"Whereas certified general accountants, whose training is identical to that of certified general accountants in the province of Ontario, have a statutory right to practise public accounting in the provinces of Alberta, British Columbia, New Brunswick and Newfoundland, are free to practise in the provinces of Saskatchewan and Manitoba, can be licensed to practise in Nova Scotia and have considerable public accountancy rights in the province of Quebec; and

"Whereas this has created a monopoly in the province of Ontario since 1962 that is not only unfair to the public but also results in additional expenses, particularly to small business owners; and

"Whereas the monopoly results in NAFTA inequalities for certified general accountants in the province of Ontario; and

"Whereas according full professional rights to certified general accountants would lower costs to business by creating competition in accounting and auditing services, which is consistent with the current government's initiative to introduce measures designed to reduce government interference in the private and business lives of Ontario residents; and

"Whereas certified general accountants in the province of Ontario are qualified professionals whose governing body delivers a rigorous and demanding program of professional studies, examines for professional competency, requires practical experience to qualify individuals as certified general accountants, has an established code of ethics and rules of professional conduct and an accompanying disciplinary process to ensure that the standards of the profession are maintained and that the interests of the public are protected; and

"Whereas the Professional Organizations Committee rejected the notion of a monopoly over licensed practices for chartered accountants and specifically supported and recommended the extension of public accounting licences to certified general accountants with experience in the field of public accounting;

"We, the undersigned residents of the province of Ontario, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to grant to the Certified General Accountants Association of Ontario their request for overdue amendments to the Public Accountancy Act to allow certified general accountants full access to public practice licences and to eliminate the present monopoly."

This is signed by residents of Ontario from Newmarket, Toronto, London, Waterdown, as well as residents of my constituency on Scarlett Road, Humberside and other locations. I affix my signature to this petition.

ABORTION

Mr Wayne Lessard (Windsor-Riverside): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Ontario health system is overburdened and unnecessary spending must be cut; and

"Whereas pregnancy is not a disease, injury or illness and abortions are not therapeutic procedures; and

"Whereas the vast majority of abortions are done for reasons of convenience or finance; and

"Whereas the province has exclusive authority to determine what service will be insured; and

"Whereas the Canada Health Act does not require funding for elective procedures; and

"Whereas there is mounting evidence that abortion is in fact hazardous to women's health; and

"Whereas Ontario taxpayers funded over 45,000 abortions in 1993 at an estimated cost of $25 million;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to cease from providing any taxpayers' dollars for the performance of abortions."

PAY EQUITY

Mr Ernie Hardeman (Oxford): I have a petition signed by a great number of home care workers with the Canadian Red Cross in my riding. They're requesting that the government do something about the pay equity problem that has arisen for their workers. The main focus of their petition is, "We are prepared to forgo this last pay equity payment if it means saving our jobs. All homemakers, regardless of agency, should be paid similar wages, as they do work of a similar nature."

I would like to file this petition with the House.

MALDEN PARK CONTINUING CARE CENTRE

Mr John Gerretsen (Kingston and The Islands): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly. It says:

"Whereas it took 20 years and $10 million in local donations to create a 225-bed chronic facility known as Malden Park; and

"Whereas this community believed that its donations were going towards the creation of a new chronic care hospital; and

"Whereas the Health Services Restructuring Commission recommends putting chronic care beds in Windsor Western Hospital, at a cost of $14 million to $25 million; and

"Whereas the funding levels for Malden Park have been deteriorating over the past two years;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to restore funding levels to Malden Park to the average per-day rate for chronic care and designate Malden Park as a complex continuing care facility, which is what this community raised $10 million for, and to save the $14-million cost required to refurbish Windsor Western as a chronic care facility."

I agree with this petition and have signed my name to it as well.

CERTIFIED GENERAL ACCOUNTANTS

Mrs Lillian Ross (Hamilton West): I have a petition similar to the one the member for York South presented, which reads in part:

"Whereas it is in the best interests of the public to have open market competition among professional accountants; and

"Whereas under the Public Accountancy Act only chartered accountants have full access to public accounting licences in the province of Ontario; and

"Whereas the province of Ontario restricts certified general accountants more than all other provinces, with the exception of Prince Edward Island; and....

"Whereas this has created a monopoly in the province of Ontario since 1962 that is not only unfair to the public but also results in additional expenses, particularly to small business owners....

"We, the undersigned residents of the province of Ontario, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to grant to the Certified General Accountants Association of Ontario their request for overdue amendments to the Public Accountancy Act to allow certified general accountants full access to public practice licences and to eliminate the present monopoly."

EDUCATION FINANCING

Mr Frank Miclash (Kenora): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas education is our future; and

"Whereas students, parents and teachers will not allow their futures to be sacrificed for tax cuts; and

"Whereas students, parents and teachers will not allow the government to bankrupt Ontario's education system; and

"Whereas you cannot improve achievement by lowering standards; and

"Whereas students, parents and teachers want reinvestment in education rather than a reduction in funding; and

"Whereas students, parents and teachers won't back down;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, support our MPP Frank Miclash in his efforts to withdraw Bill 160 immediately."

I've attached my name to that petition as well.

ANIMAL WELFARE

Mr Tim Hudak (Niagara South): I have a petition signed by over 1,000 people from Fort Erie, Port Colborne, Niagara and the Toronto area. It reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas ownership of a domestic animal (pet) is a responsibility not a right;

"Whereas owners have a responsibility to treat their domestic animal (pet) with care and utmost concern for their wellbeing;

"We, the undersigned, support the amendments to the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act."

In support, I add my signature.

MALDEN PARK CONTINUING CARE CENTRE

Mrs Sandra Pupatello (Windsor-Sandwich): This is a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas it took 20 years and $10 million in local donations to create a 225-bed chronic facility known as Malden Park; and

"Whereas this community believed that its donations were going towards the creation of a new chronic care hospital; and

"Whereas the Health Services Restructuring Commission recommends putting chronic care beds in Windsor Western Hospital at a cost of $14 million to $25 million; and

"Whereas the funding levels for Malden Park have been deteriorating over the past two years;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to restore funding levels to Malden Park to the average per-day rate for chronic care and designate Malden Park as a complex continuing care facility, which is what this community raised $10 million for, and to save the $14-million cost required to refurbish Windsor Western as a chronic care facility."

This petition is signed by many, many people in the riding of Windsor-Sandwich and the county of Essex.

COURT DECISION

Mr Bob Wood (London South): I have a petition signed by 112 people.

"Whereas the courts have ruled that women have the lawful right to go topless in public; and

CHOICE IN HEALTH CARE

Mr David Ramsay (Timiskaming): This petition reads:

"Please support Tammy. By signing this petition, you will let Janet Ecker, Minister of Community and Social Services, know that she has no right in making decisions about an individual's health. Treatment decisions should be left up to medical professionals, patients and their families."

I will affix my signature to this.

PAY EQUITY

Mr Doug Galt (Northumberland): I have a petition signed by over 3,000 residents of Northumberland. It's addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas the province's pay equity law which goes into effect January 1, 1998, will drive the Red Cross homemakers out of business; and

"Whereas this pay equity legislation only affects the Red Cross homemakers; and

"Whereas if the legislation is not amended, the Canadian Red Cross homemakers will no longer be able to provide in-home care for the frail, elderly, handicapped and people coming home early from hospitals;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to amend the legislation to maintain the Red Cross homemakers' ability to continue this vital public service."

CHIROPRACTIC HEALTH CARE

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): I have a petition to the Ontario Legislature.

"Whereas the Ministry of Health has recently strengthened its reputation as the Ministry of Medicine through its $1.7-billion three-year agreement with the OMA; and

"Whereas the Mike Harris government is restricting access to alternative cost-saving treatments for patients of the province; and

"Whereas two recent reports commissioned by the Ministry of Health called for increased OHIP funding to improve patient access to chiropractic services on the grounds of safety, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness; and

"Whereas over one million Ontario adults now use chiropractic services annually, increasingly those with higher incomes, because of the cost barrier caused by government underfunding; and

"Whereas the Mike Harris government has shown blatant disregard for the needs of the citizens of Ontario in restricting funding for chiropractic services;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to recognize the contribution made by chiropractors to the good health of the people of Ontario, to recognize the taxpayer dollars saved by the use of lower-cost preventive care such as that provided by chiropractors and to recognize that to restrict funding for chiropractic health care only serves to limit access to a needed health care service."

This petition is signed by several thousand people.

BEAR HUNTING

Mr Gary L. Leadston (Kitchener-Wilmot): This petition is signed by citizens all over Ontario with respect to protecting the hunting heritage and allowing the continuation of hunting for black bear.

ROYAL ASSENT / SANCTION ROYALE

The Acting Speaker (Mr Gilles E. Morin): I beg to inform the House that in the name of Her Majesty the Queen, Her Honour the Lieutenant Governor has been pleased to assent to certain bills in her office.

Clerk at the Table (Mr Todd Decker): The following are the titles of the bills to which Her Honour did assent:

Bill 98,

An Act to promote job creation and increased municipal accountability while providing for the recovery of development costs related to new growth / Projet de loi 98, Loi visant à promouvoir la création d'emplois et à accroître la responsabilité des municipalités tout en prévoyant le recouvrement des coûts d'aménagement liés à la croissance

Bill 140,

An Act to establish the Financial Services Commission of Ontario and to make complementary amendments to other statutes / Projet de loi 140, Loi créant la Commission des services financiers de l'Ontario et apportant des modifications complémentaires à d'autres lois

Bill 149,

An Act to continue the reforms begun by the Fair Municipal Finance Act, 1997 and to make other amendments respecting the financing of local governments / Projet de loi 149, Loi continuant les réformes amorcées par la Loi de 1997 sur le financement équitable des municipalités et apportant d'autres modifications relativement au financement des administrations locales

Bill 152,

An Act to improve Services, increase Efficiency and benefit Taxpayers by eliminating Duplication and reallocating Responsibilities between Provincial and Municipal Governments in various areas and to implement other aspects of the Government's "Who Does What" Agenda / Projet de loi 152, Loi visant à améliorer les services, à accroître l'efficience et à procurer des avantages aux contribuables en éliminant le double emploi et en redistribuant les responsabilités entre le gouvernement provincial et les municipalités dans divers secteurs et visant à mettre en oeuvre d'autres aspects du programme «Qui fait quoi» du gouvernement

Bill 160,

An Act to reform the education system, protect classroom funding, and enhance accountability, and make other improvements consistent with the Government's education quality agenda, including improved student achievement and regulated class size / Projet de loi 160, Loi visant à réformer le système scolaire, à protéger le financement des classes, à accroître l'obligation de rendre compte et à apporter d'autres améliorations compatibles avec la politique du gouvernement en matière de qualité de l'éducation, y compris l'amélioration du rendement des élèves et la réglementation de l'effectif des classes

Bill 161,

An Act to provide fairness for parents and employees by providing remedies relating to the province-wide withdrawal of services by teachers between October 27 and November 7, 1997 and to make a complementary amendment to the Education Act / Projet de loi 161, Loi favorisant le traitement équitable des parents et des employés en prévoyant des recours à la suite du retrait de services par les enseignants à l'échelle de la province entre le 27 octobre et le 7 novembre 1997 et apportant une modification complémentaire à la

Loi sur l'éducation

Bill 167,

An Act to Change the name of the geographic township of Creighton in the Territorial District of Sudbury to Creighton-Davies, and to make a consequential amendment to the Territorial Division Act / Projet de loi 167, Loi visant à remplacer le nom du canton géographique de Creighton dans le district territorial de Sudbury par celui de Creighton-Davies, et apportant une modification corrélative à la

Loi sur la division territoriale.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

TAX CREDITS TO CREATE JOBS ACT, 1997 / LOI DE 1997 ACCORDANT DES CRÉDITS D'IMPÔT POUR CRÉER DES EMPLOIS

Mr Baird, on behalf of Mr Eves, moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 164,

An Act to implement job creation measures and other measures contained in the 1997 Budget and to make other amendments to statutes administered by the Ministry of Finance or relating to taxation matters / Projet de loi 164, Loi visant à mettre en oeuvre des mesures de création d'emplois et d'autres mesures mentionnées dans le budget de 1997 et à apporter d'autres modifications à des lois dont l'application relève du ministère des Finances ou qui traitent de questions fiscales.

Mr John R. Baird (Nepean): I'm very pleased to have the opportunity to speak to Bill 164. This bill implements and enhances our 1997 budget commitments to invest in research and development, new technology, cultural industries, youth employment and small business job creation. We listened to the people of Ontario and responded to ideas that would further create economic growth and employment in Ontario.

Bill 164 will support creating more well-paid, leading-edge technology jobs for Ontario's youth. This is absolutely key to the economic future of the province. During the last 10 years, two out of every three jobs in Ontario were created in knowledge and technology-based industries.

Bill 164 will extend the leading-edge technology component of the cooperative education tax credit to include approved apprenticeships and private sector vocational school programs.

Perhaps before I continue, Mr Speaker, I will indicate that I will be splitting my time with the member for Kitchener.

We are going well beyond our budget commitment to encourage companies to expand and create jobs in computer animation and special effects. Bill 164 will increase the Ontario computer animation and special effects tax credit. Ontario trains some of the best experts in the world for this growing and dynamic segment of the film and television production industry. This will help ensure that the talented people trained in Ontario have opportunities to work here.

Bill 164 will also deliver on our commitment to strengthen Ontario's research and development competitiveness and to forge stronger links between the private sector and Ontario's post-secondary research institutions.

The Ontario business research institute tax credit will encourage post-secondary educational and research institutions to become more market-driven to attract business-sponsored research and development. It will also complement the research and development challenge fund by providing companies with an added incentive to contribute towards university research and development.

To help foster job creation and new investment, Bill 164 will also provide an incentive to acquire new technology and to innovate in Ontario.

The Ontario new technology tax incentive will encourage the acquisition and commercialization of new technology by allowing firms to deduct immediately the cost of new technology acquired.

High-tech means jobs for Ontario in Silicon Valley North, in my part of Ontario in Nepean and Kanata in the Ottawa area, in Kitchener-Waterloo, in Carleton Place and indeed in the greater Toronto area. If you look at my community of Nepean alone, you can see a tremendous amount of economic growth that comes right out of this area.

I have here the front page of the Nepean Clarion from June 14, 1997: "5,000 Jobs Coming to City of Nepean: Nortel Announces $250 Million Expansion." What a tremendous example that is of the good economic news across the province of Ontario, and no provincial money going to support this, there was no grant. It's an Ontario success story.

I'll read briefly from it:

"A recent announcement by Nortel to expand in the capital region has left many buzzing with excitement - and Nepean stands to be a great benefactor.

"Not only is the $250-million expansion slated to create over 5,000 new jobs in Nepean by the year 2000, it is expected that 15,000 spinoff jobs will be created in construction, retailing, and service industries across the region."

That's tremendously good news for the people in Ottawa-Carleton and across the province. We look forward to more announcements like that.

We said if we could have an announcement like that once a month we'd be in good shape, and the following month in Ottawa-Carleton we saw another major economic development announcement, from Newbridge Networks. They didn't match the 5,000 new jobs announced for Nepean by Nortel, but they came pretty close: 4,100 new jobs coming to Newbridge in the city of Kanata, adjacent to the city of Nepean.

In Ottawa-Carleton we've only in recent years become good at attracting new companies to our region, but we're very good, in my part of the province, at growing small business. Newbridge is a small business success story. A growing small business in Ottawa-Carleton is good news. Newbridge started out just 10 years ago with annual sales of only $1 million. Today, its annual sales globally are more than $1.5 billion. That's tremendously good news for high tech in Ottawa-Carleton, very important.

One of the other important areas for high tech is high income tax rates. When you look at the competitiveness for our friends from other countries, when they go to attract graduates from universities like the University of Waterloo and Bill Gates can set up a Microsoft recruiting office right in the city of Waterloo, they can point to a very low tax rate in Seattle, Washington. That's why our tax competitiveness, in addition to the strong health care system and strong quality of life, is essential to ensuring that these young people can get jobs right here in Ontario. That's extremely important for folks not just in Ottawa-Carleton but right across the province.

The small business sector is an important job creator for our young people. The Ontario graduate transition tax credit will help ensure that taxpayers' investment in educating our young people translates into jobs. Bill 164 enhances our budget commitment to give small business incentives to provide Ontario's young people with jobs. Bill 164 will increase the tax credit rate for small business with both the graduate transition tax credit and the cooperative education tax credit.

In my constituency, an incredible number of co-op education students working at Nortel and Newbridge and various small businesses around the region benefit greatly from the co-op education programs of a number of Ontario universities.

Over the next three years, we estimate the graduate transition tax credit will help up to 45,000 unemployed graduates get employment experience and on-the-job training in a tough job market. That will be good news for young people in Ontario. It's a specific example of one of the many policies and initiatives undertaken by this government in recent times to help concentrate on the problem of youth unemployment, because young people in the province are looking for more than platitudes from politicians.

They want more than another government program to simply throw money at a problem; they want some concrete solutions that will yield results. Strategic investments in our young people through the tax system ensure that it will get a maximum bang for the buck and will be of great assistance to young people looking for work in the province. This came out of our budget in May, and we're putting it into legislation through Bill 164, so it's not a new commitment on a Monday afternoon.

The cooperative education tax credit encourages businesses to provide more work experience opportunities for students and encourages institutions to form stronger partnerships with firms in leading-edge fields. Expanding this tax credit to private sector vocational schools and to apprenticeships broadens the benefits of this program for students and employers. By targeting more programs and students in leading-edge technology fields of study, this tax credit will encourage enrolment in high technology fields and increase job opportunities for Ontario's youth.

I can point out another few examples to my colleagues opposite in terms of other tangible examples for young people that have been seen by this government. The Minister of Economic Development, Trade and Tourism, our friend Mr Palladini, made reference earlier today in the House to an important program to help young entrepreneurs in the province. There's an

article in the Globe and Mail I'll quote from:

"The Ontario government has launched a new training and loans program aimed at young people who want to start their own businesses. Called the young entrepreneurs program, it will provide aspiring owners (aged 18 to 29) with a loan guarantee of up to $7,500." That's another example of a program to help young people in the province find their way and get that key first employment opportunity.

Another very important area where this government has sought change to help the problem of youth unemployment has to do with the employment insurance premiums of the federal government. This is an issue where parties on all sides of the political spectrum can agree that Ottawa, the federal government, must cut employment insurance taxes. Right now, a windfall in employment insurance tax is going to the bottom line of the federal government. It's a tax that's killing jobs. If you look at the people pushing for changes in employment insurance taxes, and I can quote from the Globe and Mail just this morning -

Mr Bud Wildman (Algoma): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: This is so fascinating that I'm sure we'd like to have more members present to hear what the member for Nepean has to say. Could you call for a quorum?

The Acting Speaker (Mr Gilles E. Morin): Would you please check if we have a quorum?

Clerk at the Table (Mr Todd Decker): A quorum is not present, Speaker.

The Acting Speaker ordered the bells rung.

Clerk at the Table: A quorum is now present, Speaker.

The Acting Speaker: Member for Nepean.

Mr Baird: I want to thank my colleague the member for Algoma, who sees so much good in the Ontario economy he wants more people to know about it - more good news in the Ontario economy on job creation efforts.

Before I was interrupted, I was speaking about employment insurance premiums and the terrible tax on jobs that employment insurance premiums are putting on the Ontario economy. There's widespread agreement on this problem. Not only is Ontario's finance minister, Ernie Eves, pushing it; so is the government of British Columbia and its finance minister, Andrew Petter. They're leading the charge, according to today's Globe and Mail

article on this issue. The huge surplus created in the employment insurance account goes to offset Mr Martin's fiscal problems but kills jobs. That's why in Ontario we on this side of the House believe that job creation is the central priority of government, to create jobs and restore hope and opportunity in Ontario.

Ontario pushed not only for employment insurance premiums to be cut effective January 1; we also, last week, pushed the federal government and our friend Mr Martin and his colleagues in Ottawa to cut and eliminate premiums entirely for young workers. What a great signal that would send to the economy, not just in Ontario but throughout Canada, if we could eliminate employment insurance taxes on workers under the age of 25, to make it as easy as possible, particularly for small business in Ontario, to hire more young people. We look forward to our colleagues at the federal level to respond to that important tax.

Interjection.

Mr Baird: Don't worry, member for Fort York, I'm not through.

I can also mention small business as a key job creator in Ontario. If you look at the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, they regularly poll their members to find out what their views are on a whole host of issues, one of the most job-creation-friendly organizations in the province. They asked a question of their members.

So we can see that there is solidly more support for further reducing taxes to help job creation measures than for the federal government to undertake new spending policies. The Canadian Federation of Independent Business represents some of the biggest job creators in Ontario, because while we love to see 5,000 new jobs at Northern Telecom, we know that so many of the jobs are going to be created when one small enterprise takes on an extra employee or two a couple of times a year. That's where we'll see a substantial amount of opportunity for young people in Ontario.

We hope that our friend Mr Martin will keep this in mind in the consultations leading up to his budget. I have a clipping here where obviously the finance minister at the federal level realizes the problem, and I'll quote the Toronto Sun headline: "Martin Admits Taxes Too High. Four years into his term as Minister of Finance, Paul Martin" - the federal Liberal Minister of Finance - "finally recognizes that taxes across the country are too high." I'll read from this article: "`Obviously, I think taxes are too high,' Finance Minister Paul Martin told CTV's Question Period yesterday." This is from February 24.

"`We would like to bring them down, but we're not going to bring them down to jeopardize the basic values of Canadians.'"

So tax cuts later or tax cuts never with this individual, you would think. He thinks we should do both, though, according to this article. We're waiting for some tangible evidence, as the federal budget comes into balance, that he is concerned about the plight of small business, one of the key job creation sectors in Ontario, to give them a glitter of hope, a light at the end of the tunnel in terms of high taxes. We anxiously await announcements coming from his department.

Improving access to capital will help small business in communities throughout Ontario grow and create jobs. Bill 164 reflects how we listen to stakeholders on making the community small business investment fund more attractive. The 1997 budget announced the creation of the community small business investment fund to encourage communities to partner with financial institutions, labour-sponsored investment funds and local investors to provide greater access to capital for small, local-growth businesses.

Bill 164 will provide further support for small business by enhancing and simplifying the small business investment tax credit for banks, trust companies, credit unions and caisses populaires, which will allow these financial institutions to reduce their capital tax when they invest or lend to small businesses. I know my colleague from Fort York - all the big banks are headquartered in his constituency - will be very pleased to learn about these new measures.

To simplify and modernize Ontario's capital tax system, this bill will harmonize Ontario's capital tax on banks and other financial institutions with the federal large corporations tax. This will level the playing field between financial institutions. It will also reduce compliance costs for businesses and administration costs for government.

Bill 164 recognizes the important contribution of the domestic film and television industry to our economy. This was an issue that got a lot of favourable push from the then Minister of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation, the Honourable Marilyn Mushinski, who pushed very hard for these programs. It's already yielding substantially more investment in Ontario and more jobs, particularly here in Toronto.

Interjection.

Mr Baird: In fact, as the member for Scarborough Centre says, right outside this building today, outside the Macdonald and Whitney blocks, they're filming another film and television production as a positive result and example of this measure brought in during the last budget. This change implements the 1997 budget announcement to increase Ontario's domestic film and television tax credit rate and increase the corporate annual limit.

The Minister of Finance has also announced that legislation will be introduced to expand eligible genres and to remove caps on size of production and total credits. These changes will significantly expand the amount of eligible Canadian content production that will qualify for Ontario's tax credits. These measures will help ensure that Ontario continues to be a leading-edge film and television production centre in North America.

The finance minister said that we will be consulting with the federal government on the 48% cap on qualifying expenditures for the domestic film and television credit tax credit in an effort to work in concert as we harmonize Ontario's film tax credit with the federal system.

He also announced that Ontario will also be reviewing the existing caps under the federal computer animation and special effects tax credits.

Bill 164 will provide more support for other cultural industries. The book publishing tax credit will encourage Ontario publishers to publish more and promote new Canadian authors, and that will be good news in Ontario.

The bill responds to advice from the book publishing industry to include educational textbooks and first-time illustrators of children's books.

There is new confidence in the private sector. We want to help Ontarians take advantage of the opportunities opening up around the province.

Bill 164 supports lower-income working families who are not benefiting from the current child care funding. By implementing our budget commitment for a child care tax credit, about 90,000 families and about 125,000 children under the age of seven are expected to benefit from the 1997 tax credit. This tax credit will be a new investment of $40 million to support lower-income working families and, most important, their children.

This government is committed to ensuring that Ontarians receive high-quality services in a cost-effective way. This legislation delivers on our commitment to reduce costs and to make sense of the division of provincial and municipal responsibilities by returning property assessment to municipalities where it can be done more efficiently. Bill 164 will establish the Ontario Property Assessment Corp. After a quarter-century of the province running this local tax base, local governments will take over the control and management of it now that the province-wide assessment is nearly completed.

The 1997 budget announced measures that are part of the government's plan to make Ontario the best place in the world to live, work and invest.

For many, many years Ontario was the economic engine of Canada. We were a magnet for jobs, investment and opportunity. But for 10 years around the world, Ontario became known as a mismanaged debtor, overgoverned, overregulated, overtaxed. In just two years the Ontario economy has rebounded sharply. We're leading the way in jobs in Canada. Once again we're the magnet for jobs, investment and opportunity.

Looking through the papers just today, you can see examples: "Ontario Top Job Creator and Welfare Rolls Dropping" - the Toronto Sun. "Ontario is leading the country in job growth in 1997 and the trend should spill over to the new year, Statistics Canada figures show." Those aren't Ministry of Finance figures; those are figures from the federal government, Statistics Canada - more jobs in Ontario.

Just last month alone, Ontario picked up 13,000 of these jobs. I know my colleagues on all sides of the House will welcome those types of measures.

Canadians are confident about personal finances. That's something we haven't seen in many, many years in Ontario. We look at the Toronto Star, December 5: "Help-Wanted Index Holds Seven-Year High." More good news.

Mr Wayne Wettlaufer (Kitchener): Seven years.

Mr Baird: Seven years, as the member for Kitchener says. "Job listings hit seven-year high. The number of advertised job postings jumped to its highest level in seven years last month, suggesting an improving job picture." We think this is good news. We think it's going to lead to substantially more jobs. We've already seen some solid evidence of solid job growth across the province. But now is not the time to let up. That's why we have a whole host of tax measures in this budget designed to ensure the ball keeps rolling and that more jobs are created in Ontario.

The Ontario economy grew at an annualized rate in the first quarter of this fiscal year, from April to June, by 7.2%. That's substantial growth and good news for the people of Ontario. Clearly, tax cuts are helping to restore consumer confidence, and that's good news. Tax cuts are restoring consumer confidence.

The income for too many families in Ontario was flat-lined. The ability of working men and women to be able to provide for their families was severely compromised. More taxes and static income led to less hope and less opportunity, particularly for young people looking for their first job. Too many young families were struggling to provide an income for their families.

These folks don't protest high taxes in front of Queen's Park, they don't have temper tantrums in front of the television cameras, but these folks are the backbone of Ontario's society. They work hard, they raise their families, they pay the taxes, they run the small businesses, they are active in the community and they play by the rules. These hardworking families across Ontario were hit hard by 65 tax increases over 10 years and they are beginning to see light at the end of the tunnel. They are beginning to see for the first time in many, many years their real spending power increase.

There is confidence coming in the Ontario economy and that's good news, because for far too many, the price of high taxes meant it was just that much more difficult to raise a family and to provide for their children.

We know that the private sector is the primary economic engine of Canada. It is our government's responsibility