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

February 17, 2005

38th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2005-Feb-17 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Thursday 17 February 2005 Jeudi 17 février 2005

PRIVATE MEMBERS'

PUBLIC BUSINESS

INCOME TAX AMENDMENT ACT

(PUBLIC TRANSIT EXPENSE

TAX CREDIT), 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 MODIFIANT LA LOI

DE L'IMPÔT SUR LE REVENU

(CRÉDIT D'IMPÔT POUR DÉPENSES

DE TRANSPORTS EN COMMUN)

ASIAN HERITAGE ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005

SUR LE PATRIMOINE ASIATIQUE

INCOME TAX AMENDMENT ACT

(PUBLIC TRANSIT EXPENSE

TAX CREDIT), 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 MODIFIANT LA LOI

DE L'IMPÔT SUR LE REVENU

(CRÉDIT D'IMPÔT POUR DÉPENSES

DE TRANSPORTS EN COMMUN)

ASIAN HERITAGE ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005

SUR LE PATRIMOINE ASIATIQUE

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

ANGUS THE ELEPHANT

YOUTH SCIENCE MONTH

HIGHWAY 7

LOCAL HEALTH

INTEGRATION NETWORKS

CONSERVATIVE HEALTH

CARE POLICY

STUDENT'S COMMENTS

FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL

FISCAL POLICIES

CITY OF TORONTO

BLACK HISTORY MONTH

MOTIONS

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

SCHOOL FACILITIES /

INSTALLATIONS SCOLAIRES

ORAL QUESTIONS

GOVERNMENT ADVERTISING

HEALTH CARE SERVICES

LIBERAL CAMPAIGN PROMISES

HEALTH CARE SERVICES

HOSPITAL FUNDING

GREENBELT LEGISLATION

SCHOOL FACILITIES

HOSPITAL FUNDING

CHILD CARE

WORKPLACE SAFETY

ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE

PETITIONS

HEALTH CARE SERVICES

GREENBELT

HEALTH CARE SERVICES

NURSES

FREDERICK BANTING HOMESTEAD

SECOND-STAGE HOUSING

PIT BULLS

FREDERICK BANTING HOMESTEAD

OPTOMETRISTS

CONTROL OF SMOKING

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

LONG-TERM CARE

ANTI-SMOKING LEGISLATION

ANAPHYLACTIC SHOCK

NOTICE OF DISSATISFACTION

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

ORDERS OF THE DAY

FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL

FISCAL POLICIES /

POLITIQUES FISCALES

FÉDÉRALES-PROVINCIALES

ADJOURNMENT DEBATE

FOREST INDUSTRY

The House met at 1000.

Prayers.

PRIVATE MEMBERS'

PUBLIC BUSINESS

INCOME TAX AMENDMENT ACT

(PUBLIC TRANSIT EXPENSE

TAX CREDIT), 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 MODIFIANT LA LOI

DE L'IMPÔT SUR LE REVENU

(CRÉDIT D'IMPÔT POUR DÉPENSES

DE TRANSPORTS EN COMMUN)

Mr O'Toole moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 137,

An Act to amend the Income Tax Act to provide for a tax credit for expenses incurred in using public transit / Projet de loi 137, Loi modifiant la Loi

de l'impôt sur le revenu afin de prévoir un crédit d'impôt pour les dépenses engagées au

titre des transports en commun.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Pursuant to standing order 96, the member has 10 minutes.

Mr. John O'Toole (Durham): I ask the indulgence of the members of the House to look at this is a non-partisan initiative to make public transit

affordable for their constituents and to encourage people to use public transit.

This bill really precipitates from listening to my constituents in the riding of Durham. In fact, as one of the thousands of people commuting daily from the

Durham region, it costs me about $20 a day. That includes getting on the GO train in Oshawa to Union Station and of course the subway up the University Avenue line to Queen's Park. What that means

to a normal person, at $20 a day, five days a week, is $100 a week. We're suggesting in this legislation that that would be 50% tax deductible and recoverable as a direct subsidy or support to the

users of public transit.

Before I get into any detail on this bill and thank the public at large and the stakeholders I have been in consultation with, I'd like to thank my legislative

intern, Audrey Lemieux, who has been very instrumental in helping to draft and shepherd this piece of legislation to this point. She is here in the chamber today. She has been a great help in

drafting and trying to get the mechanics of this in the order it is today.

I also want to thank the public. As I say, I've had communication with the Canadian Urban Transit Association, who have widely endorsed it, as well as my own

councils in the region of Durham. There has been quite a long and engaged discussion about trying to rationalize transit and integrate it across the Durham region. There have been some pitfalls and

some challenges, but just recently -- I'm looking at an

article in the local paper that says "Region-wide Transit Gets Green Light." That's by taking Ajax, Pickering, Whitby, Oshawa and Clarington,

as well as Scugog, Uxbridge and Brock. Brock, of course, is represented very capably by my seatmate Laurie Scott. Roger Anderson, the chair of Durham region, worked very hard, along with Mayor John

Mutton, to explain the transitional issues that were creating a problem. I believe I have wide support for my initiative because it would help transit authorities like Durham region, and not just

Durham region but York region as well, which has done a great job in terms of trying to integrate, streamline, harmonize and make more efficient the transit systems in their area.

Also, taking a broader view of this, I was pleased that Now magazine, which isn't commonly known to support Conservative views, stated in its November 4 issue

that, "The Tories have a great idea." I won't go on at any great length, but at least people were paying attention.

I have had a lot of comment from municipally elected people. I want to put on the record what Ted Galinis, the general manager of Ajax Pickering Transit

Authority, says:

"Ajax Pickering Transit Authority is very pleased to support Bill 137, an amendment to the Income Tax Act which provides a tax credit for expenses incurred in

using public transit.

"Financial incentives such as the public transit expense tax credit do much to encourage use of public transit as a viable transportation alternative. This type

of incentive is necessary in making public transit a more attractive choice and motivates drivers to leave their vehicles at home.

"We believe this is a good beginning in encouraging the use of public transit and look forward to future incentives, including employer-provided transit benefit

tax exemptions. It is through efforts such as these that assist in altering the public's perception and attitude toward transit and enable public transit to live up to its potential."

The point here is that public transit authorities generally realize the relationship between gridlock and other emission issues, and the use of automobiles and

public transit. There is a solution for gridlock and for the emissions issue, the Kyoto kind of issue, and it is public transit. It is one of the solutions, especially in congested urban areas like

Toronto, like London, like Ottawa -- large urban centres. The federal government recognizes that. Ralph Goodale recently -- I look at an

article here -- responded that the federal budget is looking

at the potential of introducing a user tax credit in the upcoming budget, very similar, respectfully, to the issue I've brought to this House today. I hope they follow through federally. I don't

think I have that clipping with me; I thought I did. It is here. I can only assure you that the federal government has been looking at this initiative as well.

What does it actually do? I think this is important for people, to make sure that the issues this bill will assist them with -- I am at the moment trying to find

some of the stuff I'm supposed to have here. Here it is. The bill, if passed, would amend the Income Tax Act and give Ontario taxpayers 50% of the public transit expense they incur during the tax

year. The bill provides a monetary incentive to encourage Ontarians to choose public transit as an alternative to motor vehicles. The Liberal government supported, in their 2003 election platform,

investing in public transit that would ease gridlock, reduce air pollution, decrease commute times that keep families apart and slow down our just-in-time economy.

Two years ago, prior to the 2003 election, Greg Sorbara stated in the House, "The people of Ontario have an opportunity to choose soon. If they choose with us,

they will see a new era in public transportation." Joe Cordiano also highlighted the negative effects of smog caused by gridlock and air pollution. The Liberal government has utilized every

possible avenue at its disposal to tax Ontarians. This bill here is an opportunity for the government to ease the tax burden in Ontario while addressing the issues of gridlock and quality of

life.

Public transit is safe and it's convenient. It's user-friendly. Public transit can embrace one's quality of life: less frustration and stress, more time with

family and less time commuting. Air pollution is increased as gridlock increases. The bill will get more drivers off the road and on to public transit. Easing and reducing gridlock and air

pollution is important to our common quality of life.

Taking public transit is more cost-effective than commuting daily by car to work. Bill 137 contemplates various municipal public transit initiatives that are

currently under review in the greater Toronto area; indeed, as I mentioned earlier, in Durham.

Having worked with my municipal partners, for whom I have a lot of respect, I want to make sure I get on the record here that Mayor John Mutton and I have just

recently discussed that. He is the mayor of Clarington and is also chair of finance at the region of Durham. Here is what he writes to me:

"I have had the opportunity to read your private member's bill, number 137,

An Act to amend the Income Tax Act to provide for a tax credit for expenses incurred

in using public transit.

"Public transit has been a very important factor in the overall quality of life in the municipality of Clarington. We are a growth community with many new

residents moving to this area because we have a stock of affordable housing. Now that they are residents, they have to be able to access public transit to get to work, to shop, to enable their

children to get to school and to part-time jobs. The council of the regional municipality of Durham has recently voted to initiate a seamless transit system for the region of Durham, using GO

Transit and the existing transit systems of the Durham municipalities.

"I believe that every elected official in the greater Toronto area, at the local, regional, provincial and federal level should be trying to promote the use of

public transit in order to alleviate the gridlock that exists in Toronto and the GTA and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to the environment. You are certainly taking the initiative through your

private member's bill, number 137, and I support your efforts to enact legislation to provide a tax credit for expenses incurred by the residents who use public transit.

"On behalf of the residents of the municipality of Clarington, I wholeheartedly support your private member's bill number 137."

That says it: that the municipal people, who are closer to the electorate whom we all serve, have unanimously endorsed this initiative. It's non-partisan. It

helps those who can often least afford it and must take transit as a way of sustaining their lives, their employment and that of their children. It affects seniors and it affects young people.

I urge people to look at this objectively. It is an initiative that reflects the sentiment in the gas tax. It will help people and encourage people to use public

transit, improve the environment that we all share, as well as the quality of life for themselves and families.

Ridership drives public transit efficiency. If you can get one car off the road, you're going to help all the other drivers, and you're also going to be helping

public transit.

I ask for your support this morning on this bill.

The Deputy Speaker: Further debate?

Mr. Jean-Marc Lalonde (Glengarry-Prescott-Russell): Even though I have a lot of respect for my colleague who came up with this bill this

morning, it is not clear to me what effect this would have on the people of the whole province of Ontario. When I look in the description of the bill, public transit expenses would include

"personal transportation on a regular passenger transportation service operated by, for or on behalf of the government of Ontario, a municipality in Ontario or a transit commission or authority in

Ontario."

I looked at this. Who would benefit from this? Only those in large municipalities that have public transit. I'm looking at the gas tax program that we have put

in place this year. We have gone ahead. We understood the importance of having public transit and having numbers of cars off the road by encouraging the use of public transit. I look at the city of

Toronto, for example. This year, we are giving Toronto $91 million from the gas tax. Over a three-year period, we will be giving them $365 million. When I look at Ottawa, this year Ottawa is

getting over $18 million from the gas tax.

Interjection: Unbelievable.

Mr. Lalonde: Unbelievable. When I look at the municipality where I come from, it would come up with a shortfall from this province. We either go

with the gas tax or the tax credit. I was talking to an accountant this morning. If we look at 50% of the tax receipts we will get, it's a tax credit. There are two kinds of tax credit. You have

the basic tax credit and you have an income tax credit. In this case, it's a tax credit which amounts to 22.05% that the government would have a shortfall.

We heard about the tsunami relief that the federal government has given to the people who were hit by the tsunami. The federal government says, "We will give

over $400 million in donations or credit to those people." Some $146 million to $159 million came from tax credits. In this case, I look at the town of Rockland, for example, where we have a public

transit system. This is the only one I have in Glengarry-Prescott-Russell. This would mean a shortfall of $11.17. It represents approximately $38.69 additional revenue to the Ontario taxpayers.

I definitely recognize the intent of the bill, but why have we not looked at the whole of the province? Some people have public transportation services, but

they're not run by the government; they're not run by the municipality; they're not run by a commission; they're just privately owned bus services that are providing transportation services to

urban centres from the rural areas. This wouldn't be fair for those people.

I know John O'Toole is a very good hockey player. He knows how to stickhandle. On this one he said that if we were to come up with this project, it would put the

government in a position that would mean that if we're not giving this to the people, the people would probably turn around and not support the Liberals. But those -- I wouldn't call them gimmicks,

but that approach is unacceptable to the citizens of this province when they know all the effects this would have. If we come up with this tax credit, are we going to come up with cuts in other

services?

We have to balance the budget. The previous government was not able to balance the budget. We intend to balance our budget over our terms in office.

Mr. Speaker, I will now give a chance to my colleague Vic Dhillon to continue speaking on this bill.

The Deputy Speaker: Just for your information, it goes in rotation. So it will come back to you.

The member for Simcoe-Grey.

Mr. Jim Wilson (Simcoe-Grey): I'm pleased to join the debate on what I think is an excellent proposal by my colleague Mr. O'Toole, the MPP for

Durham. As the Progressive Conservative transportation critic, I wish I had thought of this myself or that John had provided me with the idea so I could look good to all of those commuters and

people who would like to use public transit. Perhaps this bill will spur them to get out of their cars and use public transit, because it will give them a tax credit for 50% of the cost of public

transit. Public transit, as we know in the city of Toronto, is not cheap. It's $98.75 per month for a TTC Metropass. Some other fares that we have here, as soon as I find them: The GO bus from

Barrie to Toronto costs $20.80 per round trip; a monthly pass is $331.

Speaking on behalf of the people of Simcoe-Grey, in my riding, I note the statistic from the Ministry of Transportation that there are -- the only statistic we

have is from the city of Barrie to Toronto -- some 20,000 commuters a day going from just Barrie alone, up near my part of the province, to Toronto. Soon, we hope, the GO train will go all the way

to Barrie, and perhaps once this is widely publicized, if the government would adopt this idea in the upcoming provincial budget -- Mr. O'Toole's timing is excellent with this private member's bill

-- this would be a great way to provide an incentive for people to get out of their cars and use the GO train. The GO bus right now is available from Barrie and, as I say, it's very, very

expensive.

Gridlock is probably the number one issue that everyone commuting from my riding thinks about every morning, because you've got two or three hours to think about

it. If I want to get down here for an 8 o'clock meeting from Wasaga Beach, I have to be going through Barrie by 5:30 in the morning. So it will take me from 5:30 till 8 to get here, and it gets

worse.

I read yesterday in a newspaper

article that we used to call gridlock "rush hour" in Toronto. According to the Ministry of Transportation, it's now called "rush

13 hours." They estimate that the traffic is congested over a 13-hour period, morning and evening. That's my own experience as an MPP. Of course, we're provided with a subsidy for an apartment in

Toronto. Not everybody is provided with that. Nonetheless, I still find myself often commuting several times a week, and it's horrendous. This is the best idea, Mr. O'Toole's idea, that I've heard

of in 14 years with respect to public transit.

We always went about it in another way. We always went about it that we'd subsidize the TTC. You mentioned the gas tax, and although Toronto's going to get less

under the gas tax scheme than they got under the Mike Harris-Ernie Eves transit subsidy -- probably about $9 million less this year than they got in our last year of office -- the fact of the

matter is, we have always gone about it in the front end by trying to lower the ticket fare.

Usually, this type of tax incentive, tax credit, is a better way of going about things, because people have to put the money forward and make the commitment,

knowing that when tax time comes, they can get 50% of that back, just like medical expenses and charitable donations. So, for the people at home, that's what we're talking about.

The government should be embracing this. I was disappointed to hear just a few minutes ago that the member from Glengarry-Prescott-Russell doesn't think this is

the greatest idea in the world. I don't know why. I bet Mr. Goodale, the federal Liberal finance minister, as Mr. O'Toole said in his remarks -- I know he's seriously looking at it. We've seen that

in media reports. I bet he'll do something in his budget, and I would encourage the government, on behalf of all the people who have to commute every day, to give them an incentive to get out of

their cars. They want to do that anyway because of the high price of gasoline, and we see no relief in sight on that over the next decade.

We know, in my part of the province, the GTA area and just north, that over the next 20 years, the population will almost double. We're expecting 2.6 million

more people. So the sooner you can get the GO train up there, the sooner you can get people using it. This is a very pleasant way to encourage them to go to public transit.

Finally, I want to mention one thing -- because I rode the TTC recently -- and that is about their student fares. I promised that I would raise this in the

House, because I got an e-mail from a mother, Christine Walsh from Peterborough, whose son is going to school in Toronto, but because his permanent home residence is Peterborough, he is not

entitled to the student rate on the TTC. Yet, if you're a senior citizen in this province, no matter where you live, you go to buy a senior citizen TTC token and you just have to show your proof of

age. It doesn't matter whether you're from Peterborough or Collingwood or Tottenham or whatever --

Mr. Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): Timmins.

Mr. Wilson: -- or Timmins -- my old northern hat on -- it doesn't matter. As long as you're a senior citizen, you're entitled to the senior

discount. It doesn't work that way for students. So we're asking the TTC to do that. That doesn't make any sense. Most people don't live in a university town. They have to go to school somewhere

else, like Toronto. It would only be fair. So I'm dealing with Howard Moscoe, which is always a pleasure --

Mr. Bisson: A good friend of mine.

Mr. Wilson: -- and I haven't heard back from him. You know, Howard is pretty good to be on the airways when it's his issue, but when it's

someone else's issue, you never hear much from him. But hopefully, he'll get back to me. He's had two months to think about this.

Having said that, I'm going to leave the floor to my colleagues, but I just want to encourage the government to adopt this idea before the feds beat you. You'd

look good, commuters would love you, and it would go a long way to getting people into public transit.

Mr. Bisson: To my good friend, Mr. Wilson: They don't want to look good. That's the whole point. All these guys in government want to do is make

people mad. I've been watching them for the last, almost two years now. Any time they get a chance to break a promise, they break a promise, so they make people mad. To my good friend from Simcoe,

I've got to say, I don't think they're going to do it because they'd look good.

To the author of Bill 137, I think this is not a bad idea, actually. I'll echo what was said by a few people before. It's not a bad way of dealing with what is a

fairly significant issue when it comes to the city of Toronto, and also for commuters. We know there is a gap between what it costs to run the TTC and what the province is giving -- I'm going to

talk to that in a few minutes -- and this is kind of an innovative way of coming at it and saying, "Let's try to put some dollars back in the pocket of the actual transit users by way of a tax

credit." I never knew that this existed. I always assumed that people had the right to do this. But unfortunately not, because currently, as any Ontarian, if you're not getting a mileage allowance

from your employer or a car allowance of some type, you're allowed to deduct your car or your driving to and from work in certain circumstances. That would bring transit somewhat in line with what

the rules and provisions are under the Income Tax Act. So I think it's not a bad idea.

To the issue of Toronto transit, I just think it's interesting. My good friend the critic for the Conservative Party probably would like to bear this out, if he

can get the floor back. You know, we were here yesterday. We watched the Premier. The Premier got caught in a scrum yesterday morning, and he said, "Oh, Lord, we're having a hard time in Ontario.

That bad old federal government, they're just not giving us the money that we're entitled to. We've got to run into the House, and we've got to get an all-party motion here in order to say the feds

are bad and we're good." Imagine how the city of Toronto feels when they look at that. It happens to be that there is a $70-million gap between what it actually costs to run Toronto transit and

what the province is giving. I just sit here and say, "Hang on a second here. Something is a bit askew." If it's good enough for the Ontario government to whine against the federal government, then

it should be good enough for the city of Toronto to whine against the provincial government.

There's an old saying: Physician, heal thyself. I think the Premier would be well set to try to deal with municipalities fairly, because they're our transfer

partners. We're responsible for municipalities, much the same way that the federal government is responsible to us when it comes to transfers. Maybe we should be setting an example of what we

should be doing with our own transfer partners before we start whining to the federal government on the issue of how much money we are entitled to.

Now, why are we in this situation? I think it's quite a simple one. It's not the government that created this problem; I'll give them that much. We have a

deficit in Ontario. First of all, the Liberals knew there was a deficit before they got elected, so I don't buy this argument, "Oh, big surprise, didn't know, boo hoo, boo hoo." We all knew that

there was going to be a deficit; we all knew it would be about $5 billion. I think, more to the point, the issue is that the federal government has got a surplus. And why do they have a surplus?

Because they didn't do tax cuts. At a time when the economy was slowed down, at a time when we were trying to come out of one of the worst recessions we had seen in Ontario in a long, long time, up

to the mid-1990s, the provincial government decided, contrary to the federal government, to do tax cuts. When you annualize the tax cuts in today's dollars, if you were to say the province of

Ontario would have never, never, never cut taxes in the way that they did, we would now be in our own surplus situation here in Ontario. The actual number, when you annualize it, I always thought

was around $6 billion, but somebody yesterday was telling me it was closer to $10 billion. But I'll be more conservative in my approach and say it was $6 billion. Well, you know, you wouldn't have

a deficit in this province. So that's how we got into this mess in the first place.

Imagine the federal government -- we'll get a chance to debate that this afternoon, and I'll speak to that more then. They're going to listen to our request for

them to give us $5 billion, and they're going to say, "Well, you did it to yourselves. Why should we bail you out of your problem?" That's a bit of the argument. I think we'd be better served to

come at this from a completely different perspective, and I'll talk about that in this afternoon's debate on the emergency motion that the government will bring forward. But I wanted to raise it in

the context of this bill, because the province finds itself in the same situation with the federal government that the city of Toronto has with the province.

On the issue of the tax credit for transit, that's not a bad idea. We need to find ways of being innovative when we provide a public service so we can do it at a

cost that is as reasonable as possible. One of the ways to do that, obviously, would have been to say, "We will give transit more money to make sure that they don't have to raise the fares." That

is one option. The other option is to offset the costs somewhat, because we know that transit costs are going up. One way of doing that is to do what the member suggests by way of this bill, which

is that you can deduct the full cost to buy a transit pass or a GO Transit pass against your income tax, and I think the rate you would be able to get back is about 50%. It's not a bad way of

dealing with the end users so that they're not put in the position where it becomes so expensive to get to work that they're in the position of being almost in the negative every time they get up

to go to work.

The other thing is what the member for Simcoe-Grey raised, and that is the congestion on our highways. He's right. I use that highway on a fairly frequent basis.

I come down Highway 11 from northern Ontario, and around Orillia it starts to get pretty busy. When you get to Barrie, you may as well say you're in a parking lot, from Barrie to the top end of

Toronto. Then, when you get on the 401, it's another big parking lot, but it's going east-west. Then you get on to the streets of Toronto and it gets even worse. The point is, why do we have all

that gridlock? Because we have not provided a good alternative for people to be able to move on mass transportation.

If we look at Europe, for example, Europe has been much, much more progressive and forward-thinking when it comes to getting people off the roads and on to

trains or subways. If you go to cities like Paris or London or others, if you go anywhere within Germany, France, Italy, Spain or England, you have a very good intercity train system. You can stand

at any railway track in Europe and wait for a train to come by and go pretty well anywhere you want to go at a pretty reasonable cost. So most people say, "Why use the highways when I can do it

that way?" That's something this government has not created, and it's something we have to deal with.

I think the government would be well advised to let one of our standing committees of the Legislature take a look at this issue, to ask, what kinds of things can

we do as a province, in partnership with the municipalities and our federal government, and possibly the private sector if that makes sense, in terms of how we move people off our highways and into

a mass transportation system?

For example, can we do a better job of how we run our already public system of GO Transit? I think the answer is yes. Certainly GO Transit services should be

expanded into other communities. If we can do that and, more importantly, provide a frequency of service that is usable on the part of the commuters, you're going to take them off the highways. If

you take them off the highways, then you don't have to build bigger highways, so you save some money, plus you reduce the overall amount of emissions into our atmosphere, which is something we

should all be aiming for, especially with the Kyoto Protocol being brought forward, which I think we all support, by and large.

We can probably do some pretty innovative stuff, but I don't think one person has the answer. I think the standing committee would have to go out, over the

period of a winter session or a summer session, and canvass the various people who are involved in transit, to talk to riders and everybody who has something to say on it so we can at least come

forward with a comprehensive plan to deal with gridlock. If we did that, I think we'd be well served in the future. That's not to say that once the committee finished its work, all these problems

would go away, but it would provide the province of Ontario with a plan -- something it doesn't have -- about where we should be making our key investments within the current system and how we can

expand the system in other ways.

For example, as I mentioned earlier, if you're able to provide really good GO Transit services to the cities of Barrie and maybe even Orillia, you would take

people off the highways. Jeez, it would make a heck of a lot more sense than having to take one's car. On the other hand, for northern Ontario, obviously, that may not be an option because the

distances are greater.

In Europe, which is interesting, they've got what they call the TGV. You can get on a 300-kilometre-an-hour train that moves pretty darn quick. It would probably

be far too expensive to build, in terms of laying track all the way into Hearst and westward into Thunder Bay. The ridership may not be there to recover that kind of cost, so in northern Ontario we

may have to look at something different. You'd probably have to look at an investment in our highways to make sure we finish the four-laning promised by this government -- for example, Highway

I don't know how many times the former member from Sudbury, the now Minister of Northern Development and Mines, when he was in the previous Parliament, went

after the Tory government to four-lane Highway 69, denounced the government for not doing it, did all kinds of press conferences along the highway. Every time there was a fatality, he ran to the

media saying, "We've got to four-lane Highway 69." Then he gets himself elected -- bully for him; his party won -- and people in the media asked him, "When can we have Highway 69 finished?" "Oh,

six months from now I'm going to have a comprehensive plan." Six months went by -- no comprehensive plan. The only thing they did was that they went and had a press conference on the highway where

they announced they were going to make one overpass and one underpass. I guess that's the sort of four-laning they were thinking about, but we're nowhere nearer where we need to be than what he was

promising when he was in opposition. The question is, with the scarce dollars we have as a province, where would it be better to spend our money when it comes to four-laning highways or providing

passing lanes so those passing lanes are able to move traffic along?

Again, we need a strategic plan. The problem is that nobody has gone out and done the kind of work that's needed to say where the bottlenecks are, where the

congestion is. Does it make more sense to invest in four-laning Highway 69, or do we have to do something else? Do we have to put passing lanes on Highway 11 or Highway 17? God only knows. That

committee would be able to look at that issue.

The other thing that committee could look at for northern Ontario is the whole issue of air service. The reality in northern Ontario is that to get down here

to the city of Toronto -- which other people call the centre of the universe -- it really is the only option if you're trying to get here quickly. The problem is that we are in the worst possible

situation in northern Ontario. The federal government some years ago deregulated the airline industry, so it became open competition for anybody who wanted to set up shop, and they privatized Air

Canada. We went from jet service in places like the city of Timmins, which used to bring us to Toronto for a fare, in today's dollars, of maybe $150 return, to where you are paying, on a deal -- I

pay $700 to go home every weekend. I can fly to Vancouver cheaper than that. In fact, I went to Vietnam two or three weeks ago, and the ticket I purchased -- I used my Aeroplan, but if I had bought

the ticket, I could get a ticket to go to Hong Kong for around $1,400 or $1,500, but I have to spend almost a thousand bucks to go to the city of Timmins. It doesn't make sense.

One of the things that the committee could look at, if we were to form a committee to do such a thing, is to take a look at the kinds of things the province

can do, or the kinds of things the province needs to do with the federal government, to provide air service in northern Ontario that works, first of all, and so we have east-west connections, not

just north-south connections. It could look at what we need to do to provide a transportation service that is reasonable when it comes to cost.

I want to remind people that northern Ontario goes far beyond Timmins and Hearst. There's the whole question of travel among the northern communities north of

51. We need to look at transportation for all those communities along the James Bay coast, like Big Trout Lake and others on the northwest, because trying to buy everything from diesel fuel to milk

or bananas or whatever it might be is astronomically expensive in communities like that because they don't have highways to bring the stuff in. The only way they can bring it in is either by winter

road, which costs a lot of money to make every year, because basically you're using the frost on the swamp to build a road, or to bring it in by air. To give people an idea, the cost of milk in a

community like Attawapiskat is about four times the price you pay here in the city of Toronto. How do a mother and father provide milk for their growing young children when they have to pay those

prices? It's pretty ridiculous. The point is that one of the things the committee should look at is the whole question of transportation for those communities north of 51.

At the end of the process, we'd find ourselves in a position where we would be able to come forward with a comprehensive transportation strategy for the

province of Ontario. The three distinct parts, in my view, are the urban centres around southern Ontario, southeast and southwest; the central and northern part of the province, up to places like

Hearst and the northern part of Highway 11, the northern transportation route; and also a plan for what we do north of Highway 11, which is basically the north of 51. I think that would be a good

idea. We would be able to look at a number of issues and alternatives about how we're able to come forward with a comprehensive transportation strategy.

I do want to say to my good friend Mr. O'Toole that New Democrats will support your motion. We think it's a darn good idea. I hope the government doesn't kill

this thing. We should at least allow it to go to committee. I heard the parliamentary assistant get up and say some bad things about the bill. I hope what he means is that Liberals will vote in

favour of the motion to allow it to go to committee so we can have a discussion about it, take a look at the alternatives and look at what the idea looks like. From there we'd bring it in for a

third reading vote, and then the government can do what the government's going to do. But to say no at this point and kill the bill, for it not to get second reading, I think would be a disservice

to the transit riders of Ontario.

Mr. Vic Dhillon (Brampton West-Mississauga): I'm glad to speak to the bill introduced by my colleague the member from Durham. I think, and my

constituents think, that Bill 137,

An Act to amend the Income Tax Act to provide for a tax credit for expenses incurred in using public transit, is an important bill.

A large segment of my riding is comprised of new immigrants. Most often, these new immigrants automatically resort to buying an automobile once they arrive in

Canada and don't even think about using public transit. I think this bill gives them a very good incentive to think about using our public transit system.

Over the past few months, I've been approached by several seniors' groups in my riding about the rising cost of public transit. This bill is welcome news to

these people, and they'll be very happy to know that it'll be more economically feasible for them to use public transit.

The provincial gas tax funding was very well received by Ontario's municipalities. Our government is committed to public transit. In fact, we're committing

over $300 million to public transit. This is much more than I can say for my colleague's party. I have to admit, when the bill was introduced, I was very surprised that it had Tory affiliation. Our

government has been very supportive of transit within Ontario. Whether it's the environmental assessment for the extension of the Spadina subway to York University, the AcceleRide rapid transit

initiative in Brampton or the GO-Mississauga rapid transit busway, our government is committed to getting people moving on public transit.

Car owners who use cars for business or their jobs can deduct part of their car expenses from income tax, often to great advantage. Why can't taxpayers who use

public transit to get to their jobs, at far less environmental cost, also benefit from the tax system? This will definitely increase transit ridership, getting more people out of their cars and on

to trains, subways, streetcars and buses. Increasing ridership is a major tenet of our government's transit philosophy.

Again, based on what other jurisdictions are doing -- Quebec comes to mind -- I think this bill will be very beneficial to our constituents. A lot of my

constituents are recent immigrants and are good, honest working people just trying to make ends meet and raise their kids. Transportation costs can mount, and this bill, which I'm happy to support,

will go a long way.

Mr. Joseph N. Tascona (Barrie-Simcoe-Bradford): I'm very pleased to join in the debate on the member for Durham's bill. I fully support this

change to the Income Tax Act to provide a tax credit for expenses incurred in using public transit.

Some of the information provided by the member was a regional breakdown of the number of commuters into metro Toronto. From my area, Barrie, there are 20,000.

I can tell you, being on the highway -- I was on the highway very early yesterday, at 5 o'clock in the morning, coming down here to Toronto, and it was just bumper-to-bumper at that time. That just

continues all through the morning.

We need public transit. We made a significant investment, when we were the government, to the city of Barrie. We gave them $2 million toward saving the rail

from Barrie to Bradford, because the federal government at that time had brought legislation in to discontinue and pull out the track, and they were about to do that. So the city purchased and owns

the rails.

GO Transit has done an environment study -- and it's completed now -- for the three sites: one on Mapleview Road off Highway 11; one down in Bell Ewart; and

another one at the old Allandale train station. That has been done, and it's GO Transit's plan to be going ahead with the operation by 2006.

We're hopeful that the city of Barrie is going to approve that, just like they did in Bradford-West Gwillimbury recently to expand their GO Transit service,

because they have up to three trains a day out of Bradford, hopefully to go to six trains. So we're waiting on the city of Barrie for them to make final arrangements with the province and the

federal government for that to happen.

So I fully support the bill. Certainly, a public transit income tax credit will encourage more use of public transit. I think we now have about 10 to 15 GO

buses a day going out of Barrie. I know Jim Wilson's constituents use it also. So it's very important that this happen. I think it's a very progressive measure by the member from Durham.

Ms. Laurie Scott (Haliburton-Victoria-Brock): I'm very pleased to rise today to speak on the motion from the member from Durham,

An Act to

amend the Income Tax Act to provide for a tax credit for expenses incurred in using public transit. He mentioned at the start that it's a non-partisan issue, and I think all of our ridings

certainly face some transit challenges.

In my riding of Haliburton-Victoria-Brock, some of you may be surprised to know that General Motors is the number one employer. So there's a lot of traffic

that's going down to the south and the west in the riding. One

part in Pontypool still has some train tracks. I know the member from Simcoe had mentioned that there were trains available. We just

have one track left in the northern part of the riding -- they've lifted all the tracks -- and I know the snowmobilers are happy, because they use it to snowmobile, but there are still some

opportunities in the former Manvers township and around Pontypool. There's a train track there.

I know GO has mentioned for several years a possibility of coming to that community with a train, which we fully support. There's no question that if transit

is made more affordable and more accessible, especially in my part of the riding, we can deal with our gridlock problems, especially with the greenbelt legislation coming in and the leapfrogging

that's going to occur. We need to plan for that, and I think this would be good for the environment and good for our quality of life, with fewer people sitting in their cars, away from their

families. They would be able to add more to their communities.

So I think the 50% tax credit is great. The member from Durham mentioned Brock township, which is in my riding. It's also in Durham region, which has GO buses

there now. I think this would increase their ridership. Just the number of students alone from our area going to Durham College and the University of Ontario Institute of Technology has been

increasing, and they're included in the greenbelt so far. We want to encourage more of the public transit there.

In an

article in the Globe and Mail on Wednesday, February 9, by Jeff Sallot in Ottawa: "Minister Ralph Goodale says he is ready to use the tax system to

promote a clean environment, suggesting yesterday that the coming budget could have tax breaks to encourage commuters to use public transit." We need the federal partners in here.

"Environmental groups want the government to introduce `green budget' measures, including encouragement to employers to provide transit passes -- instead of

parking spots -- as a non-taxable benefit for workers."

So I commend the member for Durham. I think our thinking has got to be progressive, it's got to be in that direction, and I want to fully support his bill. I

think it's a great idea. I encourage all the members of the Legislature here to adopt this bill today.

Mr. Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): I'm pleased to rise today in support of this important piece of legislation proposed by the member from Durham.

It's this kind of thinking that we need, not only in this chamber but also at the federal level of government. Transit is, without question, the key to unlock the problems that we're facing in the

GTA, and that is the problem of gridlock. We have many other issues that are facing us, but when it comes to the issue of quality of life, there is a very practical challenge that we face, and that

is the issue of gridlock.

I want to take this opportunity to commend the good work of the region of York and the vision they have to deal with this issue of integrated transit

throughout York region. Kitchener-Waterloo as well deserves to be commended for taking these important steps. Often there's so much polarization at the local level that they fail to see the

importance of bringing municipalities together and working together.

The saying, "Build it and they shall come," is not true. What the member from Durham has recognized is that once you build the transit system, you also have to

motivate people to use it. The way you do that is by coming forward with proposals such as the member for Durham has presented to this Legislature to give people a very practical reason for

focusing on transit. We have to make it attractive for people to choose the transit option. Responsible local governments will work with the provincial and federal government to ensure that the

funding is there.

Our government, you may well recall, made it possible and delivered to the region of York some $50 million for their Quick Start program for their transit

program. That program today is working. As you drive through York region, you can see the evidence of that money at work. They are now looking to move to the next step, and we implore the minister

of infrastructure and the Minister of Transportation to support the region of York with funding so they can indeed move on to the next step of that important transit strategy.

Again, I commend the member from Durham. He has always been a member who looks at the very practical issues facing his constituents, facing the people of this

province. Transit is a key. We have a serious gridlock problem throughout the GTA and in other areas of the province, be that Ottawa, Windsor, other areas such as Kitchener-Waterloo, the London

area. What we need now are practical solutions. I pray that the people opposite, who may be tempted to look at this as a partisan issue, will just look at it from a public policy perspective and

know it's the right thing to do, that this bill be sent to committee to work out the details in terms of how it should be implemented and make whatever necessary amendments perhaps are required to

have it fit into the overall transit strategy of this province, and we will see good public policy as a result of this proposal being put forward by the member from Durham.

The Deputy Speaker: Further debate? Further debate? Sorry. The member for Stoney Creek.

Ms. Jennifer F. Mossop (Stoney Creek): Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Tucked away in the corner here, it's easy to miss out.

Anyway, I'm very pleased to speak to this,

An Act to amend the Income Tax Act to provide for a tax credit for expenses incurred in using public transit. I

think it is a good idea, a good initiative, for all the obvious reasons that have already been talked about this morning. It encourages use of public transit, which hopefully will alleviate the

congestion on the roads out there, give us cleaner air and also even the playing field: In some cases, there are those workers who do get a car allowance or a tax credit for using their car and

there isn't that same provision for those who use public transit.

I've listened carefully this morning. It's interesting, because it's turned into a bit of a venting session for commuter angst. I'm going to join in, because I

spent six years driving between Toronto and Hamilton. I had to leave the Toronto area during rush hour, at 3 o'clock, 4 o'clock in the afternoon when all of Toronto is leaving Toronto and

heading west, or it seems that way, along the QEW. I had to use a car because there was no GO Transit returning at the hour that I was returning, which was after midnight. So I would sit in this

car every day and watch cobwebs form on the cars around me, and I would try to amuse myself coming up with entrepreneurial ideas, like maybe I could start a chip wagon out there on the highway and

I could walk in between these cars and sell potato chips and cold drinks or something to these people who had nothing else to do but stare at the tail lights of the car in front of them. You get

all these wonderful suggestions from your friends, who say, "Why don't you try some of those talking books? You could do those." I tried some of that for a while, and maybe I could learn another

language, and I tried a bit of that.

You can spend hours and hours out there, and quite frankly, it sucks the life out of you after a while. We've already heard from doctors who say that commuting

is a serious health problem. I know why, because I did it for so long. It is a serious health problem. So we do need to improve public transit. I think an initiative like this points in that

direction and it's a good idea.

The other thing I wanted to talk about a little bit: I know that our government is committed to improving public transit, is committed to cleaner air, to

improving infrastructure and all the rest, but I don't want anybody to think I'm taking any chances. All MPPs like to invite cabinet ministers for visits to their riding to meet with their

constituents. I always try to time the visits of cabinet ministers to rush hour so that they have to leave Toronto and go along that QEW toward Hamilton in the worst possible traffic. Invariably

they get there late because they didn't anticipate it was going to take them two hours to get between Queen's Park and Hamilton and Stoney Creek, but indeed that is how long it will take you if you

are trying to do it during rush hour. Rush hour, by the way, is no longer a couple of hours in the morning and a couple in the afternoon; it's pretty much all day long. Everybody out there who's

done it knows that I am speaking the truth. You might get an hour's break somewhere in the middle of the day, but if there's an accident, then you're toast, because all bets are off at that point.

You're not going to get anywhere in any period of time. So I always try to invite my cabinet ministers for a visit during that big, terrible, rush-hour period. They finally arrive and get out of

the car, "I'm so sorry. I hate being late. This is dreadful. But, boy, the traffic's just awful," and I say, "Yes. GTA actually stands for `God, traffic's awful.'" At least that's what it has come

to be in these many, many years. I haven't seen any improvement. We are very addicted to our cars. In fact, the working world, the way it works now, where we're actually working 24/7, doesn't help

much because public transit isn't meeting the needs of the 24/7 world yet in many cases. There's a lot of work that has to be done in the area of public transportation.

We've also heard about other parts of the world and how much better they do public transit than we do. I spent quite a bit of time in Europe and never had a

car. I travelled nine different countries, on public transit all the time. Their systems are so much better than ours. They have so many more people in a smaller space as well. Perhaps we've just

been spoiled by the space we have. We've always had bigger cars and bigger roads, but it's catching up with us now and going far beyond us. We need to be very aggressive in making some changes with

regard to public transportation, to lessen the congestion on the roads so that we aren't driving people absolutely out of their minds by having to do those sorts of things.

The tax credit that is being proposed here I think is a good start, a good initiative -- pointing in the right direction, as it were, for this sort of thing.

But I just have to encourage everybody out there to think about it before you get in your car. If you really don't have to take your car, don't take your car. Try public transit. The public transit

we have is very good if it fits in your schedule. That's the only problem: sometimes it doesn't fit, which is why we need improvements. But if it does fit in your schedule, if you are able to do

it, do it, because it's nicer to sit on a train or subway and read a book than to sit in a car with your knuckles wrapped around a steering wheel getting whiter and whiter because you just can't

stand what you're facing. You're probably going to have a better chance of getting where you're going on time if you use transit as well.

I think this is a good initiative. I'm really glad to see it coming forward. It certainly won't cure the whole problem of public transit, but it's a step in

the right direction, and that's a good thing.

The Deputy Speaker: Mr. O'Toole, you have two minutes to reply.

Mr. O'Toole: I would like to thank each of the parties, specifically Mr. Lalonde, who of course is the critic in this area, and our own

caucus, Jim Wilson from Simcoe-Grey, as well as Frank Klees from Oak Ridges, Laurie Scott from Haliburton-Victoria-Brock and Mr. Bisson from the NDP.

It looks to me, with a few exceptions, that there's general endorsement as well by the member from Stoney Creek in her comments -- supportive comments, I might

say. That's encouraging, to take this as a non-partisan way of recognizing the frustration and the expense for commuters, as well as the benefits of increasing ridership, which is to the quality of

life that we all share, and the reduction in gridlock.

Jim Wilson is our transportation critic, and he spoke to the issue of commuters, of students commuting and transit cost as part of education costs. I know he

was very, very flattering and supportive. The closing remarks from our caucus were by Frank Klees, who was the Minister of Transportation and knows full well the implications of building more and

more infrastructure in the form of highways and bridges. Public transit: It's time to turn the corner, and it's time for the government to realize that their current strategy, the gas tax, has a

potentially high risk of failure.

I'm going to refer to an

article in the Toronto Star from February 16. This is by Royson James, who writes often on these issues, talking about Mayor Miller

having the Premier in the headlights.

What has happened is that the gas tax that's being transferred to the city of Toronto is being offset by reducing the city's contribution. In 2003, Toronto

provided $182 million in support, last year it went to $142 million and this year it's down to $123 million. As the province adds more, the municipality cuts back. We need to ensure that the

drivers of Ontario move to transit.

ASIAN HERITAGE ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005

SUR LE PATRIMOINE ASIATIQUE

Mr. Wong moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 113,

An Act to proclaim the month of May as Asian Heritage Month / Projet de loi 113, Loi proclamant le mois de mai Mois du patrimoine asiatique.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): According to standing order 96, Mr. Wong, you have 10 minutes.

Mr. Tony C. Wong (Markham): As a member of Asian origin, I feel extremely proud today to rise and speak to Bill 113, the Asian Heritage Act,

2005. It is now a cliché to say that diversity is Ontario's strength. Immigrants from many Asian countries have chosen Ontario to be their home. It should come as no surprise that after

Asian Canadians are a large percentage of Ontario's population, with more than 1.5 million Ontarians. That's 12% of our province's population. It is important

to recognize and pay tribute to the many Ontarians of Asian descent who have contributed and continue to contribute to the welfare and development of our province.

British Columbia is the only province to have officially declared May as Asian Heritage Month. That happened in 1996. On December 6, 2001, the Senate of Canada

passed a motion designating May as Asian Heritage Month. The Senate adopted a motion introduced by Senator Vivian Poy to recognize May as Asian Heritage Month. On May 21, 2002, a declaration was

signed by Senator Poy and a number of other federal representatives officially declaring May as Asian Heritage Month in Canada.

I want to talk about a bit of history also related to economic contributions. Asians settled in Canada more than 100 years ago. Their hard work and

entrepreneurial spirit contributed to the evolution and development of many of our country's natural resources industries. South Asian immigrants initially worked in lumberyards, with a few opening

their own mills once they got settled. And we must not forget the significant role that Chinese Canadians played in the construction of the Canadian Pacific Railway. Many gave their lives to what

Pierre Berton described as the national dream.

Over 17,000 Chinese workers were brought over from China to spend the next four years completing the most difficult and dangerous

section of the railroad. At

least 600 Chinese workers died while working on the railroad. One Chinese worker died for every mile of track. Upon completion of the railroad in 1884, Sir John A. Macdonald commemorated the

efforts of Chinese workers. He stated: "Without the great effort of the Chinese labourers, the CPR could not have been finished on

schedule and the resources of western Canada could not also be

explored."

I want to talk about economic prosperity and trade partnerships. As globalization brings us together, Ontario needs to leverage its multicultural workforce.

The biggest growth economies are in Asia, specifically China and India. China's economy is gaining such strength that it is destined to become the world's largest trading partner. Our diverse

workforce connects us to the rest of the world and gives us an edge over other countries. This workforce and its connectedness through family, friends and business partnerships will enable Ontario

to form significant trading relationships with China and other Asian nations.

With respect to cultural contributions, Asian Canadians have greatly enriched Canadian culture. We need only look to the world of literature and the names of

Joy Kogawa, Paul Yee, Michael Ondaatje, Anita Rau Badami, Shauna Singh Baldwin, Wayson Choy and Rohinton Mistry to remind us of how lucky we are to have such great writers tell us wonderful,

compelling and thought-provoking stories in their own unique voices that reach back into their Asian heritage and experience.

Asian Ontarians have also excelled in other areas, such as sciences, the medical community and government. Our current Governor General, Adrienne Clarkson, was

a journalist who blazed many trails and who is one of Canada's greatest advocates for its artists.

I probably don't have time to talk about medical and other contributions, but I want to talk about our opportunity to right a historical wrong. Asian

immigrants' industriousness was not always appreciated. There were many attempts to curtail Asian immigration, as well as the rights and freedoms of Asian Canadians, through such draconian policies

as the infamous head tax. We have an excellent opportunity to demonstrate Ontario's maturity. We are a province of acceptance and openness that celebrates our diversity.

This bill is more than a symbolic message. Bill 113 provides an important opportunity for all Ontarians to learn and celebrate the rich heritage we share as a

result of the contributions Asian Canadians have made to our great province. In supporting this bill, we are providing a wonderful learning opportunity for the generations to come to discover and

acknowledge the contributions by celebrating May as Asian Heritage Month. May is an excellent month to utilize Bill 113 as a springboard to teach our youth about the integral role that Asian

Canadians have played in the development of Ontario, as school is still in session. Designating May as Asian Heritage Month is an opportunity to celebrate the cultural, economic and political

contributions from the people of Asian heritage who make up the province's social and cultural fabric.

What makes us truly Canadian is our inherent understanding of multiculturalism. We relish the diversity of our communities and welcome the variety of cultural

choices in our lives. This is what makes us unique and the envy of the world, and why so many go to such great lengths to make Ontario their home. We maintain our Canadian identity while

celebrating our ancestral, ethnic and cultural ties. But what is special about Ontarians is not just our pride in our own heritage but the pride we take in celebrating the myriad of cultures that

comprise our diverse society. Celebrating Ontario's diversity allows us to grow as a province and as a people, culturally, spiritually and economically.

I want to refer to a statement that was made by Senator Poy on May 25, 2004, in her speech to the Rotary Club of Canada: "This month is about the

internationalization of knowledge, because fostering intercultural understanding in Canada is the first step to creating a truly cosmopolitan Canadian individual who is ready to take on the world.

And indeed, for our young people, this kind of multicultural education is more important than ever because they are going to have to compete with the best and the brightest around the world."

I'm proud to table this bill and move it for second reading. I'm sure that many members of all parties will be supporting this bill, and that they agree with

me that we in Ontario and we as Canadians have come a long way.

The Deputy Speaker: Further debate?

Mr. Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): I'm certainly pleased to rise to add my comments to this debate. I commend the member from Markham for bringing

this bill forward.

I have the honour of representing the riding of Oak Ridges, which is composed of the communities of Richmond Hill, the northern part of Markham -- north of

16th Avenue -- and Whitchurch-Stouffville, one of the most highly ethnically diverse ridings in the province. That's what makes it so rich. Within the context of the Richmond Hill area of my

riding, some 30% of the voters are in fact of Asian descent.

I am proud to call friends those individuals who have come to this country, either themselves or their parents. I too am an immigrant to this country. I was

five years old when my parents immigrated from Germany. I know that they came here, that they made that decision to immigrate, because of the opportunity that was here, and that is here for anyone

who chooses to seize that opportunity and the freedoms represented here. It's appropriate that we recognize our heritage. I am proud of mine. We should all be proud of our heritage, and those who

are of Asian descent have much to be proud of.

I want to refer to some of the organizations within this province, and specifically within my riding, that celebrate that heritage. One is the Mon Sheong

Foundation. This is an organization that is doing much good, not only within York region but across the province. The Mon Sheong Foundation was based on a philosophy of care and respect. It is

based on the life of Mon Sheong, who lived in China around 300 B.C. The Mon Sheong Foundation has sponsored the construction of long-term-care facilities throughout the greater Toronto area and

provides ethno-specific care for individuals who are much in need of care and support in their elderly years.

I also want to pay tribute to another organization, the Carefirst Seniors and Community Services Association. This, again, is an ethno-specific organization

that provides community support and home care services. Dr. John Chan is the president and works with his wife, Susie; Dr. Ambrose Fung is the past president; and Helen Leung is the executive

director -- incredible service provided to seniors who cannot speak the language but who need the kind of community care support that is being provided by Carefirst. They deserve to be supported by

our government, by this government, for the kind of care they are providing.

I also want to make reference -- in fact, I'm attending tomorrow night one of the regular events hosted by the Richmond Hill Chinese Seniors Association. That

is sponsored by an individual who has done much good work throughout the entire area. I want to pay tribute to that organization because they provide services, recreational opportunities and

supports to seniors that are very important to them. Mr. Jackie Lee, who is president of that organization, deserves a great deal of credit for the untiring work he puts into that organization.

Finally, I want to recognize the good work of the Richmond Hill and Markham Chinese Business Association: president, Daisy Wai; first vice-president, David Ho;

second vice-president, Benedict Leung; third vice-president, Stanley Yim; secretary, Peggy Tang; treasurer, Larry Chiu; and legal adviser, Sunny Ho. This is an organization that has done so much

over the years to integrate the Chinese business community with the broader community to ensure there is co-operation, not only within the business community but among all the levels of government

as well.

When we look at our communities -- I speak specifically about York region, but the broader GTA and the broader business community in this province -- the

amount of investment, the amount of contribution that has been made by the Asian community to this province is insurmountable. If we were to extricate the contributions of the Asian community from

this province, there would be a very noticeable void. So we welcome and we are thankful for the contributions of the Asian community, their contribution to the culture of this province, to the

culture and strength of our local communities, and certainly to the strength and viability of our economic foundation here in this province.

This community deserves this recognition. I certainly wholeheartedly support it. As I indicated, I welcome the initiative by the member from Markham. I join

with him. I have many opportunities to attend the same events as the member from Markham and to celebrate with the Asian community the many good works that are done.

In closing, I want in my remarks to thank this community for its generosity. Whether it's the Dragon Ball, whether it is one of the many local fundraising

events that take place to support the various charitable organizations and the good works the community does, time and time again we see many of the same people who are giving, I know,

sacrificially for that good cause. It comes out of that philosophy of care and respect, two principles that are so fundamental and so important and that are often forgotten. It's the Asian

community that reminds us of it, not only in word but in deed. We are grateful for that and we look forward to all members of the House supporting this initiative today.

Mr. Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): I want to say that New Democrats will gladly support this motion. We think it's high time.

I'm going to come at this from a different perspective, because the history of Canada and how it has welcomed the Asian community, specifically the Chinese, to

this country is not a proud one. We know that Canada at one time had a head tax that said that if you wanted to have your children or your wife emigrate here, after we went and got Chinese workers

from China to work on building our national dream, the CPR, the only way you could get those children or wives here was to raise $500, which was equal to about two years' wages at the time. We know

the Chinese community has for some time been looking for the Canadian government to say, "I'm sorry, that was wrong, that was something that never should have happened; it is a blight on our

history," and to have some form of apology and even some form of compensation. I look at this motion a little bit through that glass and say that this is maybe one way we in the province of Ontario

can do the right thing.

Every country, not just Canada, has some dark moments in its history. Canada has far fewer than most. I think we can all agree that this is a great country we

live in and we're awfully happy to be here, because compared to many other nations, Canada, even at its worst times, is probably one of the best countries to live in. I would argue, it is the best

country to live in. I've travelled around the world. I've been to Asia, Africa, South America, Europe and other places, and there aren't many places that compare to Canada.

To the Chinese community, I say specifically, on behalf of New Democrats, we're sorry. That should never have happened in our history.

People came here and contributed greatly to the building of our national railway. Many of them died. It was very dangerous work. They were paid half the wage

that white workers were paid at the time. They were given the most difficult and most dangerous jobs.

One of the stories I remember reading at one point around the whole issue of the building of the railway was that when the Chinese workers were brought over by

boat to Canada, they couldn't figure out why so many Chinese workers were dying. They thought they had some sort of disease that they contracted in China before they came to Canada.

You know what it was? They were malnourished. It was as simple as that. The food that we were providing by way of the contractors who worked for the CPR to the

Chinese workers was less than what we gave white workers, and the Chinese workers were having to live on fish and dried rice. They just thought that was the right way to do things for those pesky

Chinese workers.

today. We say specifically to the Chinese community, "We're sorry. That was the wrong thing to do. It was a bad time in our history, and we're prepared to say that and to move forward."

As the motion says, this is about the entire Asian community. I want to say to the member, I agree with much of what you've said, because I'll tell you, one

place in the world that is growing by leaps and bounds and is, quite frankly, probably going to outperform us economically in very short order, is the Asian part of the world.

I am astounded. I have travelled to Japan, to Hong Kong, China, Burma, Thailand, Malaysia, Vietnam and other places, and I'm just amazed at the resourcefulness

of the people within those countries. Many times, within countries where governments are sometimes a hindrance to marketplace principles, such as China and Vietnam, the Chinese people and the

Vietnamese people seem to say, "So what? The government's there. We're just going to keep on doing what we've got to do." They're building their own economy.

In fact, I've got to tell you this story because I think it's quite a fascinating one. My brother and I were just in Vietnam in January for three weeks, and we

travelled from Ho Chi Minh City down to Saigon, Hue and a few other places. You've got to try the beach in Nha Trang -- it's wonderful -- but that's another story.

The interesting part was this: Here we are, I guess about -- what? -- 30 years after the Vietnam War, and I found a couple of things rather remarkable about

30 years after the war. I thought, wow, that doesn't make any sense. If that was Canada and we had fought that kind of war, we'd still be dragging baggage from 30 years ago, because we know we've

Interestingly, there is an understanding within the country that that was then and this is now; we need to move forward. I thought that was rather interesting.

-- for example, I spoke to some former north Vietnamese soldiers and got their take on things. They were saying, "I wasn't a Communist. That's not the reason I fought. I was fighting for

unification." Communism was sort of like the second thing behind, but now that Vietnam is one country, this is a great thing.

So then I talked to some southern Vietnamese, and one guy was particularly interesting. He was a lieutenant colonel in the southern army. This particular

lieutenant colonel did five years in a work camp. So let's be clear here. This guy didn't have it easy: lieutenant colonel, south Vietnamese army, captured after the war by the north Vietnamese,

forced to work in a labour camp for five years. I said to him, "How do you feel?" He said, "Well, the important thing is, we're one country."

I think that is the remarkable thing with the Asian people: They understand that you have to work together, that there is nothing to be gained by working by

way of division. Often, in North America and in Europe, we tend to divide each other into particular groups when we're trying to move a project or something ahead. The Asian people, it's my

understanding -- and I don't pretend to understand it in any great detail -- have more of a sense of community about saying, "All right. That was then; this is now. Let's move forward. We've got to

do what we've got to do." I think that is a remarkable strength of any people, because it means that you can move forward as a community at a much greater pace, and you can make things happen at a

much greater depth, if you're able to do that by way of moving forward as a community.

The other thing that I thought was interesting in speaking to Vietnamese people was this whole sense of government. I'd never been in a Communist country. It

was the first time I had ever travelled into one, so it was kind of an eye-opener. You'd talk to the Vietnamese and you'd start looking around and say, "Well, look at all these businesses."

Everywhere you look, there's somebody doing something. A business is either somebody carrying vegetables on their back on -- what do they call those sticks?

Interjection.

Mr. Bisson: Yes. Whatever it is. You know, where they carry stuff, or somebody has a restaurant on the sidewalk, or somebody is selling

something, or somebody owns a building. There's all kinds of stuff going on. I started to wonder what was going on.

We had a chance as part of the delegation of APF because I was there partly on APF business and partly on my own. I used my own travel points. That way nobody

can come back and say I'm travelling on the government's dime. But the point is this: When we met with the members of the Vietnamese National Assembly, who are for the most

part Communist, I said,

"How do you explain all this entrepreneurship within your economy?" They said, "Well, 60% of the economy is run privately." I said, "Why is that?" He said, "Because the people wouldn't listen to us

anyway." I thought, "Isn't that an interesting comment from a government member?" I said, "What do you guys do?" He said, "We let them do it. We have a minimal form of tax for private businesses."

I think it's a sliding scale of 3% to 5%. But 60% of the economy is run by private individuals. It could be a small business, such as somebody carrying fruits and vegetables on their back, or

somebody owning a number of buildings and having employees and selling products across the world. I thought, "Well, isn't that interesting?" I think it speaks to the heart and soul of Asian people.

They're entrepreneurs in their own right, even though they have this sense of community.

I think that's the schism that we don't get in North America. We tend to think, if you live in a community, it means you've got to be a social democrat or a

socialist, and if you work in business, then you've got to be a capitalist. There's no being both. In Asia, that schism doesn't even seem to exist, in my view. People are saying, "We don't care.

We're Communist, capitalist, whatever. I've got to do what I've got to do, and we're going to do it together as a community."

So what you saw there was a very dynamic economy that's on the move. Everywhere you went, if it was in Hanoi, Saigon, Hue, Halong or wherever you might be,

there was more construction going on than you could shake a stick at. Then you go to a place like Japan -- and I've had the opportunity to go to Japan before -- and I don't need to explain Japan; I

think most people get it. Japan is like a powerhouse. You say to yourself, "Why is that?" I think it's because of the psyche of the Asian people. They come at things from a different perspective.

They come at things from a sense of community and a sense of understanding that when we bring people along with us, it makes it a better thing. At the end, we get a much better product.

I've been to Hong Kong -- again, the same thing. Man, that is one heck of a city to visit. To see and watch the wealth in that area is just unbelievable.

Recently I was talking to a professor who teaches at a city in China -- and I forget which one it is. It's one of the new emerging cities. They're sort of

economic free zones. The guy was saying that something like 10 years ago, the town had 20,000 people in it. It's now about four million. Why? Because Chinese people are flocking to it because it's

an opportunity for them to participate in the economy. Chinese people are very resourceful and want to participate in the economy. Even though the government tries to keep them out, they just come

in and do it. Here's this city -- and I forget the name of it -- it's like four million or five million people, and he says, "You've got to see this place. There are booming things happening."

I regress here, and I'm going to say this: Do we remember a guy by the name of Richard Nixon? Some years ago, Richard Nixon, a former President of the United

States, opened up trade with China, which was a good thing. But the interesting thing is, the Americans, as we know, are quite protectionist, right? The Americans like to speak the line, "Let's

open up the economy," but what they're getting at is, "But don't open it up against me." But anyway, I find it interesting that here was Richard Nixon, who went to China in the early 1970s, met

with Chairman Mao, opened trade and a relationship with the Chinese and said, "We're open for business." Well, I'm telling you, be careful what you ask for, because you might get it. What's

happening in China, even though there's a Communist government in place, is that you've got one heck of an economy. You've got how many consumers? Over a billion. What's the actual number now?

Interjection: It's 1.5 billion.

Mr. Bisson: Yes, 1.5 billion people just in that one country. You've got all those consumers, all those workers and all those entrepreneurs.

The rest of Asia is the same. You've got some really great, dynamic people, who, given the opportunity, are really going to do a bang-up job of developing their economies. I predict that within our

lifetime we're going to see -- we're already starting to see it -- that part of the world become the predominant part of the world when it comes to economic forces.

The United States, I think, is on the way down. The States have really isolated themselves, and I think it's a grave, grave mistake. That's my biggest problem

with George Bush. It's bad enough that he has gone to war, but he's isolating the United States from the rest of the world, in my view, and I think that's really wrong. North America should be

looking at how we are able to include people. We've always been the land of immigrants anyway. How can we include other parts of the world in our ideas about foreign policy and trade so that we're

able to all benefit together? But I just say that that part of the world, the Pacific Rim, is a powerhouse that's going to outstrip us. In fact, we're already starting to see in Canada many

state-run Chinese companies looking at places in the resource sector to spend all this money they've got. They wanted to buy out Stelco. They're interested in buying out Falconbridge. They've got

the bucks to do it. I'm just saying that I think that's a reflection of the attitude and the hard work of the Chinese people, and of Asian people generally.

I say to the member, this is a good motion and we'll certainly support it. There are many things I think your government could be doing to deal with some of

the issues that the community and other communities face in Ontario vis-à-vis new immigrants, new people to this country.

As I said at the beginning -- I want to close on this note -- it is an opportunity after all these years to redress one of the great wrongs that was done to

the Chinese and Japanese people during the Second World War. We have not exactly had a stellar record when it comes to how this country has viewed people from Asia. We saw what happened to the

Chinese as we brought them here to work on the railway. We put a head tax on them. We killed them by the hundreds and almost the thousands when it came to the work camps of the railway. It was a

very tough life.

We embraced the Japanese when they came because we wanted their labour, but in the Second World War we interned them. We didn't intern the Germans or the

Italians, who were at war against us during the Second World War, but for some reason we decided we were going to intern the Japanese. Why? Because they looked different than us, and that

challenged people. The Canadian government, if I remember correctly, has apologized to the Japanese people, and I think that is fitting, but we need to remember our history to make sure we don't

repeat the stupidity this country has done in the past by doing the kinds of things we did to the Asian community vis-à-vis different actions that the federal government, by and large, has

taken.

Provinces aren't exactly lily white in the way they treated people. We just need to look at the history of British Columbia, and even Ontario to some degree,

to see that. But that was in the past. Canada has grown. The provinces have grown. We've become a much more inclusive society. I think it's a great country we live in, and it's great, why? Because

it is a country that says, "Come to Canada. Don't be like the United States and become a big melting pot. Come to Canada, be part of our country and keep your identity." In the end, that identity

is what makes Canada so great. When you go from one end of the country to the other, you can walk down the street and you're able to see different communities from across the world living here in

Canada in a way that you can hardly see anywhere else in the world. I have travelled around the world and I've never seen a place as unique as Canada when it comes to how people come together to

live.

Are there problems that still challenge some of us as Canadians? Of course, but, by and large, most Canadians have embraced it, and I think Canada is much

better for it.

Mr. Peter Fonseca (Mississauga East): It gives me great pleasure to speak today to Bill 113,

An Act to proclaim the month of May as Asian

Heritage Month, and to support my friend the member for Markham. I'm going to be sharing my time with the members from London-Fanshawe, Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh, Thornhill and Davenport.

In my riding of Mississauga East, we have a very ethnically diverse community, and much of that community is made up of Asians or people of Asian ancestry.

Some of the countries they may have descended from would be China, the Philippines, Korea, Thailand, India and Sri Lanka. I've had the opportunity to visit many of these countries. They have a

wonderful culture and they've brought so much to our great city of Mississauga, our great province of Ontario and our great country of Canada.

I can go on and on about how much the Asian community has done for our community in terms of the homes they have bought, how they have beautified the area and

opened up businesses. An example is the huge commercial and tourist centre that is located in my riding at the intersection of Dundas and Cawthra. The Mississauga Chinese Centre is one of North

America's most remarkable tourist and architectural locations. If you visit there, and if those who are watching today decide to visit, it's located at 888 Dundas Street East in Mississauga East.

You can see great sculptures there, replicas of the Great Wall and many of the other treasures we find throughout Asia.

The Asian community has been one that has integrated so well with all the other communities. I can say that the Yee Hong Centre, which is a long-term-care home

within Mississauga, was built primarily by the Chinese community, as they have fundraised so well in the community through the Phoenix Ball. They have allowed other communities also to be part of

that home. I know that my community, the Portuguese Canadian community, has a wing in that home, where they cater to them with the types of foods that they would like to eat and the culture, and

make sure that they are integrated within the community.

They are also a community that's well aware of what it means to be a strong community. They know that their investments in the University of Toronto,

Mississauga, will mean a more knowledgeable and skilled workforce for the city. As I mentioned, at the Yee Hong Centre for long-term care for our seniors, they know that third stage of life, that

end of life. They want to make sure that our seniors live with dignity and respect.

They are a community that keeps on giving. Many of their initiatives are around prevention. They put together the Healthy Living Expo every year in

Mississauga. They also have the Crime Awareness Expo every year in Mississauga. They do many things to make sure we have a strong community, build a strong community. I could go on and on, but I

will allow my colleagues to speak a little bit about the Asian influence in their communities.

Ms. Laurie Scott (Haliburton-Victoria-Brock): I would like to thank the honourable member from Markham for bringing forward his bill today, An

Act to proclaim the month of May as Asian Heritage Month.

The members of the Legislature are often asked to recognize the role that various cultural and ethnic groups play in the economic, cultural and political life

of Ontario. We do this by setting aside days and months in which we can celebrate and showcase their accomplishments and successes. We have passed laws here in Ontario recognizing Portuguese

History and Heritage Month; Irish Heritage Day, brought in by my colleague, the member from Durham; Tartan Day; United Empire Loyalists' Day; and German Pioneers Day.

I know they're just leaving, but I want to welcome the children up in the gallery who have come to see and visit us here today. I think they're quite

representative of the diverse cultural backgrounds that Ontario shares and benefits from. So welcome, all the children in the gallery.

Members have also brought forward bills to recognize such occasions as Italian Heritage Day and Nikkei Heritage Day. Recently we considered Bill 150, the

Celebration of Hellenic Heritage Act. Mr. Wong's bill builds upon the work done by the former MPP from Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale, Raminder Gill. I did not have a chance to sit with Mr. Gill

or to meet with him, but my colleagues who did told me he was a great representative and that he cared a lot about his constituents.

On June 28, 2001, Mr. Gill brought forward Bill 98. The bill would eventually pass and become the South Asian Heritage Act, 2001. Since December 14, 2001, we

in Ontario have celebrated South Asian Heritage Month each day, and May 5 is recognized as South Asian Arrival Day. Raminder Gill should be proud of the work that he did in shepherding the bill

through and having it become a law.

I think we should send this bill to committee for consideration. In principle, I believe it is appropriate to cast the net wider and to extend this recognition

to people from all parts of Asia. We would still recognize those from south Asia, but we would add those from east Asia, central Asia and southeastern Asia.

I'm glad that Mr. Wong is not attempting to repeal the South Asian Heritage Act, and that we will continue to be able to recognize South Asian Arrival Day. Our

country was built on immigrants, each of whom has come to our province and our country with their own story to tell. Immigrants have settled in communities both large and small across Ontario,

enriching our lives.

There was a little-known -- and we're trying to get it more known -- Icelandic settlement that was in my own hometown of Kinmount. It was the first Icelandic

settlement in North America. As Mr. Bisson has mentioned, certainly when they first came over, there were a lot of conditions that we wouldn't allow today, and they were hungry. I know my

great-great-uncle went to pick them up by horse and wagon in the village of Coboconk, which was as far as the train went at that time. They were brought in to help complete the old IB&O, which

only really got into Haliburton and then it finished. They stayed for a short time there.

Mr. Bisson: They'd still like to have the tracks.

Ms. Scott: Yes. The tracks are up, and I'd like the tracks back.

They came and stayed for a short time and then we finally persuaded the federal government to move them to Gimli, Manitoba. I know that Senator Johnson in the

Senate in Ottawa is a descendant of one of the families in Gimli, Manitoba. Linda Lundstrom -- if I can mention fashion -- is descended from one of the Icelandic settlers there.

So we have a blessed diversity in Ontario. It's an economic strength when our businesses are able to talk directly to the customers and providers from every

corner of the world. Celebrating this diversity reminds people of how everyone contributes to the strength and prosperity of Ontario. I am pleased to support the member from Markham's bill

today.

Mr. Khalil Ramal (London-Fanshawe): I want to commend my colleague from Markham for bringing in Bill 113,

An Act to proclaim the month of May

as Asian Heritage Month.

As is well known, Canada is a country of immigrants. People from different parts of the globe come to this country to enjoy freedom and democracy. Three days

ago, I celebrated 15 years of being in Canada. I immigrated on February 14, 1989. It's almost 15 years that I've been in this wonderful country and this wonderful province.

Many colleagues from different sides of the House have spoken on this matter, and all of them in support. I believe it's very important to recognize the

efforts of certain groups that came a long time ago and worked hard to build this province and build this country. The Asian community immigrated a long time ago, and worked hard to become a part

of this country, and especially in Ontario to build and construct this beautiful province. This bill, I believe, will give them some recognition. As we know as a government, we shouldn't take

anyone for granted. Recognition by proclaiming the month of May as a heritage month for Asians is very important, a little payback for the people who worked hard and gave their lives to support

this nation. The member from Markham spoke well in terms of why we have to proclaim that month.

Many people, when they talk about the Asian community, remember only the food. They have wonderful restaurants and wonderful food. Besides that, they

contribute a lot to the economy by building buildings, constructing many different businesses and financial institutions, medical, journalists: In many ways, they participate in our lives. They

worked hard to be a part of the mosaic of our society, to build our diversity and this nation. As we know, the diversity has strengthened our society. It's well received and it's a part of our

logo, all of us, as we celebrate on a yearly basis.

On behalf of London-Fanshawe and my community of London, I am going to support this bill because it's very important to send a great signal to the Asian

community as recognition for their effort and their work. We welcome them and all the people to come to this province.

Mr. Joseph N. Tascona (Barrie-Simcoe-Bradford): I'm very pleased to join the debate with respect to

An Act to proclaim the month of May as

Asian Heritage Month. As Ms. Scott has indicated, the South Asian Heritage Act, 2001 -- it was a bill from Raminder Gill -- received royal assent on December 14, 2001. It deals with south Asian

heritage.

This bill is a little different, I guess, in content, in terms of geography. It deals specifically with areas such as east Asia, south Asia, central Asia and

southeastern Asia. Certainly the member from Markham is showing his respect to the community he is from in bringing this forth. In my riding, which is Barrie-Simcoe-Bradford, there have been some

outstanding individuals who have contributed to the community. I know of the Chau family -- Joe Chau -- Roy Lam and his family and the people who operate the Izumi Japanese restaurant in our

community. They have played a fundamental role not only in making our community better but also in making sure they contribute to its commerce. I know that last Saturday -- unfortunately, I was

previously engaged -- there was the Vietnamese celebration of the new year in my riding. Certainly that shows they are growing stronger and more present with respect to celebrating their cultural

heritage within Barrie-Simcoe-Bradford.

Certainly the recognition of the diversity of this country is something we've seen. I remember that when I was practising law in Toronto in the late 1980s with

the law firm WeirFoulds, my secretary at the time had come over from Hong Kong. She had emigrated with her family. There was a lot of emigration from Hong Kong at that time because of the scare

about what was going to happen with respect to mainland China. A number of individuals came over here and joined the community, sank their roots into the community. That was just an indication of

the types of reasons why people do come over. I think the member for Timmins-James Bay spoke about the building of the railway and the labour that was needed to do that. There are all kinds of

reasons for people to have come to this country and contribute to the betterment of the community.

Certainly the member from Markham is showing his respect and appreciation. Asian Heritage Month, which will be celebrated in May -- this a private member's

bill, and I would expect this to be supported within the House. We'll see whether his government shows the same kind of respect that he's shown to the people who are covered by Asian Heritage

Month, and whether this becomes law at all.

Mr. Mario G. Racco (Thornhill): I will be supporting Bill 113, the Asian Heritage Act. I want to thank my colleague from Markham, Tony Wong,

for bringing the bill to the House to make sure that the Asian community will continue to celebrate the month of May as Asian Heritage Month, but in a formal way. The Asian community has already

celebrated May for many years. In fact, I and my wife, who is Chinese and who was born and grew up in Hong Kong, have been able to participate in such festivities for a number of years. Also, as my

colleague Tony Wong has said, the Senate of Canada has already declared the month of May as Asian Heritage Month. Of course, Bill 113 will allow the province of Ontario to officially declare Asian

Heritage Month.

I also want to say thank you to so many members of the Asian community who have been asking that the province of Ontario do such a thing; specifically, the

Canadian Multicultural Council, Asians in Ontario, specifically Jose Saavedra from the Philippine Independence Day Council, and Dr. Ming-Tat Cheung, from the CMCAO and president of the Chinese

Cultural Centre. They represent a number of Asian communities that are strongly in favour of Bill 113; specifically, the Japanese Canadian Cultural Centre, the Indo-Canadian Association,

Bangladeshi-Canadian Community Services, the Lion City Club of Singapore, Yin Hua Association, the Canada Sri Lanka Association of Ontario, the Macao Club of Toronto, the Korean Canadian Cultural

Centre, the Overseas Renaissance Association of Chinese Culture, and the Vietnamese Association, Toronto. Those are only a few of the Asian organizations that are asking this House to declare May

as Asian Heritage Month.

Approximately 12% of my constituents are Asian. Of course, that's a reflection of Ontario. As my colleague the honourable Tony Wong from Markham has said,

today 12% in Ontario, or 1.5 million people, have Asian heritage. Of course, it's an opportunity for all of us to celebrate our diversity and to celebrate that we have the best. That is our

culture. I thank all the members, because I know the House will fully support Bill 113.

Mr. Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): Congratulations to Tony Wong for introducing Asian Heritage Month. I know, as he said earlier, that this is not

simply a symbolic gesture. Canadians of Asian background helped us to enshrine multiculturalism in our Constitution. Even today, what is it that multicultural Canadians and mainline Canadians are

looking for in the Constitution? This is how multiculturalism breaks down into two pillars, basically. They're looking for, one, equality before the law and opportunity in our schools. So the law

must certainly be colour blind; it cannot be prejudiced. Our children must have the right to go to any school, which must be open to them as Canadians. The second pillar of multiculturalism is to

maintain one's culture and one's tradition. That can be done through language and through some cultural institutions.

Asian Canadians have much to be proud about, but even today we know that multiculturalism has also a third component, and that is that multiculturalism means

business. I know all of us who've been to other countries can see that Canadians of Asian backgrounds mainly come from China, Pakistan, India, Vietnam, Korea or Japan. These are the major

multicultural populations in Canada. We know. We see them on airplanes. We see them doing business with their country of origin. How wonderful it is for us to see that, because it means more taxes,

it means greater participation, and it means they feel they are true Canadians.

So, my friends, it is very clear, when we're looking at the third pillar of Canadians, we know that their contribution is itemized in this book called

Toronto's Many Faces. Each one of these groups is very clearly received in this book because it shows, quite openly, their contribution to this country. Yes, I will sign this book for you, if you

want a copy of it, because you should know the contributions of each one of these groups, who are truly Canadians. Proud Canadians they are, but they must also have the right to be proud of their

own culture.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you to Mr. Wong for producing this great heritage month.

Mr. Jim Brownell (Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh): It is indeed an honour for me to stand in support of my colleague from Markham in

recognizing Bill 113, a bill to proclaim May as Asian Heritage Month. As well, it's an honour for me today to recognize some visitors in the members' gallery. These are students from the University

of Toronto who work with Cathay Magazine, their editor-in-chief being Huan Wang, and her editorial board here from the university. It was just before Christmas that I met them and was able to share

my old European heritage with their new Asian heritage. That was an exciting time.

I had arranged that they would visit this afternoon, but when I heard that the honourable member my friend from Markham was presenting the second reading

debate, I hurriedly got on my BlackBerry and sent a message to the editor-in-chief and said, "Come on over this morning. You will see the House in action. You will see second reading of this bill

that recognizes, supports and encourages the sharing of the heritage and the multiculturalism of this great province, and the sharing of my old United Empire Loyalist heritage with the heritage

that all these new immigrants have brought into our province." That's exciting.

What's especially exciting too is that this bill recognizes May as the month. May is a month when our children are still in school. It's an opportunity to work

this multiculturalism and the heritage of the countries that make up Asia into the curriculum. As a retired educator, I spent many years teaching the history and the heritage of these Asian

countries and talking about the inequities too.

The member from Timmins-James Bay talked about the inequities and the challenges of the past. This is what we have to understand. With this bill and the

proclamation of a special day to recognize the heritage of Asians -- this is a great bill.

I welcome these students from the University of Toronto.

The Deputy Speaker: Mr. Wong, you have two minutes to reply.

Mr. Wong: I want to thank all the members who have spoken, and I do appreciate their support. The member from Oak Ridges spoke about Mon

Sheong, Carefirst, and dragon boat, and I thank him for that.

I also want to talk about the Vedic centre for the South Asian community in my riding and the great work that they've done. I was recently at that centre

attending a tsunami memorial.

I also want to talk about Mr. Tae-Yŏn Hwang, a medical doctor who arrived in Ontario in 1948, as an example of a Korean immigrant who arrived prior to the

mass migration of the 1960s. He worked as a medical intern for several years before settling in Blind River, Ontario. In the early 1960s, he bought eight acres of land and established a poultry

ranch for the purpose of financially assisting the migration of several individuals from Korea to Canada.

By the onset of the Second World War, many Japanese Canadians owned farms, boats, and other property, all of which were confiscated by the government during

the war.

I cannot but feel a bit emotional when I repeat that one Chinese worker died for every mile of the CPR track, yet that community was still hit with the

infamous head tax and the notorious Chinese Immigration Act.

In conclusion, I want to share with all of you a Chinese proverb: "Do unto the seniors of others as you would to your own. Do unto the children of others as

you would to your own." I submit that that is Canadianism.

The Deputy Speaker: Thank you to all the members this morning. The time allowed for private members' public business has expired.

INCOME TAX AMENDMENT ACT

(PUBLIC TRANSIT EXPENSE

TAX CREDIT), 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 MODIFIANT LA LOI

DE L'IMPÔT SUR LE REVENU

(CRÉDIT D'IMPÔT POUR DÉPENSES

DE TRANSPORTS EN COMMUN)

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): We'll deal first with ballot item number 49, standing in the name of Mr. O'Toole.

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

All those in favour, say "aye."

All those opposed, say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

Interjections.

The Deputy Speaker: If we're going to do something, let's get our minds wrapped around it. It's carried.

Pursuant to standing order 96, the bill is referred to --

Mr. John O'Toole (Durham): With your indulgence -- I thank the members first -- I'd refer Bill 137 to the standing committee on finance and

economic affairs.

The Deputy Speaker: Mr. O'Toole has asked that --

Mr. O'Toole: The committee on estimates.

The Deputy Speaker: We're really having trouble making our minds up here this morning.

Mr. O'Toole has asked that the bill be referred to the standing committee on estimates.

Agreed? Agreed.

ASIAN HERITAGE ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005

SUR LE PATRIMOINE ASIATIQUE

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): We shall now deal with ballot item number 50, standing in the name of Mr. Wong.

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

Pursuant to standing order 96 --

Mr. Tony C. Wong (Markham): I would ask that the bill be referred to the social policy committee.

The Deputy Speaker: Mr. Wong has asked that it be referred to the standing committee on social policy.

Agreed? Agreed.

We've dealt with all the business relative to private members. This House is adjourned until 1:30 of the clock.

The House recessed from 1200 to 1330.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

ANGUS THE ELEPHANT

Mr. John O'Toole (Durham): I'm pleased to rise in the House today to pay tribute to my biggest constituent. I might also say he was my biggest

supporter. Angus the elephant weighs in at seven tonnes and stands 11 feet tall. For close to 20 years, he has been a resident of Bowmanville Zoological Park. He is famous for scores of appearances

in movies and ads, not to mention hundreds of visits to downtown Bowmanville and many other communities for parades, fairs and special events.

For most of his 26 years, Angus has brought a glimpse of the African savannah to Ontario. He has been in the Globe and Mail headlines recently because he is

going home. Angus was just two years old when he was captured in South Africa and taken to a zoo in Texas. He was acquired by the Quebec City zoo before being adopted by the Bowmanville zoo in

The Bowmanville zoo has announced plans to return Angus to Kwandwe, a 20,000-hectare privately owned game preserve in South Africa. It is expected he will be

reintroduced into the natural habitat of elephants after making a few more movie appearances.

I'd like to commend my constituents, zoo director Michael Hackenberger, and Dr. Wendy Korver, the veterinarian, along with the entire team at the Bowmanville

zoo for the care they have lavished on Angus over the past years. We're sorry that Angus is leaving town, but we wish him well.

Elephants are known for their great memories. As the old saying goes, they never forget. I'm certain he will not forget me.

YOUTH SCIENCE MONTH

Mrs. Donna H. Cansfield (Etobicoke Centre): Cell mutation, robotics, water pollution, air quality, aeronautics, biochemistry, physics: What do

they all have in common? It's March and it's Youth Science Month. As we speak, 250,000 students from across Ontario are planning to compete in local and regional science fairs. They're hoping to be

among the top young scientists who will earn a spot on the provincial science team and take

part in the Canada-wide science fair to be held in Vancouver in May.

I'm proud to say that our government supports these young people through the Ontario Trillium Foundation grant to the provincial organization called Sci-Tech

Ontario. This funding supports the Stepping Stone Award, which covers the cost for each regional fair to send an additional student to the national fair. This helps to ensure that all deserving

students, regardless of economic means, have an opportunity to showcase their talent and their full potential.

I would like to encourage all members to visit their local and regional fairs. It's a wonderful opportunity to know what the students in your schools are

doing, because the students today are your doctors, your scientists, your technologists and your politicians of tomorrow. It's our responsibility to go out there and support them in these regional

fairs. If we don't support them, not only through our money but through our presence, they won't know that they indeed are our future.

HIGHWAY 7

Mr. Norman W. Sterling (Lanark-Carleton): I rise to remind all members of this House that the residents of the riding of Lanark-Carleton,

which I represent, have been waiting a long, long time to have Highway 7 between Carleton Place and Highway 417 widened to four lanes. Another tragedy occurred on January 24, when a 33-year-old man

from Orléans of Ottawa was killed after being hit in a head-on crash. Only three days later, the highway was closed again because of another serious accident, although mercifully no one was

killed.

The McGuinty government is led by an Ottawa native. Dalton knows the importance of four-laning this particular piece of highway. Next week, most members of the

House will attend the Good Roads conference here in Toronto. I understand that the town of Carleton Place and Lanark county will be meeting with the Minister of Transportation. I call on the

minister to tell them exactly when construction will begin on this most important piece of highway.

LOCAL HEALTH

INTEGRATION NETWORKS

Mr. Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): With a stroke of the pen and an arrogant shrug of the shoulders, the McGuinty Liberals have demolished

district health councils -- historic, long-serving, skilled district health councils -- off the face of Ontario's map. In their stead, we see these mega-jurisdictions that will facilitate only the

de-democratization of health supervision and health care delivery, the centralization of it and the undermining of local control and input, and nowhere more dangerously, dishonestly and deceptively

so than in the regional municipality of Niagara, which this government has thrown into a mega-LHIN -- local health integration network -- with Burlington, Stoney Creek, Hamilton and places as far

away as Norfolk and the county of Brant and Brantford.

This government does a huge disservice and it creates huge new health dangers for the people of Niagara region by doing this. The government members from

Niagara region now have the opportunity, and the duty, to stand with the two opposition members from Niagara to fight this government tooth and nail in their imposition of a totally artificial and

unrealistic boundary and this government's ongoing denial of the perpetual underservicing of Niagara, to the detriment and ill health of Niagarans.

CONSERVATIVE HEALTH

CARE POLICY

Mr. Mike Colle (Eglinton-Lawrence): I'd like to say a few words about John Tory's health care agenda. When questioned about his health care

plan by the Guelph Mercury, they concluded that Tory is "short on concrete alternatives." When reminded of the health care mess left by Mike Harris and Ernie Eves, his answer was, "I wasn't part of

the decision making in the past."

It's not that easy. Tory wants to forget that "health care suffered the steepest decline on his party's watch." Tory does have a plan in mind, as bizarre as it

is. This is what he told the Guelph Mercury. Listen to this: "Using the 407 toll highway as a model" -- can you believe that? -- "he would involve the private sector in all government projects,

from health care to subway construction."

Yes, the 407, the worst model in the private sector for health care. The Conservatives said tolls on 407 would increase by 2%. Do you know what the tolls have

increased by? Two hundred and thirty per cent.. Then the Conservatives sold the 407 for $3 billion. Do you know what it's worth right now? It's worth $12 billion.

Mr. Tory wants to adopt the 407's pay-as-you-go-style health care in Ontario. Do you know what you'll need? You'll need a transponder to get into the hospital.

You'll need a transponder to go see a doctor. Yes, John Tory wants 407-style health care for this province. Can you believe that? The 407 as a model for health care? Even the member for Niagara

Centre can't believe that.

STUDENT'S COMMENTS

Mr. Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): I trust that you were as shocked as I was to read this morning that Jeremy Patfield and his classmates were

ejected from Rideau Hall in Ottawa because Jeremy was overheard to ask what was in fact a very astute question: "Is that the lady who spends the money on the Queen when she comes?" He was of course

referring to the Governor General, who is renowned for her extravagant spending habits.

Rather than being commended for his astuteness, his visit to the Governor General's residence was abruptly terminated. What message does that send to our young

people? We all, at one time or another, have expressed concern at the lack of interest in the political process on the part of youth. Here we see a spark of interest, only to have it snuffed out by

the overzealous staff of the Governor General.

What will the penalty be for any of the grade 5 students who tour here if they are overhead to ask, after seeing the Premier, "Is that the man who broke all

those promises?"? Will they be thrown out as well?

As a legislator, I want to publicly commend Jeremy Patfield for his knowledge of current events and for expressing his interest, and I want to call on the

Governor General to extend a personal apology to Jeremy and to his classmates for the unconscionable treatment they experienced while they were guests in her official residence.

FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL

FISCAL POLICIES

Mr. John Wilkinson (Perth-Middlesex): Fair is fair. Our Premier is spearheading a movement in Ontario to narrow the $23-billion gap between

what Ontario gives to the federal government versus what we get back. We're willing to stand up for what is fair. I rise today to ask the question that's on everybody's mind: Is the official

opposition against Ontario getting its fair share of money from the federal government?

Yesterday, during question period, the acting Leader of the Opposition suggested that the Premier call for a meeting of the Council of the Federation, but his

call comes after the meeting had already happened. They're out of tune and out of touch on this file. The reality is that under the eight years of Conservative rule in Ontario, the fiscal imbalance

between Ontario and the federal government grew.

This is a serious issue, and one that matters to every single Ontarian. I'm sick of the Tory talk. We need action now. I challenge all members of this House to

rise in support of Premier McGuinty's resolution later today. I challenge them to follow our lead. The issue is simple: Ontario pays $23 billion more than we get back. That's not fair, it's not

good business, and we are willing to stand up for what is fair.

I'm proud to be a Canadian. I believe Canada needs a strong Ontario so that they continue to grow and prosper. I ask all members of this House to get on board

now. Stand with us as we fight for Ontarians, as we fight for what is fair. Vote in favour of the Premier's motion and show your support for every single Ontarian we are proud to represent. Fair is

fair.

CITY OF TORONTO

Ms. Kathleen O. Wynne (Don Valley West): I stand as a proud representative of a Toronto riding and as a Toronto citizen. After the previous

government cut funding to cities across the province, Toronto was hit hard, and we can see the effects of those cuts today. The McGuinty government is working to fix the mess that was left behind

by the previous government, in Toronto and around the province but particularly in Toronto.

A healthy and vibrant Toronto is necessary for a healthy and vibrant Ontario. That's why we are investing $91 million in Toronto this year as their share of

the provincial gas tax. That is new and growing money. We've also invested $90 million for budget assistance; $1.05 billion over five years in joint provincial-federal-city funding for the TTC; $1

billion over seven years in GO Transit capital projects; and $3 million in the Toronto District School Board to make facilities more accessible and affordable to not-for-profit groups. That money

is making a difference across the city.

We are committed to forging a stronger, more productive relationship with Toronto. That's why we are continuing to work toward a new City of Toronto Act.

That's what that discussion is about, and it is a good, solid debate we are having with the city.

If the members opposite want fairness for Toronto, they should prove it today by voting in favour of the Premier's resolution. Ontario needs to be treated

fairly by the federal government. Toronto is a vibrant part of Ontario, and we are looking for fairness.

BLACK HISTORY MONTH

Mrs. Linda Jeffrey (Brampton Centre): Mr. Speaker, as you know, the month of February marks Black History Month. The black community plays a

vital role within the social and cultural mosaic of both my riding of Brampton Centre and the province of Ontario.

For more than 20 years, the staff and volunteers of the United Achievers Club of Brampton have demonstrated an extraordinary commitment to providing cultural

programs, assistance for seniors, women's support programs, mentorship initiatives, education and training. As well, every year, the United Achievers Club raises money that they give in the form of

scholarships to students of African and Caribbean descent.

Today I would also like to recognize the achievements of Mr. Leonard Braithwaite. Born on October 23, 1923, Mr. Braithwaite was the first African Canadian to

be elected to a provincial Legislature in Canada. As an MPP, Mr. Braithwaite was the opposition party critic for both the Departments of Labour and Welfare.

In his first speech to the Ontario Legislature in 1964, Mr. Braithwaite spoke out against some Ontario schools that were still practising segregation. His

criticism led to the Ontario government's prohibiting segregated schools in Ontario. As well, Mr. Braithwaite was an advocate for gender equality. For example, in 1966 he pushed for the addition of

female pages in this House, at a time when females were not allowed to be pages. Two years after he began to lobby on this issue, the first female pages started working at Queen's Park.

This month, I encourage all Ontarians to learn about the significant role that African Canadians have played in the history of our province. Both the United

Achievers Club and Leonard Braithwaite are examples of these contributions. Mr. Braithwaite is in our Speaker's gallery today, if we could welcome him.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Let me further extend a welcome to Leonard Braithwaite, who has set the path for many of us. He was the

representative of the riding of Etobicoke in the 27th, 28th and 29th Parliaments. So I too, as all of us, would like to welcome you to the House today, Mr. Braithwaite.

MOTIONS

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

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

private members' public business.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Is there unanimous consent for the House leader to put forward that motion? Agreed.

Hon. Mr. Duncan: I move that, pursuant to standing order 96(g), notice be waived for ballot item 51.

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

The member from Markham.

Mr. Tony C. Wong (Markham): Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to move second and third readings of Bill 113, Asian Heritage Act, 2005.

The Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? No.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

Hon. Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: The Min