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

December 18, 2000

37th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2000-Dec-18 vol. A (PDF)

L120A - Mon 18 Dec 2000 / Lun 18 déc 2000

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

RAMSEY INDUSTRIAL ROAD

NATALIE DAYNEKA

FOOD SAFETY

DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

INJURED WORKERS

JOYCE FEE

TED THORNLEY

NORM JARY

VISITORS

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

CITY OF KAWARTHA LAKES ACT, 2000 / LOI DE 2000 SUR LA CITÉ DE KAWARTHA LAKES

VICTIM EMPOWERMENT ACT, 2000 / LOI DE 2000 SUR L'HABILITATION DES VICTIMES

GREATER JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS ACCOUNTABILITY ACT, 2000 / LOI DE 2000 SUR L'OBLIGATION DE RENDRE DES COMPTES EN MATIÈRE DE JUSTICE

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

ORAL QUESTIONS

EDUCATION

MEAT INSPECTION

EDUCATION

ANIMAL HEALTH LABORATORY

FAMILY RESPONSIBILITY OFFICE

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

CHILD POVERTY

INJURED WORKERS

ROAD SAFETY

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

IMMIGRATION AND REFUGEE POLICY

PETITIONS

RAMSEY INDUSTRIAL ROAD

CAMPING FEES

ACCESS TO MEDICAL PROFESSION

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

SCHOOL EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES

REGISTRATION OF VINTAGE CARS

NORTHERN HEALTH TRAVEL GRANT

FRAIS DE TRANSPORT AUX FINS MÉDICALES

LONG-TERM CARE

NORTHERN HEALTH TRAVEL GRANT

ORDERS OF THE DAY

BALANCED BUDGETS FOR BRIGHTER FUTURES ACT, 2000 / LOI DE 2000 SUR DES BUDGETS ÉQUILIBRÉS POUR UN AVENIR MEILLEUR

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

RAMSEY INDUSTRIAL ROAD

Mr Michael A. Brown (Algoma-Manitoulin): Again I rise to bring to the attention of the Minister of Northern Development and Mines and this House the need to make the Ramsey industrial road, sometimes called the Sultan road, into a provincial highway.

As members would know, this road is a critical transportation link for health care, business and tourism. For too long, this Domtar industrial road has impeded safe and expeditious travel to the east.

I have asked the Minister of Northern Development and Mines to form a partnership with the communities involved, with Domtar and with the provincial government to upgrade this road in a staged, safe and expeditious way. He has told me this is not a priority.

Today I will be presenting on petitions over 6,000 names of people who share these concerns. I want to thank Chapleau Mayor Earle J. Freeborn for his continued and persistent work on this important public issue and for making certain that the petitions were circulated. Mr Freeborn has the support of communities from Sudbury through to Thunder Bay, including Wawa, Dubreuilville, White River, Manitouwadge, Hornepayne, Schreiber, Nipigon, Marathon and a multitude of others.

Clearly, for northern people this project is a priority. Mr Hudak needs to rethink his government's priorities. The status quo is not acceptable. We need action and we need it now.

NATALIE DAYNEKA

Mr Brian Coburn (Ottawa-Orléans): With millions of people around the world infected with the HIV disease, the story of an Ontarian doing her part to help infected children in this country speaks volumes. Ottawa-Orléans resident Dr Natalie Dayneka has received a nationwide award for her work with HIV-infected children: the Commitment to Care Award by Pharmacy Practice magazine.

Dr Dayneka is a pharmacist who has worked as a clinical specialist at CHEO since 1993. Her duties include finding proper dosages while factoring into consideration a patient's age, and she works in creating more favourable ways of administering medication.

Dr Dayneka must conduct much of her own research, use medical chat rooms on the Internet and communicate with drug companies to come up with a proper dosage for kids because drug companies are focusing on the bigger market in their production: HIV drugs for adults.

There were an estimated 45,000 to 53,000 Canadians living with the HIV infection at the end of 1999, and Dr Dayneka is unique: she is one of only three pediatric pharmacists in Canada specializing in HIV treatment for children. For that reason, she has created dosing charts that have been distributed coast to coast.

I congratulate Dr Daneyka on her award and I commend her for the dedication that she has shown in treating our kids living with HIV.

FOOD SAFETY

Mr Steve Peters (Elgin-Middlesex-London): Last month in this Legislature the Minister of Agriculture said food safety is a top priority of his government. I was wondering whether the minister or any of his staff had a chance to read the Toronto Star this weekend. It demonstrates quite clearly that it's not the case.

The minister claims he's working with health and natural resources on developing a strategy that gives Ontario consumers more trust and confidence in food safety, all the while cutting the number of food investigators from seven to four. That's supposed to lead to trust and confidence in food safety? Hardly.

Uninspected meat is a risk to public health. Officials warn of rabies, tuberculosis, salmonella and E coli. A Ministry of Health memo says uninspected carcasses have turned up on banquet halls across this province, yet this minister says, "I have to assume we're catching all the people who are not appropriately putting the meat through a licensed plant." We owe a debt of gratitude to the Toronto Star for pointing out the reality.

What does this government feel is adequate punishment for putting public health at risk? A $200 to a $500 fine-a pittance.

The story has been in the Toronto media for a month. This city is the largest consumer of meat in the province. Ontario farmers produce the cleanest, safest and highest-quality meat in the world, yet this minister sat idly by while the reputation of our agri-food industry has been once again sullied by a few bad apples.

He's the minister of agriculture. It is incumbent on him to ensure consumer confidence and promote Ontario's agricultural industry. He's failed miserably.

DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): I'm pleased to rise in the House today to speak about one of our most important responsibilities not only as legislators but also as Ontarians, and that is the responsibility to provide assistance for those with developmental disabilities.

It was my privilege last Friday to be part of a presentation of a cheque of more than $1 million to the Community Living associations of Durham region so that they can provide residential assistance and accommodation for 20 people with developmental disabilities.

This fund is part of a $50-million new investment announced by the Ministry of Community and Social Services last spring. It will provide for adults who are living at home with aging parents, adults whose needs change as they age and young adults moving from the child welfare system.

It has often been said that society may be judged by how it treats its weakest members. I believe that we look to Durham for examples of effective, compassionate leadership from agencies like the Central Seven of Port Perry, the Oshawa/Clarington Association for Community Living, Christian Horizons and the Durham Association of Family Respite Services, along with the Ajax Pickering Whitby Association for Community Living. These agencies ensure that people with special needs are able to remain close to their families and that supportive systems are in place.

I would like to thank the members of the board and volunteers Peter Dill, Glenn Taylor, Pam Domingos, Paul Burston, Mayah Sevink, Steven Finlay and the many volunteers and families that make services work for the people in Durham who really need our help.

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

Mr Ted McMeekin (Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Aldershot): I'm pleased the Minister of Municipal Affairs is in the House. The rationale for the Harris government's move to various amalgamations has been the creation of smaller, more efficient governments providing better quality services at lower cost.

This clearly hasn't been the case in Metro Toronto, where we've seen a quarter-million-dollar budget shortfall balloon to over $1 billion, projected, and His Worship there talking about a projected bankruptcy with the downloading of social housing.

It didn't work with the three hospitals in Hamilton, none of which were running at a deficit and which then had a deficit balloon to $40 million, nor with the school boards' amalgamation, which has left kids at risk in terms of transportation policy and has been pitting community against community around school closings.

Now we read from the government's appointed transition board chair and other elected officials that there may be up to a 10% tax increase, notwithstanding the area rating, and that doesn't include the $100-million projected infrastructure shortfall. They also note that there's been no commitment to date from this government for adequate transitional funding, currently projected at $46 million, twice the original projection.

It's the Christmas season, and the people of my riding want some assurance that legislation will be put in place to protect them from the very tax increases we were promised wouldn't occur and that adequate transitional funding for this new city that has been created will in fact be provided.

INJURED WORKERS

Mr David Christopherson (Hamilton West): I am proud to give voice to a number of injured workers who are here from United Steelworkers of America local 7135. They work at National Steel Car. They're here in the gallery today, and they're here to protest the fact that Bill 99 is denying them the opportunities that they would have had under the previous legislation that existed in this province.

This group of workers has been wronged, in my opinion and that of the member from Hamilton East. We've both attended a public meeting of all these workers. They've been wronged by the company, they have been wronged by this government in terms of the legislation that they've rammed down the throats of injured workers and they've been wronged by the board, which to date has not guaranteed them that their rehab programs and their money is going to be continued after their EI runs out, which is where they are now.

There were about 30 people in that room, and I can tell you that these workers, who were injured through no fault of their own, are desperate in terms of what their future is. We said at the time, when you rammed Bill 99 through, that there were going to be innocent injured workers that were hurt, and their families were hurt.

We are a week away from Christmas. They have no idea how they're going to manage to put food on the table next year, and at the end of the day it all lies at the doorstep of Mike Harris and this anti-worker government.

JOYCE FEE

Mr R. Gary Stewart (Peterborough): I'm very proud to have attended the Order of Ontario ceremony last week when one of my constituents, Joyce Fee, was a recipient.

Joyce Fee, the first female principal in Peterborough county, was instrumental in initiating educational reform for instruction of children with disabilities. A single mother of five, she became founder and leader of many support groups and always has been an advocate for children.

Joyce initiated several programs, including Host Family Relief, Family Support Worker, Peterborough Project for Special Needs Adults and Community Action Network and Special Olympics. As well, she has been an active member of Soroptimist International of Peterborough for over 22 years.

In 1995, Joyce received the eastern Canada region's Woman of Distinction Award for her outstanding achievements in her personal, professional, business and volunteer activities.

My congratulations, Joyce, on your achievement.

TED THORNLEY

Mr Dave Levac (Brant): I stand solemnly and with great sadness as I would like to comment on the recent and untimely death of Ted Thornley, who was the president of the Police Association of Ontario.

The Police Association of Ontario, representing over 13,000 municipal police personnel, is deeply saddened by the loss of their president, who passed away early Friday morning at the very young age of 49.

Mr Thornley led a life dedicated to community policing and the understanding that in order for police to be effective, they need to be an integral part of the greater community. He was a police constable with the Waterloo Regional Police Service and became involved with their association in 1974. In 1988, he was elected as president of the Waterloo Regional Police Association and has served in that capacity since then. Ted Thornley was then elected to the board of directors of the Police Association of Ontario in 1995 and was serving as president.

Ted Thornley was greatly admired by many people, including myself. I had the privilege and honour of meeting him. Ted led a life dedicated to his family and friends, the greater community as well as his continuous dedication to his role as both a police officer and in particular president of the Police Association of Ontario. He will be greatly missed by everyone here, and I know that all of us here share that.

I would like to take this opportunity, on behalf of Dalton and the Liberal caucus and I hope the rest of the House, to send our sincere condolences to his wife, Karen, and their three children, Vicki, Kerri and Jamie, during this time of sorrow. Our prayers and thoughts are with him and his family.

Speaker, I would also ask for unanimous consent for one moment of silence.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Is there unanimous consent? Agreed. If all members and our friends could join in a moment of silence for our colleague.

The House observed a moment's silence.

NORM JARY

Mrs Brenda Elliott (Guelph-Wellington): He still begins every presentation with "Hi, everybody" in his booming, enthusiastic sportscaster voice. His remarks are still always prepared lovingly by his wife, Jean. I rise today to pay tribute to a fine gentleman and a fellow politician, loved and respected in Guelph, Mr Norm Jary. He began his career as a sports and news broadcaster for CJOY Radio, but today I would like to honour him for his 37 years of dedication in serving the public as a member of Guelph city council, 16 of those as our mayor.

Norm had a personal interest in parks and recreation, consistently serving on that particular committee. This commitment was celebrated last June when the community park was renamed the Norm Jary Park. He has worked tirelessly to beautify our city, showing up on things like Communities in Bloom and even in his own garden, which is often included in the Guelph Historical Society of garden tours.

Whether it was supporting the development of shopping malls, Exhibition Park, the Victoria Road or Centennial arenas, or establishing the Macdonald Stewart Art Gallery or the Guelph Arts Council, Norm worked tirelessly to encourage ingenuity and competitiveness in our city. In 1993, he was honoured with the commemorative medal for the 125th anniversary of the Confederation of Canada, granted only to citizens who have contributed to the quality of life in Canada and in their communities all across this great country of Canada.

Norm's genuine love for his community and his family are legendary in our city. He was an outstanding leader and in his retirement is to be commended for his varied contributions to Guelph-Wellington.

VISITORS

Hon John Snobelen (Minister of Natural Resources): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: Today we had the opportunity to recognize the Ontario Parks bursary awards for young people who have been exemplary in their service to the public and our parks. Some 40 of these young people received a $500 bursary, with help from our corporate sponsors, and four of those young people are in the gallery today. I'd like to introduce them: Carol Reesor, Alex Curry, Ryan Good and Valerie Cavendar.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

CITY OF KAWARTHA LAKES ACT, 2000 / LOI DE 2000 SUR LA CITÉ DE KAWARTHA LAKES

Mr Clement moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 170,

An Act respecting the new municipality of The Corporation of the City of Kawartha Lakes / Projet de loi 170, Loi concernant la nouvelle municipalité appelée The Corporation of the City of Kawartha Lakes.

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

The minister for a short statement.

Hon Tony Clement (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): Briefly, this legislation will help the city of Kawartha Lakes meet taxpayer needs and save taxpayers' money when it comes into existence on January 1. The legislation has been put forward at the request of the Kawartha Lakes transition board, which includes the mayor-elect of the new city. If passed by the Legislature, the legislation would give the transition board a few new powers to enter into certain agreements on behalf of the new city. It would also give the new city additional authority to allocate certain municipal costs to taxpayers in specific areas of the city.

I'd like to take this opportunity to thank the transition board for their hard work and dedication to the new city.

VICTIM EMPOWERMENT ACT, 2000 / LOI DE 2000 SUR L'HABILITATION DES VICTIMES

Mr Sterling moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 171,

An Act to give victims a greater role at parole hearings, to hold offenders accountable for their actions, to provide for inmate grooming standards, and to make other amendments to the Ministry of Correctional Services Act / Projet de loi 171, Loi visant à accroître le rôle des victimes aux audiences de libération conditionnelle et à responsabiliser les délinquants à l'égard de leurs actes, prévoyant des normes relatives à la toilette des détenus et apportant d'autres modifications à la

Loi sur le ministère des Services correctionnels.

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

All those in favour of the motion will please say "aye."

All those opposed will please say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1351 to 1356.

The Speaker: All those in favour of the motion will please stand and be recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

Arnott, Ted

Baird, John R.

Beaubien, Marcel

Clark, Brad

Clement, Tony

Coburn, Brian

Dunlop, Garfield

Ecker, Janet

Elliott, Brenda

Flaherty, Jim

Galt, Doug

Gill, Raminder

Hardeman, Ernie

Hodgson, Chris

Hudak, Tim

Jackson, Cameron

Johns, Helen

Klees, Frank

Kormos, Peter

Marland, Margaret

Mazzilli, Frank

Molinari, Tina R.

Munro, Julia

Mushinski, Marilyn

O'Toole, John

Runciman, Robert W.

Sampson, Rob

Snobelen, John

Spina, Joseph

Sterling, Norman W.

Stewart, R. Gary

Stockwell, Chris

Tilson, David

Tsubouchi, David H.

Turnbull, David

Wettlaufer, Wayne

Witmer, Elizabeth

Wood, Bob

Young, David

The Speaker: All those opposed will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Clerk of the House (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 39; the nays are 0.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

The minister for a short statement.

Hon Norman W. Sterling (Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Minister of Correctional Services, Government House Leader): Victims of crime and their families have told us that living in the aftermath of crime is a difficult and daunting challenge. If this bill was passed, victims would have greater participation in parole hearings.

The bill will also implement a zero-tolerance policy for acts of violence against correctional staff; it will establish standards of professional ethics for all staff involved in providing correctional services, including those employed by both public and private operators; it will provide for grooming and appearance standards for inmates serving sentences in correctional institutes relevant to security, health and safety issues; and it will implement a process to monitor, intercept or block communications between inmates and others where reasonable for the safety and security of other persons and institutions.

GREATER JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS ACCOUNTABILITY ACT, 2000 / LOI DE 2000 SUR L'OBLIGATION DE RENDRE DES COMPTES EN MATIÈRE DE JUSTICE

Mr Wood moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 172,

An Act to provide for greater accountability in judicial appointments / Projet de loi 172, Loi visant à accroître l'obligation de rendre compte en ce qui concerne les nominations à la magistrature.

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

All those in favour of the motion will please say "aye."

All those opposed will please say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1400 to 1405.

The Speaker: All those in favour of the motion will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

Arnott, Ted

Baird, John R.

Chudleigh, Ted

Clark, Brad

Clement, Tony

Coburn, Brian

Dunlop, Garfield

Ecker, Janet

Elliott, Brenda

Flaherty, Jim

Galt, Doug

Gill, Raminder

Hardeman, Ernie

Hodgson, Chris

Hudak, Tim

Jackson, Cameron

Johns, Helen

Klees, Frank

Marland, Margaret

Mazzilli, Frank

Molinari, Tina R.

Munro, Julia

Mushinski, Marilyn

O'Toole, John

Runciman, Robert W.

Sampson, Rob

Snobelen, John

Spina, Joseph

Sterling, Norman W.

Stewart, R. Gary

Stockwell, Chris

Tilson, David

Tsubouchi, David H.

Turnbull, David

Wettlaufer, Wayne

Witmer, Elizabeth

Wood, Bob

Young, David

The Speaker: All those opposed to the motion will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Nays

Agostino, Dominic

Bartolucci, Rick

Boyer, Claudette

Bradley, James J.

Brown, Michael A.

Caplan, David

Christopherson, David

Churley, Marilyn

Colle, Mike

Cordiano, Joseph

Crozier, Bruce

Curling, Alvin

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duncan, Dwight

Kennedy, Gerard

Kormos, Peter

Levac, David

Marchese, Rosario

McGuinty, Dalton

McLeod, Lyn

McMeekin, Ted

Peters, Steve

Phillips, Gerry

Pupatello, Sandra

Sergio, Mario

Smitherman, George

Clerk of the House (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 38; the nays are 26.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

The member for London West for a short statement.

Mr Bob Wood (London West): This bill is intended to provide greater public accountability for judicial appointments. It proposes to do that by making the appointment process for justices of the peace the same as that for judges: having the Judicial Appointments Advisory Committee publish the criteria used in assessing candidates, permitting the Legislature by resolution to set or change these criteria, having the names of all the people found qualified and suitable for appointment submitted to the Attorney General for consideration and requiring approval by the Legislature of all proposed appointments before they become effective.

For the first time in the history of this province, the Legislature would set the criteria for judicial appointments and the Attorney General would be responsible to the Legislature for following them in each and every appointment. Surely, it is time to take this process out of the backrooms and put it fully in the hands of all the elected representatives. Transparency and democracy do work.

Mr Mike Colle (Eglinton-Lawrence): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I seek once again unanimous consent to allow for the singing of O Canada at the beginning of daily proceedings in this Legislature. As you know, the students of this province, by this government, sing O Canada. There is no reason we can't sing our national anthem in this Legislature.

The Speaker: Is there unanimous consent? I'm afraid I heard some noes.

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

Hon Norman W. Sterling (Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Minister of Correctional Services, Government House Leader): I move that pursuant to standing order 9(c)(ii), the House shall meet from 6:45 pm to 12 midnight on Monday, December 18, 2000, for the purpose of considering government business.

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

All those in favour of the motion will please say "aye."

All those opposed will please say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it. Carried.

Hon Mr Sterling: I move that pursuant to standing order 9(c)(ii), the House shall meet from 6:45 pm till 12 midnight on Tuesday, December 19, 2000, for the purpose of considering government business.

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

All those in favour of the motion will please say "aye."

All those opposed will please say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it. Carried.

ORAL QUESTIONS

EDUCATION

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the Minister of Education. Last Thursday I presented in this Legislature a peace plan. That plan respects your government's bottom line: your insistence that Ontario teachers provide 1,250 minutes of classroom instruction every week. At the same time, it will restore a sense of peace to our high schools and it will restore a positive learning climate, which the Education Improvement Commission has told us is sorely lacking.

You now have had three days to more fully consider my peace plan. At the same time, Madam Minister, you have also had an opportunity to consider how well the plan is being received by the broader public. Having had that opportunity to reconsider and to gauge the public reaction, will you now agree to support our peace plan to put our students first?

Hon Janet Ecker (Minister of Education): The Education Improvement Commission very clearly said that politics in the classroom-if people were bringing politics into the classroom regardless of who they were-was wrong and would undermine student achievement. I certainly agree with that, and this government agrees with that.

This one suggestion that the honourable member keeps on about is a suggestion the OSSTF, the public high school union, brought forward some years ago. An arbitrator has subsequently ruled that it does not achieve any of the government's objectives. The honourable member keeps saying it's a win-win-win, or a compromise for all, and asks taxpayers for another $150 million and asks students for a longer workday. Where's the compromise on the teacher union side?

Mr McGuinty: Minister, this is going to present a real and difficult challenge for you. I am asking you to put Ontario students first. I am going to be asking you about this all week long, and I'll be asking you to do the same thing time and time again: put the politics aside and put our students first.

You've had an opportunity to gauge the public reaction to this proposal. You've seen the Toronto Sun, you've seen the Hamilton Spectator, you've seen the Toronto Star and you've seen the Ottawa Sun. These newspapers represent the full spectrum of political diversity in Ontario and they've all said the same thing: this plan is worthy of serious consideration and it's high time that we, the legislators in this House, worked together to put our students first. That's exactly what our plan is all about, Madam Minister. Why won't you work with me to put our students first?

Hon Mrs Ecker: First of all, we were quite prepared to work with the honourable member to put the students of Hamilton-Wentworth first, and he refused and did not support back-to-work legislation. Second, I met with all our education partners some weeks ago. They put forward a number of proposals that are worthy of study. We are looking at those. As recently as today I met with representatives of the teacher unions to talk about many proposals. We are doing the work on that to solve these things.

It's interesting that, on one hand, last week the Liberal Party was standing up saying we have a teacher shortage and was worried that there wouldn't be teachers in the classroom. Then, the same week, they put forward a proposal that would actually make the situation worse. It is not a helpful policy proposal to make an even worse challenge for school boards trying to hire qualified and good teachers at the front of the classroom.

Mr McGuinty: I've heard from school boards, I've heard from teachers, I've heard from parents and I've heard from students. I've heard from no one who stands against giving very serious consideration to this peace plan, save and except for you. Apparently, the only real impediment to restoring peace in our schools is you, the person in charge of our schools.

Here's a call I got from a parent last week when she heard about the peace plan. Cathy Balsys has three students attending Martingrove Collegiate, just outside Toronto. She says, "This plan would truly give our kids more quality time, while restoring dignity to our teachers and harmony in our schools. I am so pleased that we are finally putting the needs of my kids first."

Madam Minister, if you don't sense this, I at least sense a heavy responsibility to try to reintroduce some sense of stability and to eliminate the turmoil inside public education today. This is the kind of thing that can't wait until after Christmas. I put forward a positive, substantive policy proposal. It has been well received in many quarters. If you don't agree with this, Madam Minister, where is your proposal?

Hon Mrs Ecker: Let's talk about some of the proposals. OSSTF said the workload, set almost three years ago, wasn't workable. There have been strikes over it; there's been an election over it. It was set three years ago; they said it wasn't workable. So we compromised on that this spring, and we put forward 64 million taxpayers' dollars to make that happen. But they still weren't satisfied.

Then they said job loss was going to be a problem, so we put forward $263 million of the taxpayers' money to hire more teachers to have smaller classes to try to deal with the workload. They still weren't satisfied. We gave them flexibility in how they could implement it, so that the teacher who goes out and does the extracurricular activities gets the extra time to do them. They rejected that; they wouldn't agree to that. They're still not satisfied. Now, through the Liberal Party, the OSSTF brings forward an idea that was rejected three years ago and says it is the magical solution.

I didn't hear any union leaders standing up and saying extracurricular activities are going to be miraculously restored in our schools-

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

Mr McGuinty: The second set of questions is to the same minister. The matter is so important to us that we're prepared to devote the time and energy necessary to helping the minister see the light in this matter.

Minister, there are probably 100 reasons that you are prepared to articulate here and during the rest of the week as to why we shouldn't move forward with this peace plan. But there is one overwhelming, predominant reason why you and I have to move forward with this peace plan. It's simply because our kids aren't getting the quality education to which they are entitled. That's what it's all about.

I can tell you that Ontario families have the same kind of rule right across the province. When it comes to matters that are in the interests of our children, kids come first. That's exactly what this plan is about. It's about putting our kids first.

Since I introduced this bill in this House, Madam Minister, I've heard from teachers and school boards, and do you know what they're telling me? They are sick and tired of the fighting, and they want a way out. They know, in their heart of hearts, that what they're supposed to be doing is putting the interests of our students first. That's what this peace plan is all about. Why won't you help me, Madam Minister? Let's put students first.

Hon Mrs Ecker: With all due respect to the honourable member, peace is fine, but what parents want is better schools. That's what we need: increased student achievement.

The standards that are being put in place across this province, the proposals that we were elected to implement-stronger curriculum, standardized teaching, testing, teacher testing programs-those are the standards that we were elected to implement that will achieve higher student achievement for our students and better schools.

This proposal is asking the taxpayers for another $150 million, asking our students to spend a longer time in their school day. So, more work for students, more paid by taxpayers, reduced workload by teachers. That is not the solution that we need for all of the problems. If this means that the teacher union that is objecting to all of this, that is putting forward this proposal, is now prepared to work with this government-

The Speaker: Order. The minister's time is up.

Mr McGuinty: Minister, you've taken $1.8 billion out of public education in Ontario. I think putting $150 million back in public education in order to give peace a chance is a damn good investment.

Some 75% of our high school students aren't getting the extracurricular activities to which they are entitled. If you don't understand just how urgent the matter is, I'm going to refer you, one more time, to the Education Improvement Commission, your own commission, which just released its final report and said the following:

"We cannot overstate our concern about the reduction in extracurricular activities. Research shows that students who take

part in extracurricular activities enjoy greater overall success in school. If the current impasse continues, it's clear that more students will drop out and fewer will succeed." This, from your own commissioner.

We have a full-blown, genuine crisis in Ontario high schools. I sense a heavy responsibility and my caucus senses a heavy responsibility to try to do something positive, something proactive, and that's what we've done through this peace plan. If you don't like this plan, Madam Minister, give us your plan. Table it here right now.

Hon Mrs Ecker: First of all, the Education Improvement Commission talked about compromise, not capitulation. Secondly, the money in the education system today is more than it was in 1995 and 1996. In 1995 and 1996, it was $12.9 billion; today it is $13.5 billion.

Secondly, today, as we speak, there are thousands of teachers who are-

Interjection.

The Speaker: The member for Toronto Centre-Rosedale, come to order, please. Minister.

Hon Mrs Ecker: The honourable member can talk all he wants about trying to buy peace. It is not about buying peace; it is about putting forward quality reforms that will help us get to better schools, because that's what parents want. We can try to buy off the union, as the honourable member is recommending. I would prefer to sit down with our education partners, as we are, to find out solutions that will work. I know the honourable member thinks he can wave a magic wand and-

Interjection.

The Speaker: Order. The minister's time is up.

Mr McGuinty: Minister, you know what is happening out there. Parents are in absolute dismay, if not disgust, at what has been happening inside our high schools. They want solutions; they don't want politics. They want all of us to work together to fix it. They are sick and tired and disgusted with the constant in-fighting and bickering.

We've done something that is, admittedly, out of character with opposition parties. We've put forward a substantive policy proposal. We think the matter is so important that we put something forward, we've tendered it to you, we've made it available to the public. It has been well received in virtually every quarter except by you and your government, Madam Minister.

If you, for some reason, feel that our plan has some serious shortcomings, then let's talk about those. If you feel that it is beyond repair, beyond redemption, then you have one option alone: to put forward, before this House rises for the Christmas break, to introduce in this House a bill that will be acceptable to our teachers, to the government, to parents, to students and the school board; a bill, in short, that puts our students first.

If you fail to do that, Madam Minister, that tells me and it tells our parents and it tells our students, most importantly, you have no genuine commitment to peace in our schools and you have no genuine commitment to putting Ontario students first.

Hon Mrs Ecker: The honourable member says that peace in our schools is the goal and the objective. I would like to remind the honourable member that when we did have peace in our schools, we had declining standards. When we did have so-called peace, this magical period that the opposition likes to talk about, some magical time when there was peace in our schools, we also had student achievement declining.

International tests are showing that the higher standards are starting to pay off. We actually do have-

Interjection.

The Speaker: Please, this is the last warning for the member for Toronto Centre-Rosedale. One more and you'll be out for the day.

Hon Mrs Ecker: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.

The international tests are showing that our higher standards are starting to pay off. That's what parents want to see: better achievement for their students.

Secondly, yes, parents are frustrated. Why are they frustrated? Because some teachers are choosing to take away extracurricular activities from their kids. That is wrong; that is not supportable. Parents have objected to that, and we are going to continue to work with the teacher unions-

The Speaker: The minister's time is up. New question.

MEAT INSPECTION

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Deputy Premier. Do you think your government is doing enough to stop the operation of illegal slaughterhouses in Ontario and to stop meat that is slaughtered in filthy and unhygienic conditions from being sold in Ontario restaurants and in some food stores?

Hon Ernie L. Eves (Deputy Premier, Minister of Finance): The Minister of Agriculture will be able to answer that question.

Hon Ernie Hardeman (Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs): Thanks very much to the member opposite for the question. The illegal meat trade is a problem and we are concerned about it. Our ministry is working hard to track down any offenders and lay the appropriate charge. Making sure that food is safe is a top priority for our ministry.

Here in Ontario we have one of the best food systems in the world. Unfortunately, some have chosen to live outside the system. I want to stress to the member that we are taking all allegations of selling uninspected meat very seriously. We have a highly trained and specialized enforcement team that responds to these calls. The alleged illegal plants monitored in the Toronto Star story today are currently under investigation.

Mr Hampton: We saw the Ministry of the Environment dramatically cut back on the number of inspectors who were out there inspecting water treatment facilities and ensuring that water treatment facilities were operating properly. The public probably doesn't know that the Ministry of Agriculture reduced by half the number of inspectors who should be out there making sure that illegal slaughterhouses can't operate. You say you're concerned. The fact of the matter is, the only thing you've done about this is reduce the number of inspectors who should be out there protecting the health and safety of Ontario people. That's all you've done.

The problem just in one region, in York region outside this city, is such that one official says there are more than 20 illegal slaughterhouses there. That is, as we know, more a suburban neighbourhood now than a farm area. We know that there have been a number of grocery stores that have been convicted of selling illegal meat since 1997.

What are you doing, other than cutting the number of inspectors who are supposed to be out there ensuring that illegal slaughterhouses don't operate? What are you doing other than cutting the protection of health and safety?

Hon Mr Hardeman: In the past year, we've moved the focus of our investigative resources on to food safety issues rather than fraud investigation and internal human resources matters. However, the number of enforcement officers dedicated to food safety and illegal issues has not decreased.

We also want to say that we have reorganized our investigative branch in order to increase efficiency and improve effectiveness. We've consolidated important resources with the Ministry of Natural Resources. Incidentally, those changes have paid off. In the eight months since the partnership was formed, 62 charges have been laid, considerably more than over the same period last year. Of that number, there have already been 18 convictions, with over 40 court cases still coming out between now and January. This is more convictions for selling uninspected meat than the previous three years combined. We are concerned about food safety and we are working to make sure that we eliminate-

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Final supplementary.

Mr Hampton: All I can say for this minister is that he's changed his line a little bit. When this issue was first raised in the media, his response was, "Well, there are fewer slaughterhouses in Ontario. Therefore, there's not much of a problem."

The reality is that yes, there are fewer slaughterhouses that are operating legally; there are more slaughterhouses that are now operating illegally. The reason they're able to do so is because you've cut the number of inspectors who are out there dedicated to shutting down the illegal slaughterhouses and you've cut the number of inspectors overall. That's what is happening. Public health officials acknowledge that illegal meat in the thousands of kilograms is being sold in restaurants and small grocery stores across the greater Toronto area, never mind the rest of Ontario.

Everybody else out there knows about the problem. The only thing you've done about it is cut the number of meat inspectors overall and cut the number of inspectors who are supposed to be dealing with illegal abattoirs as well.

Minister, will it take another Walkerton before your government understands that your government, all governments, has a job to do in protecting the health and safety of our citizens and that the private sector isn't going to do it for you? What are you going to do to address this problem now, before somebody becomes seriously ill?

Hon Mr Hardeman: I want to say that not only at present but in the term of the previous government, your government, and in the term of the Liberal government the Provincial Auditor said that we must change the way we are doing our meat inspection in Ontario. We are not getting good value for the inspection process. One of the things he suggested was that we make sure we direct our resources toward enforcement of the meat inspection and enforcement of the illegal slaughter.

We have taken that initiative. We have put the enforcement of illegal slaughter with the Ministry of Natural Resources to make sure we put those resources toward that activity. It is working, and that's why we have laid such a large number of charges and that is why we have a large number of convictions, because the system as we have changed it is working better.

EDUCATION

Mr Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): My question is to the Minister of Education.

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of Labour): I can't hear you.

Mr Marchese: I know, but you will.

Minister, in response to an earlier question on this issue of extracurricular activities, you said parents really want better schools, a stronger curriculum and testing of teachers. I think I agree with you that a lot of parents want that. But they also want extracurricular activities, and in your answer you made it appear like they weren't so important.

I have to tell you, one former Scarborough student was very active in extracurricular activities. In fact, he played golf, track and field, did gymnastics, current affairs and was involved in editing the high school yearbook. In that yearbook message this young man noted that a school is more than bricks and mortar, that you need school spirit to make education rewarding for students, and if you can't provide those activities, in his view you have failed.

Minister, what do you have to say to this student who said, "Until we find the true experience in school spirit, we will have failed"? What's your answer to that comment?

Hon Janet Ecker (Minister of Education): First of all, I would agree with the honourable member that extracurricular activities are an incredibly important service for our students. They can open up opportunities for students; they allow them to have post-secondary opportunities they might not have had. They're an extremely important service. The majority of teachers see providing extracurricular activities as part of their job and they go out of their way to do that for their students on a regular basis. Even in Durham today we have teachers performing extracurricular activities.

Unfortunately, we also know that there are some teachers who are choosing to work to rule. We need a solution to that. We're meeting with our education partners to find a solution to that. Adding more money in from taxpayers yet again for no added benefits or asking our students to increase their workload so teachers can decrease their workload is not the solution. I appreciate the sentiment the honourable Leader of the Opposition has put forward that solution on. We are considering the recommendations of the union and all of our other education partners about how to better resolve this issue for our students.

Mr Marchese: I just wanted to identify that student. He is now the Solicitor General, David Tsubouchi. He was the editor of that paper and was actively involved in those school activities. I happen to agree with him, that we need them. He knew then it was very important and he knows today that it's very important. The fact that you blame teachers for-

Interjections.

Mr Marchese: I know you can't recognize him. He's a bit shady here because of the picture. But, Minister, your attack on the teachers as the ones who are to blame for not providing the extracurricular activities is wrong. Most teachers and most parents recognize that Bill 74 has caused this problem, and you are the author of that bill, not the teachers. I remind you that 75% of the schools are not providing those extracurricular activities. You can rant-

Interjection.

Mr Marchese: Seventy-five per cent, Minister. That means we've got a serious problem in our schools. What we need is for you to seriously sit down with the federations. I know you said, "We're meeting with them; we're listening to them." I don't believe you. I just don't believe you are seriously taking their suggestions or that you are meeting with Earl Manners, who has urgently said, "We've got to meet because we think we have a solution." I think they ought to be at the table when they find solutions to these questions. I need to know from you, what solutions have they put forth that you are considering that will solve this question?

Hon Mrs Ecker: I should have invited the honourable member from across the way to the meeting I had this morning with a number of the affiliates. It was a very productive meeting, a very good meeting. Many of those meetings have been very helpful. We are looking at a number of issues that they themselves agree need to be addressed. The government agrees with them, and we are looking at those solutions for a number of problems.

But as the honourable member will know, we very carefully set a classroom standard for teachers that reflects the workload that teachers across the country-and again, this is only the secondary. The elementary teachers in this province already work more than teachers across the country and provide extracurricular activities, I should add. But we set a workload of four hours and 10 minutes of time in the classroom. It's a reasonable standard. We gave boards and unions the flexibility to implement that in a way that would support the teacher who does extracurricular, because as the honourable member knows, not all teachers did extracurricular before. They could have chosen to-

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

Interjection.

The Speaker: Order. The minister's time is up. New question.

Mr Gerard Kennedy (Parkdale-High Park): I want to again talk to the Minister of Education about the need to resolve the problems in the schools. I want to commend the Minister of Finance for apparently giving some advice to the Minister of Education, because we need cooler heads to prevail here.

Minister, you're saying to us today that you want to see teachers teach a certain amount. You're saying to us today that you don't want to put out the extra money if this plan fails. But in some schools right now you've got teachers teaching five hours in the classroom plus another five hours in their other duties; you've got some at your four hours and 10 minutes and some at less. That's a result of your plan initiated 105 days ago, and what it's done is, in 70 out of 72 school boards that last year had extracurricular activities, most of them haven't got them this year.

That's your creation, but here today and in the next three days there's something you can do about it. You can give back extracurricular activities to the students in Durham who were demonstrating outside these windows less than two weeks ago, so things must not all be fine in the region of Durham. Minister, I want you to speak to them directly now. Will you agree to our peace plan and will you put students first?

Hon Mrs Ecker: First of all, as I said, the reason we are having a better curriculum and improving that curriculum is so that students learn and know what they need. The reason we are setting higher standards, including time in the classroom, the reason we are having standardized tests, the reason we are bringing in teacher testing, the reason we are doing all of these things, the reason we are putting more money in the classroom is because we are putting the students first. The goal is improved student achievement. That is the goal of this government. That is what I am continuing to work with our education partners to achieve.

Mr Kennedy: Hundreds of students came down here in the last number of weeks: Bronwyn Underhill, Jennifer Coles from Humberside Collegiate with Katrina Galas; Jeff and Scot Brazeau and Daniel Greene came all the way from the Upper Canada board; Nicholas Graves from Etobicoke Collegiate; Marshall Sterling organizing students across the province, Caitlin Martella from Oakwood school. In each of the members' ridings in this House, students have pleaded to be heard.

Minister, you are going to hear shortly from the school trustees of this province, and they are going to tell you to sit down and find a solution. They are going to tell you that the solution that will work looks a lot like what's in the peace plan.

I think the people of this province have a right to know who you listen to when it comes to education. Will you listen to the students, to the parents, to John Henry, for example, the chair of the school board in Kitchener-Waterloo, a Conservative for 35 years who sits on your Advisory Panel on Special Education? He says this plan is worth doing. He says for you to sit down, not to wait, don't delay, put the kids first.

Minister, agree to this plan or produce a better one, and please do it today.

Hon Mrs Ecker: I met with the trustee associations not that long ago, and it's interesting that they didn't put forward the OSSTF union plan. They put forward a number of options and recommendations, as have our education partners. I've met with the student trustees.

There are a number of issues we need to deal with. It's not simply an issue of trying to buy peace with one particular union or trying to buy extracurricular activities. It's really interesting that, on one hand, OSSTF says, "Don't pay teachers extra to do extracurricular activities." They've ruled that out. Now they're back, through the Liberal Party, asking for another $150 million for the teachers' union. I don't think that is an appropriate solution.

We've already put forward additional money for more teachers, we've put forward additional monies to lessen the workload and we've put forward more money to help teachers provide extra support to students who need the remediation. We've taken those steps. We're prepared to continue to take those steps to make sure we have improved student achievement. But this plan, this particular suggestion, is not a solution.

ANIMAL HEALTH LABORATORY

Mrs Brenda Elliott (Guelph-Wellington): My question is for the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. Last week, one of our colleagues across the way, the member for Elgin-Middlesex-London, asked a question about an animal health lab in my riding of Guelph-Wellington. The member alleged that funding for this lab was about to be cut and that the services were in jeopardy. As you know, this lab is a key part of animal health and food safety in Ontario and a major employer in my riding. Constituents are concerned.

Was the member for Elgin-Middlesex-London correct? Are the services and funding to the animal health lab going to be cut, or was he engaging in irresponsible fearmongering?

Hon Ernie Hardeman (Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs): I thank the member for Guelph-Wellington for the question. The member for Elgin-Middlesex-London was totally off the mark in his suggestion. As I indicated to him last week, funding for the animal health lab has been $5 million a year since 1997, and there are no plans to reduce it.

But don't take my word for it. Listen to what the general manager of the university's lab service division, Dr Pat Collins, said last week in the Guelph Mercury, when asked about Mr Peters's assertions: "That information wasn't accurate. It's just plain wrong. I think he's completely off base. What we're getting back from OMAFRA is strong support for the program."

We're proud of our involvement with the animal health laboratory, and we'll continue with our strong support into the future.

Mrs Elliott: People in my riding are glad to know this, Minister, and I'm glad to have this clearly on the record.

The lab and the services have undergone some changes. I know we made some changes in 1997, when the lab became part of the partnership agreement with the University of Guelph. There has been consolidation of services with Guelph and with Kemptville College. For the record, Minister, how well is this lab working and what effects have these changes had?

Hon Mr Hardeman: By reviewing the operations in 1997 and again this year and by consolidating services, we've been able to improve services at the lab. For example, the lab has extended its services on weekdays and is now open on Saturdays, turnaround times have been shortened, the consistency of testing has improved and the scope and quality of tests available have been enhanced.

The animal health lab works closely with our ministry as a strong line of defence against disease outbreaks and food safety issues. It provides good services for about 40,000 cases and 700,000 tests a year. Along with our 35% increase in the OMAFRA veterinary science program, Ontario is well positioned and prepared to deal with the animal health issue.

FAMILY RESPONSIBILITY OFFICE

Mr Michael Bryant (St Paul's): My question is for the Attorney General. He was here before, and I'm sure the minister, who enjoys answering questions-

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): If we could just stop the clock for a quick moment, I'm sure we would be able to find him.

He is here. The member for St Paul's.

Mr Bryant: Minister, today an organization called Families Against Deadbeats spoke out against the Family Responsibility Office of your ministry. This organization assists thousands of families who are victims of deadbeat parents who won't make their support payments. FAD said that you weren't listening to them, that you weren't even responding to their correspondence, that the collection rate of the Family Responsibility Office is abysmal and that you broke a promise made in 1995 and 1999 to crack down on deadbeat parents.

So FAD and Ontario Liberals are calling upon you today to consider bringing in an investigative unit similar to the one brought in by the province of Alberta. This would get people out from behind their desks, hitting the pavement to track down and crack down on deadbeat parents.

Minister, will you agree to set up an investigative unit within your office?

Hon Jim Flaherty (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs): We are, of course, very concerned about the collection of monies owed to children and parents in the province of Ontario. I'm pleased the member raises the subject, which he hasn't raised and the opposition hasn't raised for weeks here. I'm pleased with the new-found interest they're showing today for the children and parents of the province of Ontario.

Let me update the opposition with respect to what the Family Responsibility Office has been doing these last several months. In fact, they are collecting record amounts of money for the children and parents of Ontario. The FRO workers are handling a large number of cases. They're working every day of the year to collect this money for the children and parents of the province, not just at Christmas but all during the year, collecting record amounts of money. I applaud those parents, the in excess of 60% of parents that are timely in terms of their support payments for their children in Ontario.

Mr Bryant: Minister, you say everything's all right. I say, don't take my word for it; listen to the families. Families Against Deadbeats represents hundreds of these thousands of families. Don't listen to me; listen to the Provincial Auditor, who says that 75% of the cases in your office are in arrears.

I understand that this isn't a headline-grabber, setting up an investigative agency. I understand this doesn't fit within your populist agenda. But you've got to understand that many, many children are going to get coal in their stockings from deadbeat Grinches because your ministry isn't doing anything about cracking down on deadbeat parents.

So if you won't agree to an investigative agency-and I don't understand why; it has worked in other provinces; you can't tell me that what we're doing in this province is enough-will you at least tell all those families and all the members in this House, who all get calls from the victims of deadbeat parents, why on earth you wouldn't set up such an agency for the sake of the children?

Hon Mr Flaherty: In fact, I'm informed that the work of the Alberta investigative unit is quite similar to the work done by the FRO enforcement staff in Ontario, so that'll leave that as it is.

Let me say this, though, about the Liberal work for the Family Responsibility Office. If you want to go back to 1995 and today, let's compare some performance.

Since 1995, we're collecting more money than previous governments. A record $535 million was disbursed to recipients the last fiscal year. That's about $170 million more than the Liberal government collected in 1994 and 1995. During October alone, $43.4 million was received and distributed to children and parents in Ontario. That's 24% more than your government collected in 1995. Sixty-one per cent of the cases are in substantial compliance for the children and parents in Ontario.

We've done a lot; there's much more to do. But thank goodness, for the parents and children in Ontario, they're not where they were under the Liberal government in 1995.

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

Mr David Young (Willowdale): My question is to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Minister, over the last five years, Toronto and surrounding areas have experienced exponential economic growth. This growth has made Toronto a magnet for those coming to improve their lives and for those coming to invest in this province. This growth has also increased the use of our roads, our transit system and the human services in this city and beyond.

Minister, we continue to see media stories that chronicle or suggest that Toronto will have difficulty in properly funding these services and programs, including the TTC and housing. These articles suggest that Toronto did not receive a fair shake, a fair deal under the local services realignment that took place three years ago. My question to you is just this: can you comment on how Toronto fared under the LSR three years ago?

Hon Tony Clement (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): I thank the honourable member for Willowdale for the question, and I'd be happy to comment on this. All the municipalities across the province have faced the same challenges of providing better, more efficient, safer services at a more accountable cost to the taxpayer-and indeed the results are in. Last year 85% of municipalities across this province were able to deliver better services, either at the same tax cost or a lower property tax cost to their taxpayers.

Indeed Mayor Lastman himself, in his inaugural address, boasted that, "As the first council of the new city of Toronto, we delivered a tax freeze for three consecutive years, we improved service, we cared for our less fortunate and we pulled six cities and seven governments into one." That's what he said.

But they've got to do more. They've got to continue to look for more efficient ways to deliver these services to the taxpayers. In addition to the $560 million of tax room, when we took half of education off of property tax, they got a $50-million grant from the province, they got $200 million of interest-free loans. They have the ability to find those savings; they've got to deliver those better services for less. The tools are in place.

Mr Young: I've lived in this city for my entire life. I've been in the city when we've experienced boom times. I've been in the city when the streets were full, when there was vitality, when there was confidence in our businesses. I've been in the city at other times when the streets of this city seemed as though they had cleared out because no one had reason to go downtown, because people weren't working in the same numbers as they are now.

These are great times that we live in, but what comes with that economic boom are also pressures and challenges. My question to you is just this: the TTC is a vital link in this city; it has been for many years and it undoubtedly will be in the future if this city is to continue to prosper. Millions of people use the TTC each and every day and rely upon it for social purposes and also in order to make a living.

I'm concerned that Toronto taxpayers will no longer be able to afford the sort of transit system that they deserve and that they expect. I'm aware that Toronto received $829 million for TTC capital needs as part of the local services realignment, but given the concerns being expressed repeatedly at the city hall and in the media, my question to you is, can the city of Toronto adequately fund the TTC without resorting to tax increases?

Hon Mr Clement: Again, the honourable member is quite correct. There was an $829-million payment to the TTC upon local services realignment that paid for the Sheppard subway, as well as other capital needs of the TTC. Yet we have Rick Ducharme, who's the chair of the TTC, the general manager, saying that Toronto taxpayers are going to be required to provide for more capi-tal needs of the TTC in the near future through a tax hike.

I say to Mr Ducharme and to the city of Toronto, there's only one taxpayer. Get your financial house in order. Then and only then do you have the right or the obligation to consult with your taxpayers on whether a tax hike is necessary or desirable. Indeed, the results are that there is more work to be done.

I heard recently of $35 million worth of parking ticket revenues that were lost in the past five years due to administrative errors. There is more work to be done. If Toronto can't keep its financial books in order, then I guess that the city of Toronto taxpayers are on the hook for a tax increase. But it shouldn't come to that.

CHILD POVERTY

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Minister of Community and Social Services. The federal government has indicated that they are going to make available home heating tax rebates of from $125 to $250 to people who qualify for the GST tax credit.

We know that home heating costs are going up by $500 at least this year, so that amount of money won't cover the full increase in costs. But for someone who is forced to rely on social assistance in Ontario, it may well mean the difference between having heat in their home and not having heat in a very cold winter. We know your government took away from social assistance recipients in Ontario the national child tax benefit. I'm asking you today for a guarantee that your government will not take away the home heating rebate from citizens in Ontario forced to rely on social assistance.

I'm asking you to guarantee today that people who have to rely on social assistance in Ontario will be allowed to keep that home heating rebate when it arrives. Will you guarantee that?

Hon John R. Baird (Minister of Community and Social Services, minister responsible for francophone affairs): Yes. We don't claw back GST rebates. But I understand in the federal government's pre-election budget the Minister of Finance, Paul Martin, came forward with a plan to use some of the windfall tax revenues the federal government has obtained because their tax on home heating fuel and on gasoline goes up when the price goes up. So they had a windfall of tax revenue because of the increases in energy costs, and as such are going to give some of that back through the GST tax credit.

We don't take back the GST tax credit-it is allowed to be kept by those on social assistance in the province of Ontario-and we have no plan for changing that.

Mr Hampton: I'm glad to hear you're not going to try to take back that rebate for heating fuel.

I want to go back to the national child tax benefit. We've seen two reports now in the last two weeks which indicate that poverty among children is increasing in Ontario, that despite all your talk and bluster about an economic boom, the number of children who are living in poverty in Ontario is increasing. That was confirmed last week by the National Council of Welfare and by Campaign 2000.

If you're prepared to allow people to receive the home heating tax rebate, will you allow those families and children living in poverty who have to rely upon social assistance to receive the national child tax benefit as well?

Hon Mr Baird: I'll first look at the National Council of Welfare's report. It showed since 1995 in Ontario poverty rates are going down. It showed that for Ontario families since 1995 poverty is going down. It showed for Ontario children since 1995 poverty is going down. These were based on 1998 figures. Since 1998 we've seen literally hundreds of thousands of net new jobs created in Ontario. Since 1998 we've seen literally hundreds of thousands of people escape the welfare system, so I'm enthusiastic and excited to see this report based on year 2000 numbers.

The member opposite will be surprised to learn there are two tax benefits. The national child tax benefit which the member refers to is not taken back from social assistance recipients. The national child benefit supplement is, because it's there to help promote attachment to the labour force. That's the way the whole program was designed. The Conservative government in Ontario and all 100 Liberal MPs in Ottawa said that was the way to go, that to promote attachment to the labour force was a good public policy initiative.

That policy, combined with the Ontario child care supplement for working families, has given a real benefit to the working poor, people who have been left behind. We do a lot for people on social assistance. We've got to do more to help those with low and modest incomes, the real heroes and champions.

INJURED WORKERS

Mr Dominic Agostino (Hamilton East): My question is to the Minister of Labour. On December 1 my colleague from Hamilton West and I met with about 30 injured workers from National Steel Car in Hamilton. That group represents approximately 150 injured workers who now work for that company.

Minister, as of today almost 100 of those workers have been laid off while injured because of the loopholes that exist in legislation, particularly Bill 99 and the changes that have occurred. Many of these are workers who have a long history there; many of these are workers who have a permanent disability as a result of simply going to work in the morning and then coming home not in the same condition, obviously because of an injury that happened to them while they were trying to earn a living and take care of their families.

People are being laid off out of seniority. The company is using loopholes that are in the legislation. They will call workers back for one shift or two shifts of modified work and then eliminate that position and lay these workers off, forcing them on to UI and in some cases on to welfare after that.

It's a very desperate situation. As I said, 100 out of the 150 workers who are injured have been laid off by the company. They feel abandoned by the company; they feel abandoned by this government; they feel abandoned by the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board in this province. They have come here looking for your help, looking for the help of the government of Ontario in trying to remedy this wrong. On behalf of the workers who are represented and who are behind me, Minister, will you commit today to reviewing this case and intervening, if necessary, with both the company and the WSIB to right the wrong and give these workers the justice they deserve?

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of Labour): I will certainly commit to meeting with you or them, if that's what you'd like to do, to review the situation.

Mr Agostino: I appreciate that because it's a non-partisan issue; it's one that's important. Clearly, it's important to the workers.

These workers have been denied opportunities. As you know, under the previous legislation they were entitled to vocational rehabilitation if they had a permanent disability. Under current legislation, they're only entitled to some form of assistance after they've been laid off for 13 weeks. In one case, a worker who's been laid off since the spring of this year has not yet received one bit of assistance from any market, labour or re-entry program.

Minister, clearly we need to relook at the changes that have occurred in compensation. We need to look at the changes that occurred under Bill 99, and we need to look collectively at programs in this House that are going to help injured workers, are going to help these people get back into the workforce, get back into some type of modified work, but also stop the exploitation and the abuse of injured workers by companies who believe the legislation allows them to take advantage of these workers and deny them justice.

I appreciate the offer to review it. Minister, the workers are here today. Would you take some time after question period and meet with me and the workers so that you can see them and hear first-hand from them some of their experiences in dealing with the company and with the WSIB?

Hon Mr Stockwell: Certainly.

ROAD SAFETY

Mr Wayne Wettlaufer (Kitchener Centre): My question is for the Solicitor General. Minister, road safety in Kitchener Centre is a very important issue, and I believe it is equally as important to the rest of the people in Ontario. In 1995, we launched the comprehensive road safety plan to give police the tools they needed to make the roads safer.

We took a number of other initiatives since then: the Sergeant Rick McDonald Act, which increased the penalties for criminals who take reckless flight from police; the creation of five regional traffic management units; and since 1998 we have allowed municipalities to designate community safety zones in an area where safety is of particular concern, like schools. However, our road safety is still a concern in Ontario.

As we enter the Christmas holidays, I wonder if you could tell us, and the people of Kitchener Centre in particular, how our government is addressing the issue of safety when it comes to driving on our roads.

Hon David H. Tsubouchi (Solicitor General): I'd like to thank the member from Kitchener Centre for the question. Last Thursday, I had the opportunity to visit a RIDE spot-check with Toronto Police Chief Fantino, Superintendent Gary Grant and Staff Inspector Ron Ralph. The location of the RIDE program was the location where two elderly people were killed last year by a drunk driver. This gave us an opportunity to reinforce the message of zero tolerance for drunk driving and also to recognize the commitment that Toronto Police services have toward the RIDE program.

Mr Wettlaufer: My supp is also for the Solicitor General. Last Friday, I lost a good friend and the people of Ontario also lost a good friend in Mr Ted Thornley, the president of the Police Association of Ontario. On a personal level, I feel a great sense of loss and sorrow in his passing. I was honoured and privileged to have known Ted as a friend and, as well, on a professional level. Ted dedicated his life to making Ontario a better place in which to live. His commitment to making our communities safer was a bright guiding light for us to follow.

His dedication has been and will always be an inspiration to all of us. He joined our local police service in 1973 and, as a constable, became involved with the Police Association of Ontario the following year. He became an association board member in 1978 and president in 1988, a post he occupied until his death. Our community will miss Ted Thornley; I personally will miss Ted.

Minister, you worked with Ted, the Waterloo Regional Police Association and the Police Association of Ontario in his efforts to make the streets of our province safer. As well, you worked with him to make the job of police officers a safer one across Ontario. You had some experiences working with him and I wonder if you could share some of those experiences with us now.

Hon Mr Tsubouchi: On behalf of all Ontarians, I'd like to express our condolences to the Thornley family, Ted's wife, Karen, his two daughters, Vicki and Kerri, and their son Jamie, and the entire policing community for the passing of one of the most respected police officers in the province of Ontario.

It was my pleasure to work with Ted on a number of issues. Two things I was always impressed with from Ted were his two loves: one was his family, but also his love of his job. He dedicated his job to the police officers in the street, making conditions better for them. The one thing about Ted that you appreciate-and I know the former Solicitor General, Bob Runciman, will-was that Ted always had a great love for life and a great sense of humour. No matter how tough the meetings were, he always managed to bring a smile to people's faces.

Tomorrow I'll be attending a service for a man who not only made a positive impact on policing in Ontario but set standards for others to follow. In attending, I'll bring to the family, on behalf of this Legislature and the people of Ontario, condolences and thanks for the contribution that Ted Thornley made in making Ontario a better place to live.

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

Mr Mario Sergio (York West): My question is for the Minister of Health. Lately you have been making and remaking funding announcements with respect to health care funding to hospitals to face the increasing health care needs. However, I want to bring to your attention a particular case, a constituent of mine, Mrs Maria Ramundi. Maria Ramundi, after breast cancer surgery, has developed a condition called lymphedema. Lymphedema, as I'm sure you know, if it goes untreated, can develop into a situation where the swelling can cause deformity and enlarged, disfigured limbs.

Maria Ramundi has to travel on a daily basis to Scarborough General Hospital to receive treatment for two hours each day. It's the distance, going from the west end of the city to Scarborough General. She does not drive, it is wintertime, and her husband does not drive due to a heart condition. She receives two hours of treatment with a machine called a lympha press extremity pump.

The doctor at the hospital tells me that this particular machine is used by a team which receives patients from not only Scarborough, Toronto and the GTA, but from as far as Timmins, Kingston and Cambridge as well.

I'm asking you, for the sake of the health of my constituent and many others in the same situation, what will you do to assist Mrs Ramundi by providing care in the hospital close to where she lives in the west end of the city?

Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): In response to the question from the member, as the member knows, we have been investing in the hospitals in the province of Ontario. In fact, this year we have committed approximately $8.3 billion, an increase of about $850 million from last year, because our government has committed to ensure that our hospitals today are centres of excellence. We are renovating, we are expanding the hospitals within the province, in order that they can provide more and better services closer to home.

We will move forward with that plan of action. We have added and are adding more cardiac centres, more cancer centres, more dialysis centres, all with the purpose of making sure that people in this province no longer have to drive the distances they have in the past, and that they can get the services closer to home. We will continue to do that with the additional funding we're making available.

Mr Sergio: I would think that you would take it upon yourself and your government, then-if you continue to provide so many more millions of dollars-to provide the machine in the northwest area of the city, where people with the same condition as Mrs Ramundi can access that care without travelling miles and miles from one end of the city to the other at this particular time of the year.

I'm asking you, Madam Minister, on behalf of Mrs Ramundi and many others with the same condition, since the only option left to Mrs Ramundi is to rent a machine at a cost of $20 a day or $600 a month, will you absorb the cost of renting the machine, or will you make the commitment here today to Mrs Ramundi that indeed you will provide the funding to have a machine at the Humber River Regional Hospital in the west end of the city?

Hon Mrs Witmer: As I indicated in my response to the member's first question, it has been the objective of our government to ensure that we do everything possible to bring all services closer to home. It was the commitment that we undertook in 1995. We have been increasing health spending each and every year, from $17.6 billion to well in excess of $22 billion this year.

As many of the members know in this House, we now have dialysis services throughout Ontario where there were none before. We will continue to make sure that as time goes on, all of the services are delivered as close as they possibly can be. We're constructing three new cardiac centres at the present time. We have five new cancer centres that are being expanded. We've introduced the Healthy Babies program. I made an announcement this morning about a new infant screening program for hearing purposes, and every newborn will be screened.

IMMIGRATION AND REFUGEE POLICY

Mr Brian Coburn (Ottawa-Orléans): My question is for the Minister of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation. Weekend reports in the media describe what some are calling a staggering increase in the number of refugee claimants coming into Canada, specifically from border crossings in southern Ontario. For instance, the border crossing in Niagara Falls and Fort Erie in 1998 had 1,536 refugee claims. This year that number could reach more than 10,000.

Our immigrants contribute greatly to our economy and our culture and help make this province truly the best place to live in North America. But how are we coping with this increased number of refugee claimants?

Hon Helen Johns (Minister of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation, minister responsible for seniors and women): I'd like to thank the member for Ottawa-Orléans for the question. Ontario welcomes all new Ontarians to its borders, whether they come from another country or from another province. But it's important to recognize that although new Canadians coming to Ontario consist of about 55% of all new Canadians, we only receive 40% of the funds from the federal government for settlement services. Of course, this becomes a substantial problem.

If you think about the number of new Ontarians we get in the province, we should be receiving about $134 million from the federal government; as opposed to that, we receive about $100 million. So it's really important that Ontario receive its fair share of the settlement dollars from the federal government, and we're looking forward to being able to work with the federal government to get our fair share.

With that money, we invest in newcomer settlement programs which make sure that newcomers are settled as quickly as they can be into Ontario. We also invest in cultural interpreter programs to make sure that violence against women is minimized, and we help new immigrants-

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

PETITIONS

RAMSEY INDUSTRIAL ROAD

Mr Michael A. Brown (Algoma-Manitoulin): I have petitions signed by well over 6,000 people, most of them northerners, but not all. I want to thank my colleague the member for Sudbury, Rick Bartolucci, the member for Thunder Bay-Superior North, Mike Gravelle, and the member for Timiskaming-Cochrane, David Ramsey, for assisting with this petition. It says:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Ramsey industrial road from Sultan to Highway 144 is used by thousands of people annually;

"Whereas the Ramsey industrial road is a treacherous gravel road;

"Whereas thousands of people must use this road to travel for business, medical and personal reasons;

"Whereas the economic development of the area is strangled by the lack of a paved highway;

"Whereas the communities of Manitouwadge, White River, Hornepayne, Dubreuilville and Wawa all support the efforts made by Chapleau Mayor Earle J. Freeborn to have this road upgraded;

"Therefore, we, the undersigned, petition the Ontario Ministry of Transportation and the Ontario government to immediately approve the paving and upgrading of the Ramsey industrial road to a provincial highway."

This petition is signed by people in Sudbury, Thunder Bay and all communities in-between.

CAMPING FEES

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): This is a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas the Dryden district Ministry of Natural Resources is proposing to relinquish administration of traditional public boat launching and camping sites to the private sector,

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

"That the Ministry of Natural Resources be given sufficient funding to carry out its fiduciary duty to the people of this area and this province and continue to administer over these sites and cease efforts to obtain private sector proposals that may lead to" more "user fees."

I have affixed my signature to this petition as well.

ACCESS TO MEDICAL PROFESSION

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): I have a petition:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the report of the McKendry commission, released by the Ontario Ministry of Health in December 1999, finds that Ontario is facing a shortage of over 1,000 physicians; and

"Whereas at least 286 international medical graduates in Ontario have successfully completed the Medical Council of Canada evaluating exam, demonstrating competence in clinical knowledge; and

"Whereas the number of Ministry of Health funded post-graduate positions in "pool B" (that is, international medical graduates) has been reduced from 289 to 81 since 1994; and

"Whereas the Council of Ontario Faculties of Medicine has indicated that they have the capacity to absorb an increase in the number of entry-level post-graduate positions, as long as sufficient resources are provided to support the increase; and

"Whereas the Legislative Assembly of Ontario unanimously passed private member's resolution number 6 on November 25, 1999, which held that the government of Ontario should implement a plan to improve access to professions and trades for foreign-trained professionals"-I support that, actually;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to direct the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care as follows:

"(

a) to restore the number of Ministry of Health funded post-graduate positions for international medical graduates to at least 1994 levels;

"(

b) to increase immediately the number of entry-level post-graduate training positions to the full capacity of the Ontario faculties of medicine;

"(

c) to make the increased entry-level post-graduate positions directly available to international medical graduates who have successfully completed the requisite examinations;

"(

d) to develop a plan to identify alternative funding mechanisms that will allow more adequate access for international physicians to the health care system in Ontario; and

"(

e) to appoint a committee, with representation from the international medical graduate community, to review and dismantle the barriers which have been established to prevent international physicians from gaining fair access to licensure and practice" in Ontario's health care system.

I am pleased to sign this petition on their behalf, and I'll be giving it to Geoff.

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): This petition is addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas cancer patients in Ontario requiring radiation treatment face unacceptable delays and are often forced to travel to the United States to receive medical attention;

"Whereas many prescription drugs which would help patients with a variety of medical conditions such as macular degeneration, multiple sclerosis, arthritis, diabetes and heart failure are not covered by OHIP;

"Whereas many residents of St Catharines and other communities in Ontario are unable to find a family doctor as a result of the growing family doctor shortage we have experienced during the tenure of the Harris government;

"Whereas many assistive devices that could aid patients in Ontario are not eligible for funding from the Ontario Ministry of Health;

"Whereas community care access centres have inadequate funding to carry out their responsibilities for long-term and home care;

"Whereas the Harris government has now spent over $185 million on blatantly partisan government advertising in the form of glossy brochures and television and radio ads;

"We, the undersigned, call upon the Harris government to immediately end their abuse of public office and terminate any further expenditure on political advertising and instead to invest this money in health care in the province of Ontario."

I affix my signature, as I am in complete agreement with the sentiments expressed in this petition.

SCHOOL EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES

Mr David Christopherson (Hamilton West): I am very proud today to present a series of petitions organized and forwarded to me by Megan Lynch, who is a grade 10 student at Orchard Park high school in Stoney Creek. I also want to say hi to her civics class because I understand they're attempting to be tied into this while the petition is being presented. I'm very pleased that Megan has taken this effort, and I'm proud to introduce the petition here to the Legislature.

"Petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the government of Ontario is forcing teachers to volunteer in extracurricular activities, on top of teaching an extra half-course and teaching up to four classes a day; and

"Whereas teachers are already marking tests, taking exams, organizing projects and other assignments and preparing for graduation and field trips; and

"Whereas the government of Ontario has left our teachers with no time for extracurricular activities at our schools; and

"Whereas the government of Ontario has not solved any problems with Bill 74 but has instead created problems in schools throughout Ontario;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, demand that the government of Ontario take immediate action to repair the damage it has done to teachers and our education system through Bill 74."

As I am in agreement with the content of this petition, I am proud to add my name to those of the students, teachers and parents at Orchard Park high school who took the time and cared enough to generate this petition.

REGISTRATION OF VINTAGE CARS

Mr Raminder Gill (Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale): This is a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas there are many Ontarians who have a passion for perfection in the restoration of vintage vehicles; and

"Whereas unlike many other jurisdictions, Ontario vintage automobile enthusiasts are unable to register their vehicles using the original year of manufacture licence plates; and

"Whereas Durham MPP John R. O'Toole," my esteemed colleague, "and former MPP John Parker have worked together to recognize the desire of vintage car collectors to register their vehicles using vintage plates; and

"Whereas the Honourable David Turnbull as Minister of Transportation has the power to change the existing regulation;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows: to pass Bill 99 or to amend the Highway Traffic Act to be used on vintage automobiles."

I pass this on to Adam, who will present it.

NORTHERN HEALTH TRAVEL GRANT

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): I'd like to present this 2,000-name petition. It's 2,000 of the 69,000 people who have signed this petition to the Ontario Legislature. It deals with northerners demanding the Harris government eliminate health care apartheid.

"Whereas the northern health travel grant offers a reimbursement of partial travel costs at a rate of 30.4 cents per kilometre one way for northerners forced to travel for cancer care while travel policy for southerners who travel for cancer care features full reimbursement costs for travel, meals and accommodation;

"Whereas a cancer tumour knows no health travel policy or geographic location; and

"Whereas a recently released Oracle research poll confirms that 92% of Ontarian support equals health travel funding;

"Whereas northern Ontario residents pay the same amount of taxes and are entitled to the same access to health care and all government services and inherent civil rights as residents living elsewhere in the province;

"Whereas we support the efforts of OSECC, (Ontarians Seeking Equal Cancer Care), founded by Gerry Lougheed Jr, former chair of Cancer Care Ontario, Northeast Region, to correct this injustice against northerners travelling for cancer treatment;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, petition the Ontario Legislature to demand the Mike Harris government move immediately to fund full travel expenses for northern Ontario cancer patients and eliminate the health care apartheid which exists presently in the province of Ontario."

Our page Rosemary Wilson, from Chatham-Kent Essex, will bring it to the table. I thank her for that as well as the people who signed this petition.

FRAIS DE TRANSPORT AUX FINS MÉDICALES

Mr Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): I have a petition signed by a number of people, this time from the town of Hearst, and it reads as follows:

« Pétition à l'Assemblée législative de l'Ontario. Les gens du nord exigent que le gouvernement Harris mette fin à l'apartheid en matière de soins de santé.

« Attendu que, d'une part, le programme de subventions accordées aux résidents du nord de l'Ontario pour frais de transport à des fins médicales offre un remboursement partiel au taux de 30,4 cents », pas si pire, « par kilomètre à aller seulement, à l'intention des personnes atteintes de cancer, et que, d'autre part, la politique de déplacement pour les gens du sud de l'Ontario rembourse en entier les coûts de transport, de repas, et d'hébergement ; » pas trop pire, les deux cette fois-là,

« Attendu qu'une tumeur cancéreuse ne connaît aucune politique de transport pour les soins de santé ni de région géographique ;

« Attendu qu'un sondage de recherche Oracle publié récemment confirme que 92 % des Ontariens appuient un financement égal de transport à des fins médicales ;

« Attendu que les résidents du nord de l'Ontario paient le même montant d'impôts et ont droit au même accès aux soins de santé, ainsi qu'à tous les services du gouvernement et à tous les droits de la personne inhérents que les autres résidents de la province ;

« Attendu que nous souhaitons les efforts de l'OSECC (Ontarians Seeking Equal Cancer Care), une association récemment fondée par Gerry Lougheed Jr, ancien président de Action Cancer Ontario, région du nord-est, afin de redresser cette injustice envers les personnes du nord de l'Ontario qui doivent se déplacer pour recevoir des traitements anticancéreux ;

« En conséquence, il est résolu que les soussignés exigent que le gouvernement Mike Harris propose immédiatement de financer en entier les frais de transport à l'intention des résidents du nord de l'Ontario atteints de cancer et mette fin à l'apartheid qui existe présentement dans la province de l'Ontario en matière de soins de santé. »

Je signe cette pétition avec plaisir.

LONG-TERM CARE

Mr Michael A. Brown (Algoma-Manitoulin): I have a petition signed by hundreds of people from the Espanola area.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Espanola area services a population of approximately 12,000 people and government statistics project a population growth of people over 75 to reach an estimated 336 by the year 2003;

"Whereas the long-term formula for the distribution of long-term-care beds would indicate a need for between 59 and 76 beds by the year 2003;

"Whereas just 30 long-term-care beds exist in the Espanola area with the result that a lengthy waiting list already exists and people are being placed in long-term-care facilities far distant from their home communities;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care and the Ontario government to immediately approve a proposal by the Espanola General Hospital, supported by the Algoma, Cochrane, Manitoulin and Sudbury District Health Units, for an additional 34 long-term-care beds in Espanola."

I'll affix my signature, and I will give the petition to Jared Baker from Oshawa.

NORTHERN HEALTH TRAVEL GRANT

Mr Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): I have a petition this time from the town of Smooth Rock Falls, and it reads as follows:

"Petition to the Ontario Legislature:

"Whereas the northern health travel grant offers a reimbursement of partial travel costs at a rate of 30.4 cents per kilometre one way for northerners forced to travel for cancer care while travel policy for southerners who travel for cancer care features full reimbursement costs for travel, meals and accommodation;

"Whereas a cancer tumour knows no health travel policy or geographic location;

"Whereas a recently released Oracle research poll confirms that 92% of Ontarians support equal health travel funding;

"Whereas northern Ontario residents pay the same amount of taxes and are entitled to the same access to health care and all government services and inherent civil rights as residents living elsewhere in the province; and

"Whereas we support the efforts of the newly formed OSECC (Ontarians Seeking Equal Cancer Care), founded by Gerry Lougheed Jr, former chair of Cancer Care Ontario, Northeast Region, to correct this injustice against northerners travelling for cancer treatment;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, petition the Ontario Legislature to demand the Mike Harris government move immediately to fund full travel expenses for northern Ontario cancer patients and eliminate the health care apartheid which exists presently in the province of Ontario."

I sign that petition.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

BALANCED BUDGETS FOR BRIGHTER FUTURES ACT, 2000 / LOI DE 2000 SUR DES BUDGETS ÉQUILIBRÉS POUR UN AVENIR MEILLEUR

Resuming the debate adjourned on December 14, 2000, on the motion for second reading of Bill 152,

An Act to implement the 2000 Budget to establish a made-in-Ontario tax system and to amend various Acts / Projet de loi 152, Loi visant à mettre en oeuvre le budget de 2000 en vue de créer un régime fiscal propre à l'Ontario et à modifier diverses lois.

The Acting Speaker (Mr Tony Martin): The member for Eglinton-Lawrence.

Mr Mike Colle (Eglinton-Lawrence): It's my pleasure to engage in debate on Bill 152, commonly known as the budget bill. I would like to give some comments in regard to this bill and the impacts it has on people in my riding and on the people of Ontario.

The Ontario economy, as does this budget, seems to be doing the appropriate things in a macro way because the economy is buoyant. The economy is certainly riding the coattails of the American economy, and we're able to export all kinds of manufactured goods, especially auto parts, to the United States. So we're doing quite well here in Ontario in a macro way.

But in a micro way there are some very serious impacts being felt by the people of Ontario that this government is not addressing. I thought this government had a great opportunity to address some of these issues, given the huge windfall that this government is seeing in tax revenues.

This government is collecting unprecedented numbers of taxes and all kinds of revenues from gaming. Many people have forgotten the fact that this government's venture into gaming has been very successful financially for the government coffers, the general treasury. It's estimated they're bringing in a million dollars a day from gaming revenues. We're trying to say perhaps some of those gaming revenues, the hundreds of millions they're taking in in gasoline tax, the hundreds of millions they're taking in in provincial sales tax, the millions they're taking in in land transfer tax, could be put back into providing for our basic needs in this province.

The paradox is that, as well as the economy is doing in a macro way and with all these revenues coming into the Ontario treasury, we see that the three basics as far as Ontarians are concerned are in a state of turmoil. The three basics I'm going to talk about are health care, education and housing.

Despite all these revenues that are coming in-unprecedented, record amounts of revenues-we still have a health care system that is under a great deal of stress. I talked to a young lady the other day who was admitted to Humber River hospital at the edge of my riding; it used to be in my riding. She had to wait five hours to see a doctor-five hours to see a doctor in a Toronto hospital. That type of waiting is very dangerous but it is very commonplace, certainly, in Toronto hospitals.

The reason it's commonplace is that this government two or three years ago embarked on an ill-fated course in what they called the Health Services Restructuring Commission, where they said they were going to save all kinds of money, improve the health care system, by closing down 30 hospitals in this province and closing down 10 hospitals in the city of Toronto.

Well, it hasn't worked. That ill-fated hospital restructuring venture, the reckless venture this government took upon itself, is not only costing the taxpayers of Ontario extra millions of dollars to repair the damage but it's costing Ontarians good health care. There are still extremely long waiting lists for long-term-care facilities-two years, three years-and still long waiting periods for emergency services in hospitals. We've lost six emergency centres in Toronto where people used to go for emergency services. They've been closed. Their doors have been shut.

So the questions I get asked are, "If the government has so much money, how come it can't reopen the hospital emergencies?" and "Why is it closing down Women's College Hospital emergency?"

That's the dichotomy of this budget and all these revenues that are coming in: they can't take care of basic health care needs. We still have a crisis in emergencies. We still don't have enough beds. We still have people who go in for major operations who are told to go home two or three days after an operation and, when they get home, they can't get home care. You almost have to be dying to get any home care from this government. Yet, the government has so much money.

They were supposed to put in a home care system that was to replace all the hospitals they closed. They haven't done that. I have a wonderful hospital in the west end of Toronto, Northwestern hospital, and it's still empty. You wouldn't believe it; they wouldn't believe this in Sault Ste Marie: this hospital sits on 32 acres, a big, beautiful, modern building, empty, and it's being used as a television studio. That's what the hospital is being used for. The emergency doors are closed, the parking lot is empty, all those doctors or nurses are gone who knows where and people still have to line up to get basic emergency services at surrounding Toronto hospitals.

That hospital restructuring commission, as convened by the infamous Mr Sinclair, was a total failure and has cost us dearly in the health care system, cost us dearly in terms of our taxpayers' dollars.

If you look at our school systems, in the greater Toronto area, despite all these revenues, we still don't have adequate funding for our pupils' needs or program needs. The government works on the square-footage formula-so many children for every square foot-yet you can't get enough resource teachers or guidance teachers. Special education needs are not being met because the government's faulty formula is based on square footage. It's not based on the needs of a child, it's not based on the needs of a program. This government is basically neglecting the needs of students across this province.

Our schools are in turmoil, cutting back programs, cutting back after-school programs. Our high schools have no after-school programs.

We in opposition have said, "Here's a peace plan. Put a little bit of the money you have in this budget surplus into hiring a few more teachers so you can get peace in our schools." This government rejects it. This budget bill rejects any attempt to bring peace and harmony and good, solid education practices and calm into our schools. They are saying no. People can't figure out why they reject our attempts or the attempts of parents to bring peace into the schools. Instead, they want turmoil and conflict.

The money is there. Ten years ago the money wasn't there. This government is now awash in money, as I said, from gasoline tax. They collect $3 billion a year automatically, without doing any work. It comes into the coffers of this government. If they put some of that money back into our schools, put it into our hospitals-millions in gaming revenues. Where does that money go? We have no idea. The poor gamblers who sometimes lose every cent-hopefully some of that money would get back into our schools and hospitals. I don't know where it goes.

We have up to 70,000 people waiting for affordable housing in the city of Toronto, 70,000 people on the waiting list. That's probably more people than live in all of Sault Ste Marie; I know it's bigger than Kingston. Seventy thousand adults are waiting for housing in the city of Toronto. These are mostly seniors who are now on a pension and can't afford to pay the high rents in Toronto. They are on a waiting list. They have to wait maybe five years to get a one-bedroom or bachelor apartment in the city.

At one time, government provided housing for seniors. This government has downloaded that responsibility on to municipal taxpayers, despite the fact that Crombie and the Who Does What commission and all the experts said you should never download social housing on to municipal taxpayers. This government has not listened to the experts and is now about to download this housing responsibility. The housing stock they're downloading needs hundreds of millions of dollars in repairs.

Many of these buildings, whether they be in Regent Park or Jane-Woolner, whether they be in Etobicoke or in Rexdale, need new furnaces, need new water systems; they need to be upgraded to meet the fire code. The municipalities don't have the money to upgrade these downloaded social housing units they've been given. Many of the people who live in these apartments and homes are not going to have the best of conditions because the municipalities won't be able to retrofit them because the municipalities are facing a crunch with other downloads.

So we have those three basic needs: education, from the primary grades right through high school; our hospitals, whether it be emergency services or long-term-care facilities; and housing, especially housing for those in need, our seniors. This government is not investing its huge surplus in the right places. It is basically floundering around making an announcement every day about some program, yet the basic needs are not being met.

If you ask any parent, any teacher, any student in any school in Toronto, they'll tell you there is turmoil in the schools. There is not adequate funding to provide an adequate number of teachers, guidance counsellors, program administrators, people who give support programs to children with special needs. I was talking to a parent the other day in a school in my area where the caretaker has to take care of lunchroom supervision. The caretaker volunteers to take care of the kids at lunchtime because the teacher's aide who used to take care of the lunchtime supervision program was let go.

So here we are in one of the wealthiest provinces and one of the wealthiest jurisdictions in the world and we can't even afford to hire someone to supervise kids at lunchtime.

Children who have special education needs can't get assessments in our schools. They have to wait a year or two to get an assessment to get help. Never mind the help; they can't get the assessment done because in our schools many of our psychologists have been let go. Many of our schools in Toronto are missing librarians because of this government's faulty funding formula based on square footage and not on student needs.

We had so many opportunities. This budget was a great opportunity for this government to do something, set something straight, and it has failed, as I said, because it has not met those three basic, essential services that the provincial government is in business for. There's a provincial government to provide good housing, good education and good health care. That's what it's here for. That is its raison d'être, yet it doesn't do that. It is failing miserably. If you ask any Ontarian in Timmins or the Beaches or Sault Ste Marie or North York, they'll tell you this government is failing in education, in health care and in housing-three essential services.

I'd also like to talk about some opportunities that were missed. As you know, all over this province people are going to be faced with exorbitant increases in the price of heating their homes. Natural gas prices are going up 42%. We see the price of diesel fuel for running an automobile or the price of gas at the pump also going way beyond a person's ability to pay.

As you know, the federal government has put in a rebate program to help people on fixed incomes meet the crunch that's coming this winter. I would think this government had a good opportunity to do something in terms of helping people who are on a fixed low income to meet these exorbitant increases in the price of fuel. They had that chance. They could have matched the federal contribution and really helped people in northern Ontario, helped people who have to drive long distances, helped truckers who are faced with the high cost of diesel and can't make a living.

Yet there's not one word in this budget about helping seniors, people on fixed incomes, truckers who need a break on the cost of diesel fuel. There's no help for them. That's a missed opportunity, given the huge windfall this government has in tax revenues as referred to by our finance minister.

Another area where they could have helped is the whole area of property taxation. There are many seniors who have good pieces of property yet are cash-poor. They live in homes that they want to live in until their last days. The problem is that with the property taxation system of this province, these seniors on fixed incomes are taxed on virtual capital gains or unrealized capital gains. In other words, they have a home that may be assessed at $400,000. That home will get a huge tax assessment and a subsequent huge tax bill. That senior may only make $12,000 a year in pension.

How can that senior afford to pay a 20% or 30% increase in property taxes? They can't do it. This budget could have given a break to seniors. It could have done something with the Ontario property tax credit. It could have helped people on fixed incomes, people with disabilities, to give them a real, direct rebate with all the revenues this government has coming in. It didn't do that.

This government could have given a break to people who renovate, repair or retrofit their homes. As you know, all over Ontario people are rolling up their sleeves and improving their homes. They're adding on rooms; they're fixing up garages or building garages. They are improving their property. But as you know, this government gives people who improve their property a higher tax assessment. Subsequently, they get penalized with a higher property tax because they invested in their own homes.

Bill 152 had an opportunity, maybe, to stop the taxation of people who improve their homes, stop the penalization if people improve their homes. Instead, it allows higher taxes to be thrust upon people who spent their own money adding that new kitchen, adding that new bathroom; in some cases even expanding their home. This government doesn't appreciate the hard work and investment people make in their homes. It could have given them a bit of a break on that, but it doesn't-another missed opportunity.

Again, it's a budget that talks about the very healthy macroeconomy, but there are a lot of individuals in this province who are not benefiting.

There's another interesting proposal that's been made to this government, and they didn't pay heed to it. As you know, there is a home ownership program for first-time homebuyers. It's a savings plan where, if you put money aside, when you buy your first home you get a break on that as a first-time homebuyer.

Many people have said, "Why not also give that break to first-time homebuyers who buy resale homes?" Right now the provision just gives you an RSP home ownership contribution break if you buy a new home, but many people buy resale homes the first time. They are being penalized. They don't get that break, just because the home is resale. I hope that maybe in the next budget we'll get an attempt to at least treat people who buy resale homes the same way as first-time homebuyers who buy new homes. I don't know if you were aware of that, but I think that's an inequity that exists in this province.

It's something the government could have addressed because, as I said, the government has the financial wherewithal to help homebuyers who are struggling to buy that first home.

I don't know what the average price of a home is in Sault Ste Marie, but in the greater Toronto area you essentially have to pay about $250,000 for a first-time home. Even if they save $50,000, it's a huge amount of money, a huge mortgage for a young couple or a young person to get, so they need every break they can get. Right now the government doesn't recognize the fact that there are people buying resale homes who should get a break also.

I would also like to mention that there are some very good suggestions made out there in the marketplace. For instance, a lot of plumbers, carpenters, electricians and general tile setters will tell you there's a shortage of qualified tradespeople in the greater Toronto area.

A lot of tradespeople have told me and have written me and said, "Why wouldn't the government give a tax break to a professional, experienced bricklayer or a qualified, experienced plumber to have a young person come on as an apprentice so that the young person, after a year or two, can be a trained plumber or bricklayer?" Right now there's no inducement for that skilled, professional, veteran tradesperson to bring a young person on board because they say, "I just don't have any room to manoeuvre, as a small business person, with the taxes I have to pay." Why not give that person a tax rebate if he or she brings on a young person to be trained to be a bricklayer?

There's nothing wrong-in fact, it's a great way to make a living, as a carpenter, bricklayer or plumber, and people are dying for them all over southern Ontario. Yet there's no program for this government to help train and put apprentices into place to fill this growing demand. This government is not innovative enough. It's very static in its approach. It thinks very much in a myopic tunnel vision; it has no lateral vision whatsoever. It is too focused on looking down rather than looking ahead.

Those are some of the suggestions I've made. I just think the people of Ontario know full well that this government is awash in billions of dollars of surplus, that it should get its act together and put money back where it's most important: in our hospitals, in our schools and in building affordable housing, especially for our seniors. They have no excuses for not putting those programs into place, with all the money they have coming in from tax revenues.

The Acting Speaker: Comments or questions?

Mr Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): The member spoke of energy issues as related to this particular act, and I know that if he had had the opportunity, given that the time for debate has been very much limited by this government, he would have talked a little bit about the deregulation of hydro. I find interesting what's now happening in Alberta. Alberta, as you know, did exactly what this provincial government did when it came to deregulating and privatizing Ontario Hydro, with the promise that we were all going to get cheaper hydro rates.

We were going to be rolling in the dollars we were going to save by way of our hydro bills. We were looking, and salivating as we looked, at the savings we were going to get, and now we see in Alberta that the dream is nothing but a dream. It's a farce; it's not working.

Consumers over there and, even more important, industry, people like Algoma Steel, people like Falconbridge and others, the big users of hydro in Alberta, are saying that because of deregulation, because of what the Alberta government did, which is the same thing we did in Ontario at the hands of Mike Harris, hydro rates in Alberta are going up 200% to 400%.

I hope we don't see that in Ontario. But all indications are, in the early parts of our deregulated Ontario hydro market and the new privatized companies that are now split up into different parts, that we are starting to see the possibility of increased hydro rates in Ontario.

I want to stand in this House today, on December 18, 2000, to say what it means to users like Algoma Steel, Falconbridge, Abitibi and other large users in northern Ontario. If hydro rates were to go up, as we expect they will under this new deregulated market, it'll be disastrous for them economically. It's just another indication that the Conservatives' ideology does not work when it comes to actually making things work. In fact, we're going to be worse off. Just wait and see.

Mr Doug Galt (Northumberland): I was quite interested to listen to the member for Eglinton-Lawrence talk about the province being awash in surplus. He was also admitting to the booming economy but had some real problems admitting what created it.

I look back to the early 1990s, and I think he forgot what was happening in the States. There was a booming economy there in the early 1990s, and particularly as we moved into the mid-1990s, but nothing happened in Ontario. If he really looked, he would know what was going on. In the early 1990s, as we increased taxes under the NDP regime, revenue went down. You could see that each time taxes went up, revenue immediately went down. No question: with the cut in taxes, revenues in Ontario have indeed gone up.

I also look at why BC was doing well in the early 1990s but did disastrously in the late 1990s. It was certainly not related to the change going on in the US economy.

I think the member for Eglinton-Lawrence also forgot about the number of jobs lost in Ontario in the early 1990s. I don't think he remembers what was going on at that time.

The numbers on welfare escalated in the early 1990s and also escalated during their term in office in the late 1980s. Welfare numbers kept going up. Food bank activity skyrocketed in the late 1980s, and that was in boom times. If you want to relate a boom time to the American economy, that indeed would be the time to relate it to.

But have a look at the number of jobs created since 1995-some 830,000 net new jobs in Ontario-and over half a million people off welfare. That didn't happen coincidentally. That happened because of design, particularly through tax cuts in Ontario.

Mr Mario Sergio (York West): My compliments to my colleague the member for Eglinton-Lawrence for pointing out to the House what is really wrong with this government at this time. We have an opportunity and, as the member for Eglinton-Lawrence has said, we are missing a golden opportunity during these booming economic times.

Instead, what we have seen with this government and the way they've kept going since they were elected in 1995 is that they keep saying they are on the right track, but they are completely on the wrong train.

We have seen-and this is from someone who is not from either side of the House, the Provincial Auditor-the scathing reports he released just a couple of weeks ago on the record of this government. It is absolutely terrible that we have a government-with all due respect, Mr Speaker-that is even worse than in the Bob Rae days. It is absolutely abysmal.

They have increased the debt to $24 billion in this economic situation. Where are they giving the money? To the least needy. Instead of looking after the poor people, the most needy people, they are giving that money to those who don't need it.

Is this what the government wants to continue to do: attack the workers and the poor people in Ontario instead of using this golden opportunity to say, "We have an opportunity to rebuild our health care system, our education" and really give a hand up