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

October 30, 2001

37th Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2001-Oct-30 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Tuesday 30 October 2001 Mardi 30 octobre 2001

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

STUDENT PROTEST

BOTTLING PLANT

CHILDREN'S MENTAL

HEALTH SERVICES

HOUSING CO-OPERATIVES

BOB BENSON

HOME CARE

BRAIN TUMOURS

AGRICULTURAL LAND

HALLOWEEN

VISITORS

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE

ON GENERAL GOVERNMENT

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

HIGHWAY TRAFFIC AMENDMENT ACT

(STUDDED TIRES), 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 MODIFIANT

LE CODE DE LA ROUTE

(PNEUS CLOUTÉ

S) STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

COUNTERTERRORISM MEASURES

TOURISM

COUNTERTERRORISM MEASURES

ORAL QUESTIONS

ONTARIO SECURITY FUND PLAN

HEALTH CARE

HAZARDOUS WASTE

BRUCE GENERATING STATION

CHILDREN'S HEALTH SERVICES

AUDIOLOGY SERVICES

ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES LEGISLATION

LOW-INCOME ONTARIANS

HOSPITAL FUNDING

BORDER SECURITY

COMMUNITY CARE ACCESS CENTRES

YOUNG OFFENDERS

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

PETITIONS

DOCTOR SHORTAGE

CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

EDUCATION

OHIP SERVICES

DOCTOR SHORTAGE

LONDON HEALTH SCIENCES CENTRE

OHIP SERVICES

CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

AUDIOLOGY SERVICES

HOME CARE

HIGHWAY 407

SERVICES FOR THE

DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

LONDON HEALTH SCIENCES CENTRE

OPPOSITION DAY

ONTARIO SECURITY FUND PLAN

Tuesday 30 October 2001 Mardi 30 octobre 2001

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

STUDENT PROTEST

Mr John Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands): Last Tuesday, a group of 100 students from Kingston Collegiate and Vocational Institute, the

oldest high school in Ontario, engaged in a peaceful demonstration in front of my constituency office, as well as in front of their school. The students rightfully pointed out that they had been

made victim of Mike Harris's policy of profit over people.

As they pointed out in the pamphlet produced for the occasion, the rate of child poverty has doubled in Ontario in the last 10 years, the Harris government has

cut welfare rates by 22.7%, tenant protection has largely been eliminated, water testing has been privatized and environment funding cut in half, with the tragic events in Walkerton being one of

the results.

They further stated that the cuts to education have resulted in larger class sizes, reduced support staff for schools and overworked teachers having less time

for students. They also pointed out that the rapid rise in tuition fees for university and college and deregulated programs have made post-secondary education inaccessible to many high school

graduates.

The students also pointed out that Mike Harris broke his promise that home care would be available before hospitals were restructured. As you know, Speaker, our

access centre is over $3 million short, so our sick and elderly who need home care cannot get the necessary nursing they so desperately need. As their pamphlet so accurately stated, like education,

health care has been made the victim of massive provincial cuts, leaving the people of Ontario with a manufactured crisis of a shortage of beds, nurses, doctors, equipment and clinics.

I would like to congratulate all the students involved, led by Jordan Bell, for the very constructive manner in which they expressed their issues and concerns. I

challenge the government to listen to these young and eloquent students and adopt policies that will really deal with the problems facing many in Ontario today.

BOTTLING PLANT

Mr Joseph Spina (Brampton Centre): "It is amazing what you can get for $150 million." Those were the words of Lowry Kline, vice-chair and CEO of

Coca-Cola Enterprises Inc, as he unveiled the new Coca-Cola bottling plant to the Brampton community last Thursday.

This 630,000-square-foot plant is Coca-Cola's new production and distribution centre, making it the single largest investment ever made by the company in Canada.

Sitting on 62 acres of land, at the epicentre of the Golden Horseshoe, we joined with over 400 suppliers, Minister Tony Clement and MPP Raminder Gill.

Jarrat Jones, senior VP, said one of their primary goals is to begin a program in early 2002 that will link the bottling facility with schools in Peel. Coca-Cola

will bring schoolchildren to reinforce math and science, so they can see first-hand that what they're learning today in school really does apply to the real world. In fact, Jones said, the company

even used curriculum consultants to ensure this program will meet their needs.

On behalf of the Ontario government, congratulations to Jarrat Jones, Chief Operating Officer Tom Barlow and everyone at Coca-Cola. Welcome to Brampton. All

members can join me in a toast to Coca-Cola.

CHILDREN'S MENTAL

HEALTH SERVICES

Mr Bruce Crozier (Essex): My statement is for the Minister of Community and Social Services. I cannot express my thoughts better than a letter

to you from a concerned constituent, Robert O. Schmidt. In part, the letter reads:

"It is with great disgust that I watch the lack of support our provincial government provides to the children and families of Windsor and Essex county who suffer

from children's mental health difficulties. I have read the studies of services provided in other parts of the province for the families and children who suffer the scourge of children's mental

health difficulties and I cannot understand the reason for the lack of funding and therefore services provided to this community....

"I wonder what is the purpose of our elected leaders. Is your purpose only to serve those that support you, as if the `Family Compact' never left town. I ask

you, `Is our government to serve all persons of the whole province or only the select few who are deemed worthy?'

"In the Windsor-Essex county area we have lost a significant portion of a valuable service at Maryvale Adolescent and Family Service. This facility assists

children and youth who experience mental health problems. By reducing the aid to the children and families who suffer the direct effects of children's mental problems you and we as a province

ensure the perpetuation of these difficulties for future generations....

"It is with concern that the money you and therefore we as a province do not spend today to deal with children's mental health will be guaranteed to be forced to

pay out at a significantly higher rate as these children and youth enter the justice system."

I agree with Mr Schmidt's comments and, Minister, you should agree with them too.

HOUSING CO-OPERATIVES

Mr Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): My statement today is about the Co-op Housing Federation of Toronto awards which are taking place on

Thursday evening. Each year for the last number of years, the Co-operative Housing Federation of Toronto has celebrated the success of co-operative housing by honouring its member co-ops for their

achievements. This year's awards ceremony will be held on Thursday night, November 1, and I am looking forward to attending.

The federation staff has spent considerable time and effort in order to ensure a successful evening. This year, the awards for innovative community ideas will be

presented to co-ops across the GTA. These awards range from creative newsletter publishing and diversity issues to international co-operation and development.

Without giving them away, because it's a secret -- the award winners don't know yet who they are -- I want to personally congratulate and thank all the

finalists, the federation and the people who work so hard to support co-operative housing as one of the most viable alternatives to providing decent, safe and affordable housing in the city of

Toronto and across the province, especially now, when issues of affordable housing do not appear to be anywhere on the radar screen with this government.

I want to again thank them very much for keeping the issue front and centre before us and holding out hope for the people of this province that they will again

have decent, safe places to live.

BOB BENSON

Mr Bart Maves (Niagara Falls): The Ontario government believes that every child benefits from a positive sport experience. It is well

established that involvement in sport and recreation improves health, creates positive behaviours, builds communities and increases economic growth.

On Friday, October 12, I had the wonderful privilege of awarding the 3M Community Coach Award to Bob Benson, who was nominated by the Niagara Falls Girls Soccer

Club. Mr Benson has been involved with soccer all of his life. It is obvious that he truly enjoys this game. He has been involved as a player, as a coach and as an administrator. For the past two

years, Mr Benson has been the club president of the Niagara Falls Girls Soccer Club, and previously held other positions, including vice-president.

Mr Benson has been instrumental in creating two leagues: a league for ladies over 30 and a league for young ladies over 16. He has been coaching for over 25

years, originally in St Catharines, then with the Niagara Falls Boys Soccer Club, and for over 12 years with the Niagara Falls Girls Soccer Club. He has taken two teams to the Ontario Cup finals,

and on September 15, 2001, for the first time ever, a girls' soccer team from Niagara Falls reached the finals.

I congratulate Mr Benson on being one of the first recipients of the Ontario 3M Community Coach Award. Thank you, Mr Benson, for your outstanding contribution to

sport in Niagara Falls.

HOME CARE

Mr Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North): For the last five months, members from this side of the House have been pleading with the

Minister of Health to provide increased funding to our home care sector. While our cries for help have so far been unsuccessful, it's vitally important the minister understand that this is a matter

we will not allow to fade away. Too many people are being denied the care they need to stay at home, and as a result the much more expensive hospital sector is being forced to take up the

slack.

If the minister will not listen to all of us in the House who are fighting for our constituents, it is my hope today that he will take more seriously the

front-line professionals in the medical field who have to deal with the daily fallout of a short-sighted funding cutback.

I'm going to send the minister a copy of a letter that all the doctors of the Marathon Family Practice have written, calling on him to provide the needed

funding. They are concerned about the people they serve in the communities of Marathon, Pic River and Pic Mobert. They point out in no uncertain terms that the lengths of stay at Wilson Memorial

General Hospital have increased because of the limited access to home care and nursing support. They also confirm that those patients who have been able to go home from hospital but still have some

needed level of nursing care have to return to the hospital to use the emergency room to access these no longer available home-based services.

Minister, this is short-sighted, costly and in fact can be dangerous for those who must travel over northwestern Ontario roads to reach the hospital. How much

more evidence do you need that your cutbacks to home care must be reversed? You must listen and respond to the dedicated physicians in Marathon. They know what the needs are in their communities

and you must not ignore their plea.

BRAIN TUMOURS

Mr Bob Wood (London West): For many years now October has been designated as Brain Tumour Awareness Month in Canada. It has also been proclaimed

in many cities across Canada. Brain tumours, a devastating disease, strike people of all ages, from newborns to seniors across all economic, social and ethnic boundaries and affect people in all

walks of life. Brain tumours are the most common cause of solid cancer in children.

Early detection and treatment are vital for a person to survive brain tumours. Brain tumour research, patient and family support services and awareness among the

general public are essential to promote early detection and treatment of brain tumours. Each year approximately 10,000 Canadians of all ages are diagnosed with a brain tumour. Brain tumours are the

second leading cause of cancer death in people under the age of 20 and the third leading cause of cancer death in young adults between the ages of 20 and 39.

As members may know, my bill to officially designate October as Brain Tumour Awareness Month in Ontario is before this House for third reading. I've received

over 125 letters of support from across Canada for the bill. I hope I can count on all members of this House to support speedy passage of this bill so that the Brain Tumor Foundation of Canada can

get more support for their very important work of educating the public to the early warning symptoms of brain tumours. Let's make October 2002 the first official Brain Tumour Awareness Month in

Ontario.

AGRICULTURAL LAND

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): Every month in Ontario thousands of acres of farmland in natural areas are gobbled up by unwise and

unnecessary development. While municipal, provincial and federal politicians invariably run on platforms that call for the preservation of prime agricultural land and the protection of

environmentally sensitive areas, when the developer comes knocking, all of the resolve to act in the long-term interest of the people melts away as the arguments for short-term economic gain are

advanced.

Agricultural lands containing good soils and blessed with favourable climatic conditions are sacrificed on the altar of reckless development. When will those in

decision-making positions begin to understand that once the farmland is paved over and the natural areas destroyed, they are gone forever?

In Niagara, for instance, there are some who will not be satisfied until every last centimetre of land from the edge of Toronto to the border of Fort Erie and

from the shores of Lake Ontario to the beaches of Lake Erie is covered with asphalt, and until they sap the strength and vitality of the city core in the interest of big-box development on the edge

of the municipality.

What is needed is a strong, comprehensive provincial Planning Act that designates prime agricultural land and environmentally sensitive areas as off limits to

development. Without provincial leadership and foresight, a valuable and irreplaceable heritage will be lost for future generations of Ontario residents.

HALLOWEEN

Mr Raminder Gill (Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale): My statement today is on Halloween. As you know, tomorrow is Halloween and many young ghosts

and goblins will be coming to our doors seeking treats. In my riding and all across Brampton, Block Parents and the Rogers Pumpkin Patrol will be keeping a vigilant eye on our young

trick-or-treaters to ensure this evening remains fun for all. We should all work together to ensure that Halloween is safe for our children.

Today I would like to offer just a few reminders to parents. Our children need to see and be seen. Remind your children to stay in well-lit areas and only visit

homes that have their outside lights turned on. Ensure the children wear face paint instead of masks and non-flammable, brightly coloured costumes.

Caution is the key. We should remind our children that under no circumstances should they enter a stranger's home. As drivers, we should take extra time to slow

down and be extra careful when we're returning home. We must also keep watch for any suspicious behaviour in our neighbourhoods and immediately report it to the police.

Parents seeking more information can visit my Web site, www.ramindergill.com. They can also visit the Wal-Mart store at Bovaird Drive and Highway 10 in Brampton

this evening, where the Brampton Safe City Association will be handing out safety information. By taking a few simple precautions, we can help ensure that our children have a truly safe and happy

Halloween.

VISITORS

Mr Dave Levac (Brant): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I'm sure all members in the House will join me in welcoming, in the east gallery, Mr and

Mrs Vandermade. They are the parents of our one-block-away Chadd, who is our page. They, with his sister, who's younger but taller, are in the gallery today to welcome Chadd as a page.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): We welcome our guests.

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE

ON GENERAL GOVERNMENT

Mr Steve Gilchrist (Scarborough East): I beg leave to present a report from the standing committee on general government and move its

adoption.

Clerk at the Table (Ms Lisa Freedman): Your committee begs to report the following bill as amended:

Bill 109,

An Act to enhance the security of vital statistics documents and to provide for certain administrative changes to the vital statistics registration

system / Projet de loi 109, Loi visant à accroître la sécurité des documents de l'état civil et prévoyant certaines modifications administratives au système

d'enregistrement des statistiques de l'état civil.

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

The bill is therefore ordered for third reading.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

HIGHWAY TRAFFIC AMENDMENT ACT

(STUDDED TIRES), 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 MODIFIANT

LE CODE DE LA ROUTE

(PNEUS CLOUTÉ

S) Mr Bartolucci moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 119,

An Act to amend the Highway Traffic Act in respect of studded tires / Projet de loi 119, Loi modifiant le Code de la route en ce qui concerne les pneus

cloutés.

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

The member for a short statement?

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): This bill amends the Highway Traffic Act. It allows a motor vehicle to use studded tires that conform to

prescribed standards and specifications, and those vehicles may be operated on a highway in the part of the province prescribed by regulations as northern Ontario. It may also be operated on a

highway anywhere in Ontario if the address of the owner of the vehicle is in northern Ontario.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

COUNTERTERRORISM MEASURES

Hon Michael D. Harris (Premier): September 11 was a wake-up call for governments the world over. It was a reminder that we cannot take cherished

freedoms and security for granted, that we must keep working to protect the peaceful and tolerant society that we've created.

This is a complicated time in our history. It's a time when people need their government to lead decisively but also fairly. It's a time when people need

reassurances of safety but also guarantees of privacy. It is a difficult time. But it is above all a time for action.

I want the people of Ontario to know that their government is moving forward with tough new counterterrorism measures. I want them to know that we're working

hard to keep Ontario the peaceful and prosperous place that it has been for the past six years. We must not let these or any other criminal acts stop us from living our daily lives. We cannot

respond to a threat to our free and open society by abandoning its principles, and we cannot, and will not, respond to terror by living in terror.

Since September 11, our government has acted swiftly and decisively. We began immediately, within hours of the attacks, to offer our neighbours assistance and

expertise. Days later, we announced $3 million to help families of Ontario victims of these attacks. On September 24 in this House we announced a number of steps to protect the safety and security

of Ontario families. On October 1, I announced accelerated tax cuts to help keep our economy growing, and I also announced the appointment of two new security advisers, former RCMP Commissioner

Norman Inkster and retired Major General Lewis MacKenzie, to give us advice on how to further strengthen Ontario's security. More recently, on October 11, we introduced legislation that would

increase the security of vital documents.

Today I'm announcing four new measures that will help keep the people of our province safe.

First, our government will provide $4.5 million to create a new rapid response unit of the Ontario Provincial Police. The unit will be specially equipped to

combat terrorist threats and provide protection for our nuclear facilities and water treatment plants.

Second, to help stamp out terrorist activity in Ontario, we will invest $3.5 million in antiterrorism units that will proactively work to investigate and track

down terrorists and their supporters.

Third, we will give our front-line police officers the necessary equipment to respond to chemical, biological and other kinds of attacks.

Fourth, we will host a counterterrorism summit to allow the best minds in law enforcement and emergency services to share ideas and develop new strategies.

Tomorrow the Solicitor General will provide more details on these new initiatives and announce further steps that our government is taking to prepare our

province for emergencies.

The Minister of Economic Development and Trade will also address the House tomorrow regarding some of the steps we have taken to keep our economy strong during

this difficult time.

On November 6, the Minister of Finance will deliver the fall economic update, which will assure the people of Ontario that the fundamentals of our economy

remain strong.

Our government is determined to protect the economic gains that we have made over the past six years, and we will continue to work hard to normalize trade

along our border. We will co-operate with the federal government as well as American governments to develop an integrated border strategy and a secure perimeter that will ensure both Ontario's

security and the free and timely flow of goods.

We will also continue to strengthen Ontario's security. We will continue to work with our municipal and federal partners to protect our citizens.

It is the responsibility of every government at every level and of every police force in every jurisdiction to ensure a decisive victory in the war against

terrorism. It is the responsibility of this House to keep the people of Ontario safe, the province's economy competitive and to keep its future secure.

Hon David Young (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs): Our government's response to the appalling events of September 11

was immediate and continues to this day. As the Premier stated earlier, in the aftermath of the attacks we provided $3 million to help families whose loved ones were victims of the attack.

Further, we established a victim response team and a 24-hour response line, a help line drawing on the skills and expertise of staff from Ontario's Office for

Victims of Crime, an agency of my own ministry. These highly committed individuals have helped families respond to any issues that they have faced. These issues include financial assistance,

travel, meals, trauma counselling and, sadly, funeral arrangements.

Our government hopes that all these efforts are a source of support and a source of comfort to those who are personally affected by this tragedy. While Ontario

is still mourning the lives lost on September 11, our government has not lost sight of the fact that one of our most important duties is to protect our province and its people. To that end, my

ministry is planning to undertake a number of initiatives to help ensure our security, help us respond to incidents occurring within our province and provide further assistance to victims.

I would like to express my growing concern about the rash of anthrax hoaxes in Canada. In recent weeks, we have all seen and read of bioterrorist scares. In

fact, just last week in my own office we were the subject of just such a scare. While we were thankful that the scare at the Ministry of the Attorney General turned out to be a false alarm, these

despicable acts of cowardice are diverting emergency personnel from true emergencies and, as a result, are putting the lives of innocent individuals and the personal safety of Ontarians at

risk.

Let me be clear: our government will not tolerate these hoaxes. We are resolved to do everything in our power to bring the perpetrators of these hoaxes to

justice. I am pleased to announce that my ministry will vigorously prosecute hoaxes to the full extent of the current law, and we will seek significant penalties for those who engage in such

acts.

As part of our response, my ministry will be closely monitoring all cases where hoaxes occur. Designated crown attorneys will receive specialized training on

terrorism-related issues. Senior prosecutors across Ontario will coordinate all terrorism-related issues, including the prosecution of these hoaxes. Any acts that threaten the safety and security

of the public, including threats to justice facilities and personnel, will be taken extremely seriously, and such cases will be vigorously prosecuted.

I have urged Ottawa to create a new Criminal Code offence to deal with perpetrators of hoaxes, hoaxes such as bomb threats and anthrax. Officials from the

Justice Department in Ottawa have responded positively to our proposal, and I sincerely hope that Minister McLellan will act quickly to implement these much-needed changes to the Criminal Code.

This measure would send a much-needed message that perpetrating such a hoax will not be tolerated in this country. We are also demanding that the federal government ensure that the proposed

penalties for terrorist crimes are stiff enough to punish convicted terrorists and to protect the public.

Today I am pleased to announce that we are establishing a counterterrorism task force. The task force will consist of crown attorneys who will provide expert

advice on the enforcement and prosecution of crimes related to terrorism. They will aggressively prosecute terrorist crimes.

We will also be looking at a means of cutting off the lifeblood of terrorism, and that of course is money. I will be working with my colleague the Minister of

Consumer and Business Services to review provincial laws governing charities to ensure that organizations are not contributing to terrorism. The review will look at a range of solutions, including

revoking corporate or charitable status and/or freezing a charity's assets.

In times of great tragedy and personal loss, victims' families should not have their government putting obstacles in their way during the healing process,

during a time when they are trying to bring closure to their grief. For that reason, my ministry also plans to do more to help the families of Ontario's victims. We plan to remove legal obstacles

to settling estates. I will be introducing legislation in this session to streamline the process for obtaining a declaration of death. A simplified declaration of death will make it easier to

probate wills, make insurance claims and conduct other important legal business.

In addition, I will be proposing amendments to the Executive Council Act that would allow us to extend certain court deadlines so that any disruptions caused

by an emergency do not prevent the people of Ontario from having access to their justice system.

We will be living with the consequences of September 11 for years to come. The events of that day opened our eyes to the extremes to which terrorists are

prepared to go. However, our government and the people of this great province are resolved to fight terrorism and protect the rights and freedoms that make us who we are. By enhancing Ontario's

state of preparedness, we will be helping to ensure that this province will remain a safe place, a place to live, a place to work and a place to raise a family.

TOURISM

Hon Tim Hudak (Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation): I rise today to join Premier Harris and Attorney General David Young to report

back to the House on the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Recreation's response to the horrific terrorist attacks of September 11. We were all terribly shaken by the acts of terrorism in New York

City, Washington and Pennsylvania. Make no mistake about it: it was an attack on all of us as well. To our friends and neighbours south of the border I offer my deepest sympathies.

International terrorism has led to an international decline in tourism, and Ontario is not immune to that decline. Ontario's hotels, restaurants, attractions

and casinos are facing new and very real challenges. My main message to tourists is, don't stay in your homes for fear of travel. That lets the terrorists win. Get out and continue to do and enjoy

all there is to see and to discover in the province of Ontario.

On several occasions I've met with tourism leaders from across the province. The consensus around the table was that we were not going to sit on our hands; we

were going to fight back and boast about tourism in this province. We agreed that it is now more important than ever to market and promote all there is to see and do in Ontario. So, Mr Speaker, I'd

like to provide you and the members of the Legislature with an update on the actions taken by my ministry since September 11.

On October 11, I announced that the Mike Harris government would invest an additional $4 million into a new, aggressive marketing campaign in our domestic and

traditional US border markets, a 35% increase in those markets. For the next 28 weeks, Ontario will be proudly promoted using a variety of media, including radio, TV, print, direct mail and

e-marketing both inside this province and outside.

We have set up strategic partnerships with Niagara and Windsor to bring industry dollars and partnership to the table to extend the reach of the province's

marketing dollars, and more regional partnerships are to come.

We also wish to establish confidence in the industry in the regions. We've moved ahead with the full construction phase of the new state-of-the-art,

world-class Casino Niagara, as well as introducing a wine and culinary tourism strategy to help promote that growing niche tourism market in this country.

As well, immediately after the events of September 11 we extended the hours of operation at our travel information centres and our 1-800-ONTARIO line to help

travellers who are stranded and to give up-to-date information on issues with visiting this country. We continue to provide up-to-date border crossing information through our travel information

centres and our 1-800-ONTARIO line, as well as our Web sites. Since September 11, I've also released weekly bulletins with up-to-date information to everyone in the tourism industry so they can

adjust their plans accordingly.

I have met with the federal minister responsible for tourism, Brian Tobin, and called for aggressive federal support for Canada's tourism industry. As well, I

have spoken with my counterparts from New York state and Michigan, Brian Akley and George Zimmerman, and we agreed that it is imperative, now more than ever, to work together to maximize our

binational opportunities such as the Doors Open heritage tourism opportunity in our border areas.

All of our efforts to attract more visitors to Ontario and enhance our binational tourism opportunities will be in vain if our tourists run into a wall as they

try to cross our border. I want to congratulate Premier Harris for his leadership in calling for a harmonization of rules and coordination of procedures to create a North American common security

perimeter.

As I have mentioned, the tourism industry has not been immune from the impacts of September 11. What's at stake? It is estimated that in 2000, the tourism

industry generated some $17.5 billion in expenditures and employed almost half a million Ontarians, and was Ontario's sixth-largest export industry. Tourism accounted for 43% of Canada's

international visitors, and many of those visitors were of course Americans. The impact on jobs and investment in hitting that wall would be tremendous.

There is no doubt that in the near future a fence will be built. A war on terrorism has commenced, and today the view of constituents in North America is that

safety and security are of paramount concern. So as Ontarians and as Canadians, we have a choice to make: do we want to be inside or outside that fence? I'd much rather be inside that fence.

So I join with my Premier and my colleagues in encouraging our federal governments to work together to harmonize our customs and immigration procedures. It is

absolutely crucial in order to preserve and build our borderland economies. In Ontario we have world-class attractions, we have a competitive marketing plan and we're ready to boast to the world

about all there is to see and do in the province of Ontario. With a secure, coordinated, efficient border, I believe we'll be able to attract even more visitors than ever before from the United

States and beyond to build a strong tourism industry, not only today but well into the future.

COUNTERTERRORISM MEASURES

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): I listened with great interest and was pleased when I heard that the government was going to be

addressing a matter of the utmost gravity, which is the longing felt by our working families, and indeed our businesses, for a greater sense of security and stability in our province. I hoped that

there would be something of substance in these announcements. I hoped that the government had come to understand that it was going to take more than newspaper ads, tax cuts for corporations and

expressions of concern and condemnations of terrorism and terrorists. I hoped that there would be considerably more than that, but this is pretty thin gruel.

The Premier in particular tells us that he's going to be offering some further assistance to the Ontario Provincial Police. We support that; we've been talking

about that for quite some time. They talk about new equipment to help our front-line police officers contend with the new challenges presented by chemical, biological and other kinds of attacks. We

support that; we've been talking about that for quite some time.

It has been 48 days since the horrific events of September 11, and what has this government done -- I mean in a real and substantive and positive way -- other

than running newspaper ads, expressing concern and condemning all things connected with terrorism? The fact of the matter is that they have done very, very little. On the other hand, two weeks ago

now, we put before this Parliament and the people of this province a substantive Ontario security plan. It is specifically designed to inspire consumer confidence and to provide our families with

the knowledge that this government could be and should be acting in real and positive ways to improve security measures in their communities. That's what our plan is all about.

This government has said that they're committed to $1 billion in infrastructure expenditures. That is found in their last two budgets. This money is not being

invented. They said it was there. They committed to do it. The problem is all they've invested in infrastructure is $14 million. We say, take that $1-billion commitment and begin to make those

investments, and begin to make them now.

I know what the government has in mind. They have in mind to stockpile these commitments, cut cheques and hold photo-ops much nearer the election. But do you

know what? These are not ordinary times, and it's important for this government to assume responsibility, to do the right thing at the right time. Now is the right time to make those

investments.

If we were to invest these monies as they are in fact dedicated, if we put money into our bridges, our roads, our water infrastructure, our schools, our

colleges and universities, and our hospitals, not only does that create construction jobs and spinoff jobs, do you know what else it doesn't do? It doesn't compromise our fiscal flexibility in the

future, which is unfortunately exactly what this government's response to this economic challenge is. They're saying, "Why don't we cut corporate taxes by another $2.2 billion?" Our corporations

are already competitive. They are already profitable, those that are designed as beneficiaries of this tax.

We believe what we should be doing is making these infrastructure investments today. In addition to that, we think we should be dedicating 10% of those monies

which this government has committed but refuses to invest. Take 10% of those monies -- that's $100 million -- and make those available to our municipalities, make them available to those

municipalities that are struggling under some of the new challenges that are being created by the events of September 11. Some of them are concerned about protecting their water treatment plants.

Some of them are concerned about protecting their courthouses. Some of them are concerned about the fact they don't have enough police officers or firefighters. We heard some very specific concerns

expressed by the mayor of Toronto on the matter of firefighters recently.

There are some things that can be done during these trying times, and we're going to need more than pap and drivel and very thin gruel. We need matters of

substance and we need real leadership. We've put forward a positive plan. All this government has to do is take our plan and run with it.

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): We have heard from the Premier and a couple of his cabinet ministers their details on what they

believe they're doing or what they want people to believe they're doing to tackle the issue of terrorism. I actually want to go through a couple of fronts on this issue.

The first issue I want to raise is bioterrorism. It was interesting today to read in some of the larger newspapers that the issue that is worrying scientists

is not so much anthrax, which can be treated with antibiotics; the issue that is bothering a lot of scientists and lot of people who worry about bioterrorism is the fact that a new strain of

E coli could very easily be used to contaminate major parts of the food system or to literally create a toxic atmosphere across a broad spectrum of the food system.

What is interesting about that is that while scientists elsewhere in the world are worried about the use of a new strain of E coli to inflict that kind of

bioterrorist damage, this government is laying off its very microbiologist expert who has an international reputation in that field.

The other issue that was interesting to note in the media today is that a lot of people who think about the issue of terrorism and bioterrorism are concerned

about how new superbugs, bacteria that are resistant to antibiotics such as penicillin, could be used in a bioterrorism campaign. As I say, people in other countries are worried about this. What is

this government doing? It's laying off the very microbiologist in this province who has supervised the research on detecting and addressing new superbugs.

The Premier says he's going to hold a summit on counterterrorism. That may be productive, but I want to point out to people across Ontario that at this very

time this government is laying off an internationally respected scientist who just two years ago helped to coordinate and develop a conference on how to deal with emerging forms of bioterrorism. Go

figure. For any government to come to this Legislature and say it's taking meaningful steps to deal with the threat of terrorism when meanwhile it is laying off the very scientific experts who are

at the forefront of this and who are being sought out elsewhere in the world makes absolutely no sense.

Another issue the government referred to was the harmonization of immigration and customs with the United States. I merely want to point out for people across

the province that the United States has not exactly had a very successful immigration and customs program. The United States has spent billions of dollars over the last 20 years on the Mexican

border. They have employed no less than 16,000 customs officers and border patrol officers, apparently for the purpose of keeping illegal Mexican immigrants, as they term it, out of the United

States.

What has been the result of that? The estimate is that there are close to one million illegal Mexican immigrants entering and staying in the United States

every year. In fact, Spanish-speaking immigrants have become the largest single ethnic group in the United States.

Is it now the policy of the Ontario government that they want to adopt an immigration and customs procedure that has been singularly ineffective, one of the

largest leaks in the world? I want to say to the Premier that we are not interested in becoming the 51st state and we are not interested in giving up our own independent capacity over immigration

and customs.

Finally, let me say there is an economic component to this. Premier, you know that your accelerated tax cuts are not going to address that. What is required to

re-create consumer confidence is a reduction in the sales tax. That's what you need to do if you want to create some security in our economy.

ORAL QUESTIONS

ONTARIO SECURITY FUND PLAN

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): My question is to the Minister of Finance. Minister, by way of my earlier comments in response

to the statements made by representatives of the government today, you will know that it is my considered opinion that your government has done precious little when it comes to shoring up a lagging

sense of security on the part of our families and indeed on the part of our businesses. Two weeks ago, we proposed the creation of an Ontario security fund. If we dedicated to our security just 10%

of the $1 billion that you have promised but not spent on capital, $100 million would be available for projects to make our province even safer, and it wouldn't cost the budget an extra cent.

Minister, I offered this plan in a non-partisan effort to increase security for our families. Why have you failed to act on our plan?

Hon Jim Flaherty (Deputy Premier, Minister of Finance): With respect to the Leader of the Opposition, the best protection we have in Ontario

is the prudent fiscal management and planning that has been done over the past six years under the leadership of the Premier, the fact that we have had three balanced budgets in a row, the fact

that we have low competitive taxes, and the fact that we have prudent fiscal planning with a substantial reserve so that we have a strong, resilient, diverse economy in Ontario.

That's not the kind of thing that can be done overnight. That's the kind of thing that can only be done with prudent decision-making and planning and keeping

commitments over the period of six years, which this government has done under the leadership of Premier Harris. We have that solid foundation.

Mr McGuinty: Minister, what was that? I asked you a question specifically about what you're going to do about my specific proposal to help

shore up security in Ontario and you give me some ideological pap from years gone by.

Our families and our businesses need much more than that from you. You want the big job, you're going to have to start acting like you deserve it. We put

forward a specific plan that would not cost the budget an additional cent. It talks about investing in infrastructure and about setting aside 10% of the $1 billion that you've committed but refuse

to spend because you're saving it for election purposes. It talks about setting up a separate Ontario security fund. Those are practical, they are meaningful, they are relevant, they are

substantive and they will be effective. Why have you not adopted it?

Hon Mr Flaherty: As the member opposite knows, in terms of the economic security the Minister of Finance is engaged with, the Premier

announced accelerated tax cuts that were in the budget from May 9 and were to come into effect on January 1. They're now going to come into effect on October 1. They deal with capital, the capital

tax, with corporate taxes and with personal income taxes.

I can also tell him that in my discussions with the federal Minister of Finance and with the other provincial and territorial ministers of finance on Sunday in

Ottawa, the consensus certainly was that we ought not to move into deficit financing. I don't know if you share that view. I rather doubt the Leader of the Opposition shares that view with the

federal finance minister, but the federal minister, certainly, and the other provincial and territorial ministers feel that the key now is not to abandon what we've done, not to abandon the prudent

fiscal management we've worked on so hard to accomplish the solid foundation in Ontario; rather to stay the course, not to run deficits and to continue --

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

Mr McGuinty: Minister, it is time to take that tired, old, one-trick tax-cut pony out to the glue factory. Its day has come and gone. We need

new ideas. We need innovation. We need real leadership. You, sir, are not providing that.

One more time: we talked about a specific, substantive, positive proposal. It doesn't cost the budget an extra cent. What it means is that we will invest in

infrastructure today, not later near election time when it serves your political purposes. It also means we take $100 million and we make that money available to our municipal partners, our cities

and towns that are struggling with how to implement new security measures to make their people in their communities feel safer.

What I'm asking you to do, Minister, is instead of pursuing that ideological pap, which is meaningless today, especially given these circumstances, why won't

you pursue this positive plan?

Hon Mr Flaherty: I can assure the Leader of the Opposition that if I decide to take leadership lessons, I won't call him.

With respect to capital spending in the province, I heard the Leader of the Opposition say just a few minutes ago in this House that the capital investment

currently in this province by this government is $14 million -- patently wrong, not even close to the facts. The facts are that more than $8 billion of investment has been made on the capital side

by this government. All those cranes around Ontario now, at our hospital sites, at our colleges, at our universities, all providing stimuli to our economy -- all of that because of prudent

decisions that were made over the past few years, not last-minute knee-jerk ideas like you come up with.

HEALTH CARE

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): My question is to the Minister of Health. I am very interested in some of the proposals and

resolutions put forward by the youth wing of your party, but I think what Ontarians are more interested in are your opinions about some of the resolutions put forward by the youth wing in your

party. On health care, they say, "A parallel public-private health care system, better known as a two-tiered system, is necessary to relieve the overstressed public system." They go on to say,

"Many of Ontario's hospitals should be privatized and the construction and operation of new private hospitals should be encouraged."

You will understand, Minister, as somebody who is seeking the Premiership of this province, that Ontarians are very, very interested in where you would take us

when it comes to the evolution of the delivery of health care in our province. So I'm asking you, do you agree with the health care policies espoused by the youth wing of your party?

Hon Tony Clement (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): Let me say this directly to the honourable member: I disagree with what they say,

but I defend to the death their right to say it.

Mr McGuinty: Who knew until the leadership race began that this minister had a poetic bent? Who knew?

Let's try to be more specific now, because the youth wing talks about private hospitals and private operation of new hospitals. I'll have you be very specific,

then, with respect to that particular issue. Do you support that or do you not?

Hon Mr Clement: I suppose it was common policy when his government was last in power. I believe Minister Caplan, at the time, actually

approved the bill for independent health facilities in this province. We can get out the Hansard if the honourable member so desires. The fact of the matter is that we've always had a mix of public

and private in the province of Ontario. The honourable member's doctor is a private sector deliverer of publicly funded health care. Diagnostics can be privately delivered. Nursing services can be

privately delivered. Nursing homes can be privately delivered.

What we're interested in on this side of the House is not an ideological bent or some sort of ideological blinkers. On this side of the House we ask the

question, "Who can deliver it better, cheaper, faster, safer?" That is what we're interested in on this side of the House when it comes to health care reform and better health care services and

results for the people of Ontario. I encourage the honourable member not to have his ideological blinkers on.

Mr McGuinty: I take it from that answer, then, that you remain very much in favour of private hospitals and the private operation of

hospitals, because I gave you the opportunity to say no and I didn't, throughout the length of that answer, hear a no.

I want to move you on to something else now. Something else the youth wing in your party is asking for is new user fees and medical savings accounts.

Ontarians, of course, are very interested in your personal views, given that you are seeking the Premiership, when it comes to user fees and medical savings accounts. I wonder if you might

enlighten us on those two particular fronts.

Hon Mr Clement: The honourable member is talking about issues that are in the public realm. There is lots of discussion and debate. For

instance, Liberal Senator Michael Kirby was in town today and yesterday examining user fees, medical savings accounts and other health care reforms. Perhaps the honourable member didn't get the

invitation in the mail. But in fact a lot of Liberal Senators and other individuals have made presentations at that Senate committee hearing in Toronto and have indicated that perhaps this public

debate is one that is happening nationwide.

We heard the other month that the Prime Minister was interested in the Swedish model of user fees, and that has become part of the public debate. We heard the

other day that Roy Romanow has put user fees on the table, so I guess that's part of the public debate.

I agree with public debate; I think it's important to debate these issues. But the honourable member seeks to put words in the mouth of the government, which

is not fair and not accurate.

HAZARDOUS WASTE

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): I have a question for the Minister of the Environment. Minister, today your government made some

announcements about what measures may be needed to protect Ontario residents. I want to ask you about an issue that was raised over a year and a half ago, because at that time environment ministry

staff warned of their concern about "the potential for releases of infectious materials" in their communities either through "spills, vandalism or other types of releases." They warned that you

have no database on these dangerous materials and that you need a strategy and an action plan. They suggested a SWAT team should be assigned to work on this issue. Can you tell us what your

government has done to deal with the very dangerous issue of hazardous biomedical waste?

Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Minister of the Environment): We already have a SWAT team in place. Certainly our ministry has taken steps, and the

steps were shared last week in estimates, to move forward and take all the necessary action in order to ensure that all of the hazardous wastes in this province are properly dealt with. In fact,

we're looking forward to moving forward to introduce some measures in order to ensure that hazardous waste in the future will be pre-treated, similar to what happens across the border, and that

there will be harmonization.

Mr Hampton: Minister, you should check the transcript from estimates, because in fact your officials indicated that the so-called SWAT team is

doing absolutely nothing to address the issue of biomedical waste. We're talking here about potentially contaminated blood. We're talking about infected human and animal body parts. We're talking

about pathogens. We're talking about infected hospital instruments and waste.

My question was, what have you done since you were warned about this a year and a half ago? The SWAT team is not even addressing this issue. Your answer

indicates that you've done absolutely nothing about it. Your answer indicates that you have some prospective ideas.

I would suggest to you, as your officials suggested to you, that this is a very serious issue, that this kind of biomedical waste can be used in a number of

ways, as the officials suggest: vandalism or some other means. I think you owe it to the people of Ontario to tell us now, what are the steps that you're prepared to take immediately, since we're

dealing here with pathogens that can potentially infect all kinds of people in the most serious ways? What have you done so far and what are you prepared to do about it now, since your government

now admits you need to protect people?

Hon Mrs Witmer: As the member knows full well, our government has indicated our commitment to continually work to strengthen and improve the

management of hazardous wastes. Certainly, if we take a look at all that we have done and all that we are doing, we will work very closely with the Ministry of Health and also with the Solicitor

General on this particular issue, and we plan to do so.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Final supplementary.

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): Minister, that is not good enough. Instead of protecting the public, first of all you lay off five

renowned scientists, and now you minimize this issue today. Don't you think, after Walkerton and particularly after the events of September 11, that you should act now to correct this very

dangerous situation?

I'm asking you now to address the serious concerns raised first of all by your senior ministry staff. I'm going to send you a copy of this warning they raised

on March 14, 2000, in that leaked cabinet document that we referred to in the past. Senior members of your staff raised this concern. I am asking you to report back to this House on what action you

plan to take to correct this potentially very dangerous situation.

Hon Mrs Witmer: For the member opposite to indicate that our government is minimizing the seriousness of this situation is totally incorrect.

As the member opposite knows full well, the Premier today and certainly other ministers have indicated that we take the whole issue of the events that happened on September 11 and everything

subsequent very, very seriously. In fact, our government has moved forward more proactively than the federal government and is taking every step possible to ensure that the citizens of this

province are appropriately protected and we will continue to do so.

I look forward to receiving the information from you and we will certainly follow up.

BRUCE GENERATING STATION

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is to the Minister of Finance. The scandal over your government's sale of the Bruce

nuclear generating station to British Energy continues to grow. We've watched your government try to avoid having the Provincial Auditor look at the deal. I invited you yesterday to table the

documents about the deal; we know that you haven't tabled them. But what's interesting is that British Energy also conspired to keep the issue out of the news. In what is singular, British Energy

hired Hill and Knowlton to -- get this -- execute a plan on the announcement in such a way as to minimize media coverage post-announcement. Imagine that: hiring a public relations firm so that you

don't get any media coverage of the deal.

Minister, why are you afraid to table the documents? Why don't you want the Provincial Auditor to look at this issue? Why is British Energy conspiring to try

to keep the deal out of the news as well?

Hon Jim Flaherty (Deputy Premier, Minister of Finance): To the Minister of Energy, Science and Technology.

Hon Jim Wilson (Minister of Energy, Science and Technology): Again the honourable member is in error. The deal has been public since shortly

after it was signed. It's available in the local library up in Bruce; it's available here. The CBC has done several stories on it. I remember personally giving the CBC a copy of the deal some year

and a half ago.

Before Bruce Power got its licence from the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission to operate the plant as the lessee of the plant, there were public hearings in

Ottawa and at the local community level by the commission in which all the documents were available.

I'd be happy -- in fact, I think I will -- to just bring a photocopy later on today and I'll give you it because you're the only one in the province who

obviously thinks it isn't available. Ask your local librarian.

Mr Hampton: We spoke to the CBC investigator and reporter who were doing this and their response to us was, "The government very carefully

gave us documents that do not deal with the nature of the financial transaction. The government was very careful not to give us any of those documents."

But I want to quote for the minister again. This is what Hill and Knowlton say:

"British Energy: Bruce Power Announcement Strategy.

"Ensure that the announcement of the sale of the Bruce nuclear plant to British Energy was executed ... in such as way as to minimize media coverage

post-announcement."

You wouldn't let the Provincial Auditor look at this. You won't table the documents here. You were very careful to give CBC only the non-financial documents.

Now we've got Hill and Knowlton and British Energy colluding to try to keep it hidden as well. Minister, what is it that you're trying to cover up? What is it that you don't want the public to see

about your sweetheart deal with British Energy for one of Ontario's very valuable public assets?

Hon Mr Wilson: This government certainly welcomes the Provincial Auditor's examining the deal. The auditor has all the information. Everyone

who wanted the information has it. I don't know whom you were talking to at the CBC, but I would recommend one thing: you should hire the same firm, Hill and Knowlton -- which obviously Bruce Power

did, according to this guy, anyway; if it's true, because it's not always accurate in here -- and bring your own profile down a little bit, because you're killing your party with these conspiracy

theories. I can tell you that.

CHILDREN'S HEALTH SERVICES

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): My question is to the Minister of Health. I understand that on the weekend you found some time

to meet with parents who have a very real interest and concern about the London Health Sciences Centre and your cuts. I understand that you made a commitment to parents during the course of that

meeting, Minister, and specifically you said that you were going to review cuts to the pediatric programs. One of the things that parents are now concerned about is that the hospital is proceeding,

notwithstanding, to wind up programs, and doctors are continuing to leave.

If you are genuinely committed to reviewing the decision that your ministry has made on this matter, will you now advise the London Health Sciences Centre to

cease and desist in terms of moving forward with any cuts to any of the programs, and certainly the pediatric ones, and not to let any of the doctors go?

Hon Tony Clement (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I'd be happy to inform the honourable member and this House on the status of this

issue. In fact, our response has been absolutely consistent over the past few weeks on this issue, and that is that we on this side of the House are concerned about clinical outcomes: the best

outcomes for our kids, the best outcomes for any patients of the London Health Sciences Centre. From our perspective, that is how we are judging any proposals or indeed any counterproposals. How

can we get to the best clinical outcomes for our kids and for other patients at the London Health Sciences Centre? That is how we judge things. If people have proposals, that is how we judge them.

If they have counterproposals, they go through the same judgment process. I would expect the honourable member to judge things through the same prism as I propose to do.

Mr McGuinty: Minister, you know before you even utter those words that they will lend no comfort whatsoever to those parents you met with. You

told them that you were going to conduct a review when it came to cuts to pediatric programs.

Let me remind you a little bit of the record. Just prior to the election, your predecessor was in London and said that not only are these wonderful programs,

not only do they smack of excellence, but your government would even consider adding further financial resources to those very same programs. After the election, of course, you broke the promise,

but recently you met with parents. You gave them your word that you were going to review these cuts.

There is only way you can express your real commitment to a review. I want you to stand up now and assure parents that you're going to be advising the London

Health Sciences Centre that they are not to proceed in any way, shape or form with anything that would in any way interfere with the pediatric programs already being offered by the London Health

Sciences Centre.

Hon Mr Clement: I'm sorry, but for me to have that position would be irresponsible. The honourable member knows, or should know, that the

deputy chief coroner for the province of Ontario reviewed some of the programs of the London Health Sciences Centre and found them wanting. That is from the deputy chief coroner. So for the

honourable member to advocate holus-bolus, across the board, across the slate, keeping the status quo when we have a report from the deputy chief coroner that raises issues about the safety of

these --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Order. Sorry to interrupt the minister. Members come to order, please.

Hon Mr Clement: -- is, quite frankly, irresponsible, and I would not take that position.

Mr Frank Mazzilli (London-Fanshawe): My question is to the Minister of Health. A number of weeks ago the London Health Sciences Centre board

of directors decided that pediatric cardiac procedures should not be performed in London, based on clinical outcomes. That was based on the regional coroner's saying that the mortality rates with

some of these procedures were higher in London than in Toronto and some other areas.

I want to thank the minister for meeting with Dr Frewen and some concerned parents on Friday. I asked Dr Frewen this question directly: "Do you agree with the

regional coroner's report based on that?" He said that out of the 35 pediatric cardiac procedures, there are two which he has concerns with that should not be performed in London. Of the other 33,

the clinical outcomes are the same as at Sick Kids in Toronto and ought to be kept.

Minister, will you ensure that you check the clinical outcomes on those 35 procedures?

Hon Mr Clement: I thank the member for London-Fanshawe for the question. That is precisely the kind of judgment that all health professionals

and the Ministry of Health have to engage themselves in: what are the clinical outcomes? How can we ensure that our kids have the best outcomes possible?

I will say to the honourable member --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Sorry again, Minister. Members come to order, please. I can't hear the answer.

Hon Mr Clement: I would say to the honourable member that, as he is aware, he, as the member for London-Fanshawe, the member for London West

and the Honourable Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities also met with those individuals -- concerned parents as well as the doctor. We came to some very important conclusions about how

we can move forward to ensure that we have the best services in London for the people of London, especially for the kids, and that's the kind of positive interaction that the members on this side

of the House are having as opposed to the members on the other side of the House, who are making an irresponsible issue out of some very serious issues when it comes to clinical outcomes.

Mr Mazzilli: The one thing that concerned me from the outset of this was some of the professional integrity that was questioned between

doctors. In fact, when we got to the bottom of it and started questioning people, what we found was that Dr Frewen in fact does agree with the regional coroner that there are these two procedures

-- the Norwood and one other procedure -- that they've had very little success at in London, if any. In good conscience, you cannot recommend to any parent that procedure in London and the child

ought to go to Sick Kids. But for the other 33 procedures that are performed, the results are the same, if not better, than Sick Kids.

Dr Frewen also explained that an ideal model for this province should be that the Ottawa hospital retain these procedures and that the London hospital retain

these procedures but that the high-risk procedures go to Toronto. Do you agree with this model or will you check into this model?

Hon Mr Clement: Let me explain two other things that the group around the table in I think a very positive meeting agreed upon. First of all,

Dr Frewen and the gang that were there were absolutely delighted that we announced on that day the new alternative funding arrangement for the pediatricians of the London hospital so that there is

no problem with retention and recruitment of those pediatricians. This is good news for Londoners in keeping the pediatricians in London.

The second thing that I agreed to do was to review across the province pediatric subspecialty care so that we can ensure that we have a seamless, coordinated,

coherent system when it comes to complex pediatric care. That's the kind of positive to-ing and fro-ing that we had at that meeting that reached a conclusion that I think will be better for the

people of Ontario, quite frankly, and that is something that we can move upon to ensure that there are no gaps when it comes to pediatric care in the province of Ontario. That's the commitment of

myself and the ministry, that's the commitment of the Mike Harris government.

AUDIOLOGY SERVICES

Mrs Lyn McLeod (Thunder Bay-Atikokan): My question is for the Minister of Health. The evidence is starting to come in on the impact of your

decision to make people pay for their hearing tests. You keep saying that hearing tests are still covered by OHIP, but in fact you changed the rules so that far fewer tests could be done at public

expense. We now know that there has been a 48% reduction in the number of OHIP-funded hearing tests that have been done since August 13, when your rule changes came in. We know that when your rules

are finally in place, there will be a 96% reduction in publicly funded hearing tests. We know that your cost-cutting strategy is working. We know you're going to save the money you wanted to save.

What we don't know is what's happening to people who are concerned about their hearing. Are they paying for their own tests or are they simply going without?

You have told the audiologists that you are going to stick with your decision. I ask you, why do you insist on forcing people to make this choice: either to

pay for a hearing test or to go without one?

Hon Tony Clement (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): Let me assure this House that hearing tests are still covered by OHIP, they are

still part of the OHIP system, just as they were before the announcements to which the honourable member refers. There are audiologists in our hospitals, there are audiologists in our children's

treatment centres, there are ENT specialists in the community that are available for OHIP-funded hearing tests. So the honourable member is incorrect if she is implying that this is not funded by

OHIP. It is still part of an OHIP billing system, it still can be made available and will continue to be so throughout the province of Ontario.

Mrs McLeod: Minister, that's simply nonsense. You know very well and you knew it when you made the rule changes that if all the people who now

get publicly funded hearing tests or got them before August 13 were still to get them it would cost you about four times as much as what you have currently been paying. What you have done with your

rule changes is ensure that you can save at least $7 million, which you set out to save, by forcing 96 out of 100 people either to pay for their own tests or to go without a hearing test at all. I

tell you, when you and your party talk about choice in health care, the only choice that you keep providing the people is the choice of either paying for care or going without it, and we're seeing

that time and time again.

Minister, you set out to save $50 million by making people pay for hearing tests and physiotherapy. That's a matter of fact. There are now growing concerns

that you're not going to stop there. There are concerns that you're going to look at cutting services provided by optometrists, by podiatrists, by chiropractors. In fact, it may be that you're

looking at finding another $150 million in cuts to publicly funded services. The finance minister, your colleague, wants to speed up his tax cuts and you're planning to pay for it with more cuts to

health care services.

Minister, you're shaking your head. I ask you to do two things today: first of all, will you agree that people are already paying too much out of their own

pockets for health care? Second, will you give us your personal assurance that neither you nor your colleague the Minister of Finance, nor the departing Premier, will bring in any more cuts to

health care services?

Hon Mr Clement: First of all, let me say on the question of the 96%, I don't know where she's getting her figures from. Any medical

professionals --

Mrs McLeod: The audiologists.

Hon Mr Clement: Well, from the audiologists. Boy, that answers that question. The honourable member should know that OHIP billings can be

billed for six months after the procedure, so I don't know what sort of figures she's relying upon. I would suggest to you they're inaccurate.

She's talking about cutbacks. On this side of the House, we have increased health care expenditures six years in a row, to $23.5 billion. Some 45% of the

program spending of the province of Ontario now goes to health care. The only cutting of health care in the Dominion of Canada, let alone the province of Ontario, is from the federal Liberal

government. When it comes to their commitment to health care, that's what we should question. If the honourable member wishes to spend her time questioning health care policy, I'll give her Allan

Rock's name, address and phone number. She can do the job there, because clearly her leader isn't when it comes to sticking up for the interests of the province of Ontario when it comes to health

care spending and health care delivery in this province.

ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES LEGISLATION

Mr Doug Galt (Northumberland): My question is directed to the Minister of Citizenship. Minister, as you've informed the House, you've been

meeting with community leaders across the province in preparation for the introduction of the Ontarians with Disabilities Act, the legislation that you've stated will be tabled within a few

weeks.

As part of those consultations, I understand you met recently with stakeholders in Ottawa. Minister, you've said repeatedly that everyone in the public and

private sectors -- as a matter of fact, all levels of government -- will need to work together to prevent the creation of new barriers and eliminate existing barriers if persons with disabilities

are to achieve full citizenship.

disabilities. Can you report on what you've found during your visit to Ottawa?

Hon Cameron Jackson (Minister of Citizenship, minister responsible for seniors): First of all, I was in Ottawa last week for my third visit

with disabled persons. Ottawa has a very progressive committee. It's been in operation for over 10 years. They are doing extensive work in terms of transit conversion and curb-cutting, some of the

best work in the province, I might add. Under their leadership they're engaging the disabled community directly in planning decisions, in reviewing buildings. They're currently doing audits of

municipal buildings.

They have a concern though, quite frankly, that if we're going to find solutions in sharing the responsibility to make sure Ontario becomes more accessible, we

are going to need to work with the federal government and we're --

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): Fed-bashing.

Hon Mr Jackson: We're not bashing them, member from St Catharines. I'd think he'd be the first one to suggest that the federal government

should do its fair share. We haven't seen much evidence of it, but I believe that the federal government, especially in a city like Ottawa, is willing to do it for its own employees because any

legislation we do in Ontario will not cover federal government buildings in this province.

Mr Galt: Thank you, Minister. Also compliments to you for the extensive consultation that you've been carrying out on this particular bill.

Extensive consultations are, of course, a hallmark of our government.

Minister, as you have previously stated in the House, involving persons with disabilities in the public policy development is indeed a stated goal of the

with Disabilities Act and the type of approach the legislation should pursue?

initiative and any efforts put forward to make Ontario more accessible should involve the disability communities directly.

I've stated in this House before that from what I've seen in Ottawa and how it works, it is working very well, and we're encouraged by that. In fact, since

amalgamation in Ottawa, they have actually even strengthened their rules of participation. The committee is made up of 13 members of the disability community appointed by council and includes one

councillor. It happens to be Councillor Madeleine Meilleur from Ottawa. The committee is chaired by Barry McMahon, who is a member of the Ontarians with Disabilities Act Committee. He has indicated

everyone's benefit in Ontario.

LOW-INCOME ONTARIANS

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): A question for the Minister of Finance. Minister, this is today's report from the Centre for Social

Justice, entitled When Markets Fail People. This report shows that your corporate tax cuts indeed have helped the wealthiest people in Ontario, but the fact that you've frozen the minimum wage for

now going on seven years has hurt the lowest-paid workers in this province. It has fuelled an incredible gap between those who are well off and those who are working very hard at minimum wage,

trying to make ends meet. It points out that your refusal to raise the minimum wage is at the heart of this.

My question to you is this: after seven years of tax cuts for the well-off and seven years of freezing the wages of the lowest paid, will you commit to

increasing the minimum wage?

Hon Jim Flaherty (Deputy Premier, Minister of Finance): The member opposite is talking about income levels, disposable income for people with

lower incomes in Ontario. Let me give you a quote: "Overwhelmingly, the best thing one can do for low-income families is to make sure that they either pay very low taxes or no taxes at all." That's

Paul Martin in the federal Parliament on February 18, 1999.

I'm very proud of the record of our government in personal income tax cuts. Our budget this year will remove another 75,000 low-income persons from the tax

rolls -- completely off the tax rolls. They pay no income tax in Ontario. Unfortunately, some of them still have to pay federal income tax. The Ontario tax cuts to date have taken 325,000 people

totally off the obligation to pay provincial income taxes in Ontario. That's real money in their pockets.

Mr Hampton: Minister, this report also goes into your apparent explanation here today and it points out that by increasing a host of user

fees, by increasing tuition fees, by downloading on to municipalities and forcing them to increase property taxes, not only have you frozen the incomes of the lowest-paid workers in the province,

but when you add up all the user fees, the copayment fees, the administrative fees, they are paying more taxes than ever before.

The question is a simple one: after looking after your corporate friends for seven years, after looking after the well-off in this province for seven years

through tax cuts, will you finally raise the minimum wage for the lowest-paid workers in the province?

Hon Mr Flaherty: What's of importance to people in the province of Ontario, no matter what their earnings are, is that they have more

disposable income, more money in their own pockets.

He talks about rich people. Let's talk about a one-income family with two children and a net income of $30,000. A one-income family, two children and a net

income of $30,000 will pay $1,635 less Ontario income tax when these tax cuts are completed. That is a saving for that family of 100% of what they would have been obliged to pay in personal income

tax.

You're talking about caring for people and caring for children. Look at the budget this year and what we did for the 19 children's treatment centres in the

province that help children -- babies with autism and serious learning disabilities and spina bifida. Look what we did. They needed another $20 million. They were fully funded in the budget this

year. That's real action. That's real caring for real people, including babies in Ontario who need that kind of assistance on a timely basis.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Mr Dominic Agostino (Hamilton East): My question is to the Minister of Health. I want to ask you about the situation at the burns unit of the

Hamilton General Hospital. As you know, it is one of the most prestigious units in North America. Since spring of this year, this unit has doubled the number of patients from 45 to 90, without one

additional cent being given to look after these people.

This unit has 10 beds. It is currently working at its limit literally year-round. Recently two patients had to be taken to the United States because there was

no room there or in any other burns facility across Ontario. To add to this, we now have a situation where the London Health Sciences Centre is closing down its burns unit. Of course it's going to

add more to the needed capacity and ability of the Hamilton General Hospital to look after patients who are going to be there.

With this type of situation, with the seriousness of burns and with the intensive needs people have, even a handful of additional patients can overwhelm the

system. In view of this, will you commit today to additional resources and funding to open up more beds at the burns unit at the Hamilton General Hospital?

Hon Tony Clement (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): The honourable member raises a legitimate and important question. Let me assure him

and this House that under no circumstances would we allow a change of program at any one hospital to occur without the pickup at some other hospital or some other facility in Ontario. There should

be no gaps in the system. I think it should be expected by the public, and certainly on their behalf by us, that any changes that occur, and changes do occur on a regular basis, will be factored

into the operating and budgetary plans of each individual hospital.

The honourable member raises a legitimate point. That is the kind of thing on which we are in discussions with Hamilton Health Sciences about their plans and

operating projections, not only now but in the future as well.

Mr Agostino: The reality is that even before the London closing you have ordered to go ahead, this unit is already at its maximum. They

already have had to send patients to the United States. So your empty rhetoric really doesn't deal with the issue. You know there's a problem. You know the unit does not have the capacity to handle

more patients. They have no full-time physician. We are short two part-time nurses at this particular facility. It is the only facility that is going to be left between Windsor and Toronto to look

after people.

You have a responsibility here not to tell us, "It sounds good; we're going to look at it in the future." The crisis is today. I find it astonishing how you

can continue to justify $2.2 billion a year in additional corporate cuts, but you can't stand up today and say, "Yes, I will give the additional money necessary to open up more beds at the Hamilton

burns unit." Are patients and health care and well-being your priority when it comes to people in this province or does it continue to be your corporate tax cuts? Stand up today and commit that you

will give more money to ensure we can handle the need at the Hamilton General Hospital burns unit.

Hon Mr Clement: We know the Liberal Party is against tax cuts. We heard that again today, where the honourable Leader of the Opposition wants

to send to the glue factory the "one-trick tax-cut pony," according to his own words. The honourable member should be aware that along with tax cuts, we have also increased hospital funding in

Ontario to a record $8.6 billion this year, $450 million more than last year. That is the kind of commitment we're making to increased hospital services.

Now, we do expect results out of that. We expect better results for our patients. But we are there for the hospitals. We have spent tens of millions of dollars

in Hamilton, more this year than last year at St Joseph's and at Hamilton Health Sciences and we will continue to do so.

The honourable member has a particular concern. Perhaps we can look at the operating plan based on his question, but I can tell you that we are looking at the

operating plans of Hamilton Health Sciences with a view to ensuring that the services they purport to deliver are delivered with the right resources and the right accountability to make sure there

is value for money for the taxpayers.

BORDER SECURITY

Mr Bart Maves (Niagara Falls): My question is for the Minister of Economic Development and Trade. Since the events of September 11, everyone's

world has been turned upside down. What we knew to be normal before the attacks on New York and Washington is now a distant memory. Heightened security at our border crossings is one of the ways

our world has changed.

You have said in the past that while we recognize the desire to tighten security at the Canada-US border, we must maintain swift and efficient access for

legitimate persons and business transactions. I support the concept raised by Premier Harris of a secure North American perimeter. Where are we now on this issue?

Hon Robert W. Runciman (Minister of Economic Development and Trade): This is the second year in a row the member from Niagara Falls has asked

me a question on his birthday. I'm not sure what that means, but happy birthday, Mr Maves.

This is a critical issue, not just for Ontarians, but for Canadians. That's why our government is sponsoring an industry leaders' round table this Friday.

Trade with the United States is clearly a critical issue for us: 93% of our trade is with the United States. In the year 2000, that represented over $200

billion, 1.5 million jobs dependent on exports.

Our Premier, along with a number of other Premiers, has been talking about the whole question of a North American security perimeter. I think if we look at

questions of infrastructure, we can look at questions of customs clearance, but the overriding concern here is security. Provincial Premiers recognize this, business leaders recognize this,

Canadian citizens recognize this. It begs the question, who doesn't? Apparently they all reside in Ottawa.

Mr Maves: Thank you, Minister, for that answer. Minister, I do agree with you: issues of national security need to be addressed by our federal

government, and there is no time for continued hand-wringing and bungling when our neighbour to the south is at war and is looking for our help.

Minister, setting aside for the moment the Allan Rock fiascos and bungling, what is the next step we should take in making sure Ontarians aren't left behind

because of indecision and poor decisions in Ottawa?

Hon Mr Runciman: I want to make it clear that our government wants to work with the federal government on this issue, and Mr Manley has been

saying, I think, some very promising things. But if we look at this file, in the past the federal government has been lethargic, complacent. We've heard the Prime Minister talk about sovereignty as

a concern. That is indeed, in our view, a red herring.

Any country that doesn't have security doesn't have sovereignty. That's the bottom line.

I can assure the member and I can assure Ontarians that Ontario will be in the forefront on this issue. We're going to ensure that our trade and our economy do

not become victims of the terrorist attacks of September 11.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): New question.

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): Yes, Speaker, a question to the Minister of Labour, please.

The Speaker: Stop the clock, if we could, please. Just a quick moment here, please. Now that the minister has rushed in, I apologize. In the

rotation for a new question, yes, it was a question, but it was the wrong order.

Interjections.

The Speaker: No. I didn't give him much of a chance. I do give people a chance to stand up. I did not give him much of a chance. It was my

fault. I apologize to the member for Niagara Centre. He stood up with such authority, I thought he was right. I apologize.

It is the rotation for the Liberals.

COMMUNITY CARE ACCESS CENTRES

Mr Joseph Cordiano (York South-Weston): I'd like to ask the Minister of Health about the funding crisis facing community care access centres

across this province. The minister will be aware of the crisis since he froze CCACs' budgets at the year 2000 level. I'd like to know why the shortfall is going to amount to $175 million. In North

York, the CCAC, for example, is facing a $10-million shortfall.

So will he now recognize that CCACs face a serious funding crisis, and will he do the right thing and fund CCACs properly so that they can meet their 2001-02

commitments?

Hon Tony Clement (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I'm happy to do the right thing and pass the question over to the associate minister

of health.

Hon Helen Johns (Minister without Portfolio [Health and Long-Term Care]): I'd like to thank the member opposite for the question. As the

member knows, this government has put substantial dollars and substantial expertise into community care access centres over the previous four years. Since 1995, the budgets in the Toronto community

care access centres have grown by about 120%, some of the largest growth in the province of Ontario and definitely across North America.

This government is concerned as a result of a number of reviews we have done that money is being spent effectively in the province of Ontario. We have taken on

a review to look and see what services should be provided, to see how we can better manage the system, how we can have an effective management system within the CCACs. We will continue this review

and make the recommendations necessary to ensure that we have a high quality of care in community services in the province of Ontario.

Mr Cordiano: The minister would have us believe that everything is just fine, that they are funding things properly. Let me tell you, real

people are facing a real crisis out there.

Let me tell you about those people in my riding, people like Mr Frank Derango, who is a 70-year-old, if you can imagine, who has been caring for his

90-year-old mother. He now unfortunately is undergoing cancer treatment and has applied for home care. Guess what? He's been put on a waiting list. There is no service. In the Oddi family, a

daughter-in-law who suffers from a heart condition has been looking after an elderly parent who suffers from Alzheimer's. She's been waiting for home care and there is none.

Is this your vision of Ontario, where 70-year-olds who are ill themselves are now forced to look after 90-year-olds who can't take care of themselves? Is this

your new vision for Ontario, Minister?

Hon Mrs Johns: As the Premier said earlier this year, we've invested 120% more in community care access centres in Toronto. Have we increased

the service by 120%? The speaker opposite is agreeing with the government when he says there needs to be some review done of this. Substantial dollars have flowed to these community care access

centres, and when we did a study, an operational review in Hamilton, what it showed was that they had ineffective financial management, they were short on their monitoring, they had no standards to

ensure there were effective dollars being put into effective services.

We all agree in this House that there need to be operational reviews. There needs to be a review done by the province because we can't continue to put 120%

into new funding in these areas without knowing that we're getting the services back that we need. That's what we intend to do.

YOUNG OFFENDERS

Ms Marilyn Mushinski (Scarborough Centre): My question is for the Attorney General. I understand that my colleagues on Ontario's Crime Control

Commission, David Tilson, Bob Wood and Joe Tascona, have held hearings across the province on the federal government's proposed Youth Criminal Justice Act. I'm happy to hear that the Crime Control

Commission has asked for and has been granted an opportunity to share their findings with the Senate standing committee on legal and constitutional affairs. I'd like to point out that when the

Crime Control Commission asked to appear before the federal Commons committee on justice and human rights to share these same findings, the Liberal majority on the committee refused to allow it.

It's important to me and my constituents in Scarborough Centre to know that at least one level of government, the Mike Harris government, is listening to the concerns of Ontarians.

Minister, could you please tell us how extensive these Crime Control Commission hearings were and when you will be sharing the results of their work with the

Senate?

Hon David Young (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs): First of all, I'd like to take a moment to thank the member for

her question. There is no one in this Legislature who cares more about this issue. The member has raised numerous similar issues, all with one goal in mind and that is the protection and the safety

of individuals in her community. I applaud her for that today, as I have done in the past.

I also want to say that this government has gone to the people to ask for their opinion about the Young Offenders Act and the successor legislation, the Youth

Criminal Justice Act, or bill, as it is. What we have heard as a result of the efforts of the Crime Control Commission is that the people of Ontario have little or no confidence in the Young

Offenders Act and have absolutely no interest in the replacement Youth Criminal Justice Act that the federal Liberals have brought forward. The Crime Control Commission has been to 14 different

municipalities across Ontario and what they have heard is that amendments to the proposed legislation are essential to keep our communities safe.

Ms Mushinski: Thank you for that answer. I know that our colleagues today will distinguish themselves.

Minister, I understand that you'll be appearing before the Senate committee tomorrow afternoon. I know you also have serious concerns about this proposed

legislation and have developed the "no more free ride for Young Offenders Act" amendments meant to strengthen the very weak-kneed Youth Criminal Justice Act as a response. Can you please provide me

and my constituents in Scarborough Centre with a few examples of the Mike Harris government's common sense proposals for cutting youth crime?

Hon Mr Young: What we have done over the past eight months is attempt to take a constructive approach to what is a very real and serious

problem in this country. The Mike Harris government has come forward with a series of 100 proposed amendments that we have asked the federal government to simply implement, apply, add to the Youth

Criminal Justice Act, amendments that, if passed, if adopted, would make it very clear that a young person who commits an adult crime will do adult time, amendments that will make it just as clear

that if you use a weapon during the course of an offence, you will serve some time in jail. We've also said that if you commit a serious violent crime, then you should be identified, then the

people in your community should know what you have done, not only to help the community but to help the individual involved so that resources can be there to assist that young person.

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): My question is to the Minister of Labour. The inquest into the death of Robyn Lafleur was completed last

week in Welland. The evidence at that inquest was clear that there had not been a single Ministry of Labour inspection for the four years prior to Ms Lafleur's slaughter in that workplace. We heard

evidence from a plant manager telling the jury that she had never read the Occupational Health and Safety Act and that she made up her own safety rules based on common sense. The minister's own

director of occupational health and safety testified that it is not the Ministry of Labour's role to make sure that all workplaces are safe at all times. Minister, do you share that view of the

role of your ministry?

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of Labour): To be fair, we have to put that quote in context. The context of the quote is this. The question was

asked as to whether or not they inspect these places every year. The response was that due to budget limitations, the answer is no. Because there are literally millions of workplaces in the

province of Ontario, it is financially impossible to inspect every workplace every year.

Mr Gregory S. Sorbara (Vaughan-King-Aurora): That's not true.

Hon Mr Stockwell: The member over across there, who used to be Minister of Labour, suggests this isn't true. Mr Sorbara may think, in his

mind, that the Liberal government did inspect every year. The fact of the matter is, when you put that in context, no Ministry of Labour officer can possibly go to every single workplace every

single year. It's financially virtually impossible. But the education, the mailings -- that work is done on a very regular basis.

Mr Kormos: This was an exceptionally dangerous workplace. It dealt on a daily basis with explosive materials. It had not undergone an

inspection in four years. Indeed, the business place's own manager acknowledged that she had never read the Occupational Health and Safety Act and effectively made up the rules as she went

along.

Sir, the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union has taken up this cause on behalf of Robyn's family to try to make sure that a tragedy like this doesn't

occur again. They have developed extensive recommendations for positive action, including calls for mandatory annual workplace inspections and for mandatory training of managers who wouldn't even

read health and safety laws otherwise. If you won't agree today to implement or to contemplate those types of changes, Minister, will you please meet with representatives of the Communications,

Energy and Paperworkers and with Robyn's family to hear their submissions and listen to their plea for the need for you to effect some significant changes in how unsafe workplaces are

inspected?

Hon Mr Stockwell: To answer the first part of the question, of course I'm prepared to meet with them. They've suffered a very real tragedy.

There's a great, sincere loss they've had. We all understand that. I don't want to play politics with you. If your request is to meet with them and hear their concerns, in a heartbeat, in a second,

I will meet with them to hear their concerns.

But be fair: inspections are up 32% since we took office; convictions are up 24%; fines are up 113%; fines for convictions are up 73%. This is over your

administration and over their administration. That someone dies in the workplace is a tragedy. We all feel for that tragedy. But to pin this on some kind of inspection process that this government

introduced is not fair. We inspect more, we have more fines, we have more convictions, and to the ex-Minister of Labour in the Liberal Party, you should know that.

PETITIONS

DOCTOR SHORTAGE

Mr Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North): There is no way to overstate the physician shortage crisis in Thunder Bay and northwestern

Ontario. We have a petition signed by over 40,000 people, with great concern being expressed. It reads:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Our community is facing an immediate, critical situation in accessing physician services and in providing hospital care to the people of northwestern Ontario.

While the recruitment and retention of physicians has been a concern for many years, it is now reaching crisis proportions. Training more physicians in northern Ontario is certainly the best

response to this problem in the longer term. We are, however, in urgent need of support for immediate short-term solutions that will allow our community both to retain our current physicians and

recruit new family doctors and specialists in seriously understaffed areas.

"Therefore, we, as residents of Thunder Bay and northwestern Ontario, urge you to respond to our community's and our region's critical and immediate needs. For

us, this is truly a matter of life and death."

I am very pleased to add my name to this very large petition.

CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

Ms Marilyn Mushinski (Scarborough Centre): I have a further petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario dealing with the issue

of puppy mills that reads as follows:

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

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

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

on puppies under their so-called care;

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

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

Code as soon as possible."

I am pleased to affix my signature to this petition.

EDUCATION

Mr Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): I keep getting petitions concerning the education system in Ontario. This is addressed to the Parliament of

Ontario, and it reads as follows:

"Whereas the Ontario government wants to take an additional billion dollars out of the education system this year and every year; and

"Whereas the Ontario government has decided to hire uncertified teachers in kindergartens, libraries, for guidance, physical education, the arts, and

technology; and

"Whereas the Ontario government wishes to remove the right to negotiate working conditions; and

"Whereas the Ontario government will remove at least 10,000 teachers from classrooms across the province; and

"Whereas the Ontario government has become the sole decision-maker on class size, preparation time and the length of the school day; and

"Whereas the Ontario government proposes to take decision-making powers out of the hands of locally-elected community-minded trustees;

"We, the undersigned Ontario residents, strongly urge the government to repeal the education bill and create an accessible public consultative process for

students, parents, teachers, and school board administrators to study alternate solutions that have universal appeal and will lead to an improved educational system."

Since I agree with these sentiments, I am delighted to put my signature on this document.

OHIP SERVICES

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): This petition was sent to me by N.P. Armstrong of Winchester, Ontario. It reads as follows:

"Whereas the Harris government's decision to delist hearing aid evaluation and re-evaluation from OHIP coverage will lead to untreated hearing loss; and

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

due to shortages of specialty physicians; and

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

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

transcutaneous nerve therapy stimulation and biofeedback; and

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

and

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

industrial workers; and

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

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

Speaker, I agree with the petitioners and I've signed my name to the petition.

DOCTOR SHORTAGE

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): It's my pleasure to read a petition on behalf of my constituents in the riding of Durham.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the provincial Durham riding, including Clarington, Scugog township and portions of north and east Oshawa comprises one of the fastest-growing

communities in Canada; and,

"Whereas the residents of Durham riding are experiencing difficulty locating family physicians who are willing to accept new patients; and

"Whereas the good health of Durham riding residents depends on a long-term relationship with a family physician who can provide ongoing care; and

"Whereas the lack of family physicians puts unnecessary demands and strains on walk-in clinics and emergency departments;

"We, the undersigned, respectfully petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows: that the government of Ontario will:

"Do everything within its power to immediately assess the needs of Durham riding and the Durham region and work with the Ontario Medical Association, the

College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, local health care providers and elected officials to ensure there are enough family physicians available to serve this community;

"Make every effort to recruit doctors to set up practice in underserviced areas and provide suitable incentives that will encourage them to stay in these

communities;"

"Continue its efforts to increase the number of physicians being trained in Ontario medical schools and also continue its programs to enable foreign-trained

doctors to qualify in Ontario."

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

LONDON HEALTH SCIENCES CENTRE

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned" -- from places like St Thomas, London, Wallacetown, Stratford, Sarnia and Waterloo -- "petition the

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

southwestern Ontario are not put at risk."

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

OHIP SERVICES

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I'd like to thank the members of the Quinte Old Timers Club 513 in Deseronto for sending me this

petition.

"Whereas the Harris government's decision to delist hearing aid evaluation and re-evaluation from OHIP coverage will lead to untreated hearing loss; and

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

due to shortages of specialty physicians; and

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

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

transcutaneous nerve therapy stimulation and biofeedback; and

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

and

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

industrial workers; and

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

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

Speaker, I agree with the petitioners. I've signed my name to this.

CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

Mr Raminder Gill (Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

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

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

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

on puppies under their so-called care;

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

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

Code as soon as possible."

Since I agree, I am happy to attach my name.

AUDIOLOGY SERVICES

Mr Ted McMeekin (Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Aldershot): I'm pleased to present petitions from and on behalf of the following communities:

Brampton, Stoney Creek, Winona, Kingston, Gananoque, Trenton, Arden, Hartington, Napanee, Belleville, Barrie, Bolton, Aurora, Bradford, Cayuga, Mount Hope, Fergus, Lindsay, Whitby, Oakville, St

Thomas, Aylmer, Fenelon Falls and London.

"Whereas services delisted by the Harris government now exceed $100 million in total;

"Whereas Ontarians depend on audiologists for the provision of qualified hearing assessments and hearing aid prescriptions;

"Whereas the new Harris government policy will virtually eliminate access to publicly funded audiology assessments across vast regions of Ontario;

"Whereas this new Harris government policy is virtually impossible to implement in underserviced areas across Ontario;

"Whereas this policy will lengthen waiting lists for patients and therefore have a detrimental effect on the health of Ontarians,

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, petition the Ontario Legislature to demand the Mike Harris government move immediately to permanently fund

audiologists directly for the provision of audiology services."

I affix my signature to these petitions, which contain 1,000 latest names.

HOME CARE

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I have a petition signed by constituents in my own riding. It reads as follows:

"Whereas the need for home care services is rapidly growing in Ontario due to the aging of the population and hospital restructuring; and

"Whereas the prices paid by community care access centres to purchase home care services for their clients are rising due to factors beyond the control of

CCACs; and

"Whereas the funding provided by the Ontario government through the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care is inadequate to meet the growing need for home care

services; and

"Whereas the funding shortfall, coupled with the implications of Bill 46, the Public Sector Accountability Act, currently before the Legislature, is forcing

CCACs to make deep cuts in home care services without any policy direction from the provincial government;

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

"That the Legislative Assembly direct the provincial government to take control of policy-setting for home care services through rational, population-based

health care planning rather than simply underfunding the system; and

"That the Legislative Assembly direct the provincial government to provide sufficient funding to CCACs to support the home care services that are the mandate

of CCACs in the volumes needed to meet their communities' rapidly growing needs; and

"That the Legislative Assembly make it necessary for the provincial government to notify the agencies it funds of the amount of funding they will be given by

the government in a fiscal year at least three months before the commencement of the fiscal year."

I agree with the petitioners and I've signed my signature to it.

HIGHWAY 407

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): It's my pleasure to read a petition on behalf of my constituents in the riding of Durham on the issue of Highway

407. I'll read it here.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the province of Ontario has proposed the extension of Highway 407 into the Durham region" -- which I support -- "and the proposed routing, designated

as the technically preferred route, will dissect the property of the Kedron Dells Golf Course Ltd in Oshawa;

"Whereas such routing will destroy completely five holes and severely impact two additional holes, effectively destroying the golf course as a viable and

vibrant public golf course" -- it's landlocked, you see;

"We, the undersigned, respectfully petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to change the routing" -- that's very important -- "to one of the other

identified alternative routes, thus preserving this highly regarded public facility patronized annually by thousands of" -- my constituents -- "residents of Durham region and the GTA."

I'm very supportive of the Kedron Dells Golf Course in the riding of Durham just south of Taunton Road and east of Durham College.

SERVICES FOR THE

DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

Ms Caroline Di Cocco (Sarnia-Lambton): "Whereas it has been determined that recent funding allocations to the developmental services sector in

the communities of Sarnia-Lambton, Chatham-Kent and Windsor-Essex have been determined to be grossly inadequate to meet critical and urgent needs;

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

"That the Ministry of Community and Social Services immediately review the funding allocations to the communities of Sarnia-Lambton, Chatham-Kent and

Windsor-Essex and provide funding in keeping with the requests made by families or their agents."

I agree with this petition and affix my signature.

LONDON HEALTH SCIENCES CENTRE

Mr Pat Hoy (Chatham-Kent Essex): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

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

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

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

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

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

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

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, petition the Ontario Legislature to demand the Mike Harris government take immediate action to ensure

these important health services are maintained so that the health and safety of people throughout southwestern Ontario are not put at risk."

I too have signed this petition.

OPPOSITION DAY

ONTARIO SECURITY FUND PLAN

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): I move that the Legislative Assembly call upon the government to protect Ontarians by enacting

my plan to establish an Ontario security fund, with half of the funds being directed to security projects at the municipal level.

The Acting Speaker (Mr Michael A. Brown): Mr McGuinty has moved opposition day number 2: that the Legislative Assembly call upon the

government to protect Ontarians by enacting Dalton McGuinty's plan to establish an Ontario security fund, with half of the funds being directed to security projects at the municipal level.

Mr McGuinty: It has become a cliché, but it remains true nonetheless, that our world has changed. Our families in particular have been

horrified and shaken, I would argue, in one of the most profound ways they've ever been in the last several decades. They look to us now to assume responsibility for lending greater stability to

the world in which they find themselves, and they look to us to provide real leadership when it comes to making sure that we're doing what we can to strengthen our economy and that we're doing what

we can to make sure they and their children, our families, are leading safe lives.

That's why I was so disappointed today when the government came forward with these initiatives that really weren't worth the paper they were printed on. It's

going to take more than newspaper ads telling us, "Don't worry. Be happy," it's going to take more than tax cuts for already profitable and already competitive corporations, and it's going to take

more than a continuing series of expressions of concern about all things related to terrorism. It's going to take much more than that if we are going to convince our working families that we have

done what must be done to ensure they enjoy life in a safer Ontario.

What we've been doing is making a real and genuine effort to put forward positive proposals to the government. I believe there is a very legitimate expectation

on the part of our families today that, given these extraordinary circumstances, we will do what we can in a non-partisan way to look out for their interests. The message I'm getting from our

families is, "You people will work together in my interests, and I have very little time for infighting and bickering and partisan activity." That's why early off the mark we put forward a positive

proposal to the government. We put it forward two weeks ago. It works in the short term and, just as importantly, it does not compromise our fiscal flexibility in the long term. I want to tell you

a little bit about that.

The objective here is to shore up consumer confidence, it's to help arrest this downturn in our economy which had begun prior to the events of September 11 and

it's to make life safer for our families. That's the three-fold objective of this positive proposal. We call it our Ontario security plan. First of all, we take the $1 billion which had been

addressed in the last two budgets, $1 billion in commitments that this government has made as promised investment in infrastructure, and we contrast that with the $14 million this government has

spent -- $1 billion promised and committed, only $14 million actually spent or invested.

What we're urging the government to do, understanding that there are more than 800 applications on the books hanging around in some governmental limbo, we're

asking the government to simply move ahead with those projects. Let's invest this money now. We're talking about roads and bridges and water treatment plants and schools and hospitals and

universities, those kinds of things which have not only immediate value in terms of creating jobs and spin-off jobs, but have lasting value in terms of supporting the infrastructure that we are

trying to have in place here as we cultivate a knowledge-based economy. It doesn't cost us -- again, this is very important, notwithstanding the government's remonstrations to the contrary -- an

extra cent. The money has already been committed. Sadly, what the government is doing is holding these investments in abeyance. I know why they're doing that. They're doing that for purely

political purposes. They want to cut cheques and engage in photo ops much closer to election time, which I think is irresponsible and cynical, given the trying times that we all find ourselves

in.

Further, what we are suggesting is that of that $1 billion, let's hive off 10%. That's $100 million. We call that our Ontario security fund. We believe that

what we should be doing with those monies found within that fund is enabling municipalities to make application for some of those monies. We'd dedicate half of it for our cities and towns.

I've met with mayors, reeves and councillors, and they're telling me that they feel a sense of urgency here, notwithstanding that the government does not. They

feel that they must take on some responsibility to make life safer for the people who live in their communities. They want to put some extra security around some of their municipal infrastructure.

Maybe they might want to hire a few more police officers or firefighters, all with a view to making life safer for their families. In the grand scheme of things, surely one of the most fundamental

responsibilities we share, those of us who enjoy the privilege of elected office, one of the most fundamental responsibilities is to make sure that the people we serve are safe. I understand why

municipalities are looking to us to assist them in this regard. That's what this fund would serve to do in part.

I would look to the other half of that fund, the other $50 million, to use to he