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

September 25, 2002

37th Parliament, 3rd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2002-Sept-25 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Wednesday 25 September 2002 Mercredi 25 septembre 2002

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

HIGHWAY 69

HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING

NORTH AMERICAN

INDIGENOUS GAMES

CHARLES CETINSKI

ARTHUR DRUMMOND

INTERNATIONAL LANGUAGE PROGRAMS

ROBERT HARDIE

PREMIER OF ONTARIO

JAPANESE CANADIAN

CULTURAL CENTRE

VISITORS

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

SOLICITORS AMENDMENT ACT

(CONTINGENCY FEE AGREEMENTS), 2002 /

LOI DE 2002 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LES PROCUREURS

(ENTENTES SUR DES

HONORAIRES CONDITIONNELS)

GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY ACT, 2002 /

LOI DE 2002 SUR

L'EFFICIENCE DU GOUVERNEMENT

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY

ORAL QUESTIONS

BIRTH CERTIFICATES

SPECIAL EDUCATION

HYDRO RATES

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

HYDRO RATES

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

SLOT MACHINES

VISITOR

URBAN STRATEGY

LONG-TERM CARE

SLOT MACHINES

EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION

RURAL EDUCATION FUNDING

ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES LEGISLATION

DIAMOND MINE

PETITIONS

HIGHWAY 69

LONG-TERM CARE

RENT REGULATION

ONTARIO NORTHLAND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION

KIDNEY-PANCREAS TRANSPLANTS

LONG-TERM CARE

CHILDREN'S HEALTH SERVICES

SOINS DE LONGUE DURÉE

LONG-TERM CARE

HEALTH CARE WORKERS

LONG-TERM CARE

ORDERS OF THE DAY

TORONTO WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION

CORPORATION ACT, 2002 /

LOI DE 2002 SUR LA SOCIÉTÉ

DE REVITALISATION

DU SECTEUR RIVERAIN DE TORONTO

Wednesday 25 September 2002 Mercredi 25 septembre 2002

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

HIGHWAY 69

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): Here is the news update from MCTV as of 11:40 this morning: "A two vehicle accident on Highway 69 near Still River about nine this morning sent a couple of people to hospital with serious injuries. Police are still investigating the crash between a pickup and a car.... One person was trapped in the wreckage for well over an hour ... An air ambulance was dispatched to the scene" of this head-on collision.

From the Ontario Provincial Police communications centre, "a second accident that occurred about a half-hour ago near the Pickerel River bridge has closed traffic in both directions on Highway 69 ... According to early reports, a woman is trapped in her car with serious head injuries. An air ambulance is just on the scene," and one person has been sent to hospital with serious injuries. "MCTV's Sasha Novak was returning from the first accident and is in the Pickerel area," stuck in the road closure.

When will the Eves government listen to people like Henry and Colette LeBouthillier, who collected more than 4,000 signatures of the 20,000 petition signatures that I will be submitting later on today? When will this government listen to the 6,650 people who logged on to my Web site to sign the electronic petition? When will the Eves government listen to the 9,000 people who have taken bumper stickers that read, "Four-lane Highway 69"?

When will the Eves government listen to the many municipalities, chambers of commerce, labour groups and service clubs from all over the north that are telling you, "It's time"?

When will the Eves government listen to the Crash 69 Committee when they tell you that 46 deaths on Highway 69 between Sudbury and Parry Sound is just too many lives? You have to pave that road. It has to be a four-lane, multi-lane highway, and it has to start today.

The Crash 69 Committee invites the public out this Friday at 11 o'clock at the corner of Pioneer Road and Highway 69 as we launch our next step, our billboard campaign to ensure that this government understands how important four-laning Highway 69 is.

HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): It's another fine mess this Conservative government has created down in Niagara as a result of the imposition of so-called hospital restructuring. Niagara Health Services finds itself in chaos, dysfunctional from day one, and now board members resigning and senior staff resigning.

One of the solutions to the problem that this government created is passage of my bill, which provides for democratization of hospital governance. It is imperative that this largest single expenditure of public funds have direct public accountability. There is a private member's bill before this Legislature now that will provide for direct election by municipalities in Niagara region to the board of directors of the Niagara health system.

Why is this government so fearful of democracy? Why is this government so fearful of accountability? Democracy and accountability are part of the solutions to the crisis this government has created around health care in Niagara region. Niagara region needs, immediately, some direct assistance, monetary input, into the provision of home care and other services for seniors and it radically needs, dramatically needs, the democratization of governance over its Niagara Health System. That can be achieved by speedy passage of my bill to provide for direct election to the board of governors of the Niagara Health System.

NORTH AMERICAN

INDIGENOUS GAMES

Mr Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): This past summer, 180 athletes from the Six Nations reserve teamed up with other native people across the province to form Team Ontario. They joined in a week of competition, fun and memories at the Indigenous Games.

Close to 6,500 aboriginal athletes and coaches from across North America converged on Winnipeg this year for the largest Indigenous Games ever. Teams vied for gold in 16 events ranging from track and field to boxing, shooting and tae kwon do, as well as traditional sports: archery, canoeing and lacrosse.

While Team Ontario may not have come home with the total team award, our proud athletes represented their people and their province well. Six Nations athletes alone brought back 56 medals, including 31 gold, 17 silver and eight bronze, after competing in 13 of the 16 sporting venues.

Building on their already well-earned reputation as a lacrosse power, Six Nations brought home gold in all three divisions, and Six Nations ball teams earned four gold, two silver and two bronze.

I'd like to mention that on the soccer field, Team Ontario's only entry was a group of young athletes from the remote northern community of Mishkeegogamang. This was their first experience in a large city environment, and they too made it count, taking home third-place honours.

I want to congratulate all our native athletes who took

part in the Indigenous Games and thank them proudly for representing not only their communities but our province.

CHARLES CETINSKI

Mr Ted McMeekin (Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Aldershot): It's obviously a day for great athletes. It's with a great sense of pride that I rise today to acknowledge and to celebrate the accomplishments of a wonderful friend and a true Ontario hero.

Several years ago, as the result of a tragic plane crash, Charles Cetinski, avid mountain climber and pilot, was left paralyzed from the waist down. Mr Cetinski spent several months in the rehab centre at Chedoke hospital. Always candid, Mr Cetinski had this to say about the centre: "It's a grim place, a terrible place. The people [working] there are great, there's nothing wrong with the personnel -- but the place itself has no facilities.

That's why I want to create a place to help people get their lives back together and that's why we're going to raise funds for a special new resource centre." That said, Charlie and his friends envisaged a Golden Horseshoe Marathon, a 210-kilometre wheelchair trek between Niagara Falls and Queen's Park. The marathon would raise money to fulfill his dream.

But Charlie wasn't just raising money. More importantly, he was raising awareness, awareness of the positive contribution people with people with disabilities make every single day to improving the lives of all Ontarians. Charlie puts it well: "Just because you see someone in a chair they are not necessarily handicapped -- they just cannot use their legs."

September 19 marked the conclusion of the fourth annual marathon. Amazingly, Mr Cetinski and his wheelchair-bound friend Chuck Mealing broke the world record for consecutive wheelchair marathons, completing 10 back-to-back 42-km events. I'm sure all members of this House will want to join me in congratulating Charlie and his friends. What a phenomenal inspiration they are to all of us.

ARTHUR DRUMMOND

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): Mr Speaker, I'm sure you'll extend my time as well.

I rise in the House to pay tribute to Clarington's museums and their new exhibit at the Clarke Museum and Archives. It highlights the work of one of our most notable artists, Arthur A. Drummond.

Arthur Drummond was born in 1891 and was a contemporary of the Group of Seven. The community also remembers him as Orono's bank manager. In fact, young couples in the village were often invited to the artist's home to choose a painting as a wedding gift. His paintings are treasured by many Ontario and Orono residents and families. In fact, local residents have kindly loaned their A.A. Drummond paintings to the exhibit. Although Drummond painted scenes in Muskoka, the Kawarthas and Haliburton, many of the settings are in my riding of Durham.

A.A. Drummond retired from banking in 1937 to become a full-time artist. His career spanned over 63 years. He exhibited throughout his life with respected art organizations in Canada and the United States. In 1930, he was the only Canadian artist to be elected to the American Watercolor Society.

I would like to commend guest curator Mary Lofthouse for bringing this show together at the Old Kirby Schoolhouse. Congratulations also to Kirby museum curator Charles Taws, the museum board chair, Julie Cashin-Oster, vice-chair Harold St Croix, the museum board and the many, many volunteers.

The Drummond exhibit opened Sunday, September 22. It runs until November 3, Tuesday to Sunday, at the Clarke Museum and Archives at Kirby, just north of Orono off Highway 35/115. I would encourage all members to attend.

I might add, Mr Speaker, with the time you permit, that there's also an excellent exhibit of the Queen's Jubilee on display here at the Legislature, put on by curator Charles Taws.

INTERNATIONAL LANGUAGE PROGRAMS

Mr Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): I am glad the Minister of Citizenship is here to hear our condemnation of his unacceptable behaviour yesterday.

Mr Speaker, as you know, our leader, Dalton McGuinty, asked this Minister of Citizenship a question yesterday: if he agreed with the government-appointed auditor who is in the process of killing the international language programs. He should simply have said yes or no if he didn't know a better answer.

What we need today is very simple. Every educator knows that kids today need to be ready to compete in the international environment. To do that, we need to have a better level of education, a better understanding of international programs, especially international language programs. We all know that, except this minister who is authorized to speak on behalf of Ontario newcomers. He's not. What we want is for him to move aside. We want him to move aside because the Liberals can take over and show that the next generation of students will be better prepared for the future to ensure that we in Ontario are competing internationally.

Hon Carl DeFaria (Minister of Citizenship, minister responsible for seniors): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: First of all, my friend on the other side should know that's a budget item under the Ministry of Education.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Order. Will the minister take his seat. It's not a point of order.

Interjection.

The Speaker: The minister will take his seat now, please. Thank you.

ROBERT HARDIE

Mr Bob Wood (London West): On September 20, 2002, I attended a ceremony at the London Health Sciences Centre where Robert Hardie, a researcher in the division of urology, donated $1 million in support of research into prostate and other urologic cancers. In June of this year, Mr Hardie won the $10-million jackpot in the Lotto 6/49, and he continues his work at the health sciences centre.

Mr Hardie said in announcing his gift, "As a research team, we are driven by the need to know, to push the boundaries of knowledge that will improve the lives of our patients." Mr Hardie said he enjoyed his work, his colleagues, his patients and their families, and it was important to him to share his good fortune and see that the tradition of excellence continues.

What Mr Hardie has done shows how committed he is both to his community and his work. The donation will support the creation of the Robert Hardie research chair in prostate and other urologic cancers. The scientists to be recruited will further the understanding of the biology of prostate cancer.

At the same time, Dr Joseph Chin, chief of urology at London Health Sciences Centre, also announced the establishment of the Prostate Cancer Centre. The Prostate Cancer Centre will be a collaboration of physicians, clinicians and researchers from the London Health Sciences Centre, the Lawson Health Research Institute, St Joseph's Health Care and the London Regional Cancer Centre.

I know that all members of the Legislative Assembly will join with me in our heartfelt thanks to Robert Hardie. His dedication and generous gift will go a long way in helping to fight this type of cancer.

PREMIER OF ONTARIO

Mr David Ramsay (Timiskaming-Cochrane): I used to believe that Ernie Eves looked like a million bucks, but apparently I've been underestimating him, because the financial disclosures from the leadership race show he's not the million-dollar man -- oh, no -- he's the $3-million Premier.

Bay Street almost drowned Ernie Eves in a sea of campaign donations, and in return the $3-million Premier showers his backers in corporate tax cuts.

The $3-million Premier also hands his wealthy backers private school vouchers to send their kids to Upper Canada College, and the $3-million Premier lets his rich pals jump to the front of the line when it comes to two-tier health care at MRI clinics. Seniors on fixed incomes are forced to pay skyrocketing hydro rates, thanks to Ernie, but Ernie has hundreds of thousands of dollars to pay for PC party memberships.

The $3-million Premier bought the Premier's office, no doubt about it, just like another steak at Bigliardi's.

Only Dalton McGuinty has the new plan and the new perspective to earn the Premier's office.

JAPANESE CANADIAN

CULTURAL CENTRE

Ms Marilyn Mushinski (Scarborough Centre): On Monday, with my colleagues Minister Turnbull and Minister Tsubouchi, I was honoured and pleased to honour a worthy beneficiary of the Ontario Trillium Foundation program. The Japanese Canadian Cultural Centre received a total of $210,000.

This funding has a noble goal, which is to support the JCCC's Nikkei Heritage Centre. The Nikkei Heritage Centre serves as a reminder of the history of the Japanese people in Canada. It commemorates the 125th anniversary of the arrival of the first Japanese immigrants to our nation.

The Ontario government is proud to support the Japanese Canadian Cultural Centre. But government funding for the JCCC would mean nothing without the initiative of its organizers, like Bill Petrick, Sid Ikeda, Martin Kobayashi, Jim Ura, Russ Takashima, Gary Kowaguchi, Steve Oikawa and Connie Sugiyama, who have the drive to build a monument to their heritage. Thank you for your indispensable contribution to the Toronto and Scarborough community particularly and to the province of Ontario. I hope that Monday's announcement proves that your hard work has not gone unnoticed.

Minister Turnbull, Minister Tsubouchi, I and all of my colleagues respect the legacy of the generations of Japanese Canadians who have contributed and continue to contribute to Canadian life.

As a representative for Scarborough, I am proud to support the JCCC's initiatives. These initiatives make our neighbourhoods that much richer.

VISITORS

Mr Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I want to take the opportunity to welcome some very special guests we have today from Schreiber, Ontario. If I may introduce Mayor Bob Krause of the township of Schreiber; Councillor Peter Doig; Neil Tremblay, township superintendent and chief building official; and Marshall Tannahill, economic development coordinator. Welcome. It's a great community in my riding. I'm very proud to have them here.

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

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I'm pleased to introduce to this Legislature some visitors from the city of Creazzo, Italy, in the province of Vicenza. We have with us Mr Alberto Tomasi, who is an oft-awarded and acknowledged chef in Italy; his wife, Giovana Tomasi; and their friend Vittorio Pretto. They're accompanied by their host here in Canada, Bianca Rossetto from Thorold, Ontario, in the riding of Niagara Centre.

The Speaker: We welcome our honoured guests.

While we're welcoming people, in the Speaker's gallery you will note that we have the new legislative interns for the year 2002-03. Please join me in welcoming our special guests as well.

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): I beg to inform the House that today the Clerk received the fourth report of the standing committee on government agencies.

Pursuant to standing order 106(e), the report is deemed to be adopted by the House.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

SOLICITORS AMENDMENT ACT

(CONTINGENCY FEE AGREEMENTS), 2002 /

LOI DE 2002 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LES PROCUREURS

(ENTENTES SUR DES

HONORAIRES CONDITIONNELS)

Mr Bryant moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 178,

An Act to amend the Solicitors Act to permit and to regulate contingency fee agreements / Projet de loi 178, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les procureurs pour permettre et réglementer les ententes sur des honoraires conditionnels.

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

The member for a short statement?

Mr Michael Bryant (St Paul's): The bill amends the Solicitors Act to legalize and regulate contingency fees in the province of Ontario. It amends an initial bill as a result of the findings of the Ontario Court of Appeal, which will not be appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada, as has been indicated by the Attorney General, and the latest recommendations from the working committee on point from the Law Society of Upper Canada. It reflects those changes herein and the regulations will be made in consultation with the law society.

GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY ACT, 2002 /

LOI DE 2002 SUR

L'EFFICIENCE DU GOUVERNEMENT

Mr Flaherty moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 179,

An Act to promote government efficiency and to improve services to taxpayers by amending or repealing certain Acts and by enacting one new Act / Projet de loi 179, Loi visant à favoriser l'efficience du gouvernement et à améliorer les services aux contribuables en modifiant ou en abrogeant certaines lois et en édictant une nouvelle loi.

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

All those in favour will please say "aye."

All those opposed will please say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it. Carried.

The minister for a short statement?

Hon Jim Flaherty (Minister of Enterprise, Opportunity and Innovation): In ministers' statements.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY

Hon Jim Flaherty (Minister of Enterprise, Opportunity and Innovation): Since this government was elected in 1995, Ontario's economy has prospered. In the past seven years, the Ontario government has laid the foundations for this prosperity. We have cut taxes, eliminated the deficit and balanced the budget. We have raised educational standards. We have reduced barriers to business. We have welcomed investments and trade. The result is clear: there are now 955,400 new jobs in Ontario that did not exist in 1995.

It is the fundamental responsibility of the Ministry of Enterprise, Opportunity and Innovation to ensure Ontario's continued economic growth. To achieve this goal, we must constantly ensure that our legislation reflects the changing needs of our society, takes advantage of technological developments, updates outmoded regulations and eliminates unnecessary legislation and regulations.

That is why I am pleased to introduce the Government Efficiency Act, 2002. If passed, this bill would clarify, streamline and update dozens of acts of 15 different ministries. The bill would repeal 15 outdated acts and amend nearly 90 others.

This government has already repealed more than 57 outdated acts, amended more than 200 acts and eliminated more than 1,900 unnecessary regulations since 1995. Much of this stems from the great work of the Red Tape Commission, co-chaired by my honourable colleague Steve Gilchrist, parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Energy and MPP for Scarborough East, and by Mr Frank Sheehan, the former MPP for Lincoln.

The commission has been vigilant in ensuring that outdated, outmoded and unnecessary red tape is eliminated or replaced with thoughtful, needful smart tape. In fact, the commission has been instrumental in organizing the international Red Tape to Smart Tape conference that is taking place right now, this week, in Toronto, with people around the world looking at what Ontario has done in this area of red tape.

Some of the amendments in the bill before the House would ensure that the people of Ontario get better service from their government. Other amendments would enable ministries to streamline their operations for greater efficiency or modernize outdated regulations. Still others would enhance the safety of the people of Ontario. For example, the use of reconditioned air bags being sold or installed in vehicles has been linked with serious injuries. The government is using this bill to prohibit the sale and installation of rebuilt air bags in Ontario.

In many cases we are updating our regulatory framework, but we are also protecting our citizens. Take for example the amendments being made in this bill to various health statutes, including amendments to better deter fraud and go after those who abuse our public health system. The changes include significantly stiffer penalties and a clarification that courts can impose orders that require compensation and/or restitution.

The government is also using this bill to strengthen our commitment to addressing domestic violence, supporting victims and holding abusers accountable. In order to best protect victims, the Domestic Violence Protection Act would be amended to help ensure that this complex piece of legislation is implemented as quickly and effectively as possible.

The government is also using this bill to reflect modern technological advances. The Provincial Offences Act would be amended to allow bail hearings in certain circumstances to be held by means of audio or video technology and to allow search warrants to be issued by fax. Not only would these changes help modernize our justice system, but they would have the added benefit of bringing them in line with amendments made to the Criminal Code of Canada.

I encourage all of you to support this government efficiency legislation.

Mr Dwight Duncan (Windsor-St Clair): This is indeed a long and interesting piece of legislation that was just put in our hands, and we are going to be looking at it very carefully. It's difficult to respond to it in its entirety in five minutes, let alone not having read it, but let's talk about this government's history on red tape and on deregulation.

This government's idea in the past of deregulation has led to the tragedy in Walkerton, it has led to less protection of the public, it has led to the appointment of former cabinet ministers to the board of GO and it has been done in secret by a Red Tape Commission.

Members on this side of the House and indeed members on the government side of the House got to see how other Parliaments in the Commonwealth deal with regulation. It's done in an open session, it's done by elected members and it's done before there's any legislation introduced, where it can be properly studied and not just jammed through.

It will be interesting to see if this government uses, yet again, time allocation to shut down debate on a bill that, by the minister's own acknowledgement, affects countless statutes, countless pieces of legislation that affect the governance not only of this province but of charities, of municipalities. We will be circulating this to those organizations to get their response about it.

The government hailed the deregulation of hydro as something that was good for the consumers of this province. Members on both sides of this House know full well what the impact of their 40% hydro rate increases has been over this summer, and God forbid we should have a cold winter. That was supposed to be an example of how more efficient deregulated markets can serve consumers.

We've seen it in water charges, we've seen it in hydro charges, we've seen it in Union Gas charges, a government that's abandoning working families and seniors on fixed incomes in favour of corporate profits for those who've made their leadership campaigns such a lucrative undertaking over the last few months. Long-term care, the deregulation: what effect do all of these things have on our way of life, on our quality of life, and on government's ability to regulate different aspects of it?

My colleague from Toronto Centre-Rosedale just yesterday spoke about the need for better regulation of the investment industry in Ontario. We've yet to hear from the government on that. Hopefully there is something in here that will protect average investors, who are working people, who have pension plans, who have been so burned over the last few years -- many of us in this House, in fact.

And what about their deregulation on the number of baths that senior citizens can get in our long-term-care facilities? Was that an example of government efficiency? Was that their idea of saving money and providing for a stronger economy? We say, and my leader, Dalton McGuinty, says, that they have no vision of how government should work. They certainly have no idea of the compensation between efficiency of dollars and the need to protect the people of this province.

They've abandoned it on so many other occasions that we suspect -- indeed, we believe -- there will be parts of this bill that will be so offensive that we couldn't possibly support them. We'll see if they're prepared to go to committee and take amendments. We'll see if this new breed of Conservative doesn't want to use time allocation the way they have in the past.

Dalton McGuinty and the Ontario Liberals will stand up for those seniors who have had their baths taken away in long-term-care facilities. Dalton McGuinty and the Ontario Liberals say that your plans for deregulation of Hydro have hurt the most vulnerable people in our society. Dalton McGuinty and the Ontario Liberals will protect consumers, protect average Ontarians, and put the interests of average people ahead of the big corporate interests that have so steadfastly supported the party opposite.

Mr Tony Martin (Sault Ste Marie): Again we have before us another of the government's tactic in this House over the last seven or eight years, which is to take everything that they want to dump or impose on the people of Ontario and wrap it up in an omnibus bill, deliver it here, allow us some very minimal and modest opportunity to speak to it, to look into it, to do research, to see what impact it would have on the people of this province, and then to bring a time allocation motion in, usually on a Wednesday afternoon, when the member for Nickel Belt and myself are here, ram it through by Thursday, and then it becomes the law of the land, only to discover a week or two later the real impact, the real effect of its damage on the everyday life, the public life of the people of this province.

The people who have to deliver education in this province are only too aware, remember only too well the imposition of the omnibus bill that imposed on them control from the centre that has made the delivery of education in this province nothing but chaos and a travesty: a school system that was built up over years by different stripes of government, in one fell swoop with an omnibus bill through this House imposed on all those good people who work in education, destroyed the system and set people against each other, and continues to do that to this day. Anybody who has children in the elementary or secondary school in this province knows this only too well.

The megacity omnibus bill: Mr Prue, the member who was elected from Toronto, who was the mayor of East York at the time, tells us that the impact of that omnibus bill on the municipality of Toronto and those municipalities that were amalgamated has been drastic, has been very, very difficult. We still don't know the result, the cost of all that, not only financially but to the lives of individuals who live in those communities and to the institutions that try to deliver services.

We'll be asking for a prolonged and long debate on this bill. We'll want time to get into it in some detail to find out what the Trojan horse is holding this time and to give effective opposition and critique to it so that everybody out there, at the end of the day, when this government ultimately rams it through, as they will -- because that's their approach to getting legislation through this place; that's their understanding of how democracy works now in Ontario. They'll come in here and ram it through.

We'll have told them, by the way, that we will drag this out, ask for hearings, ask for full debate, ask for committees, ask to travel across the province, that the people of this province will understand what it means and whom it's affecting and who is imposing it on them.

We don't have to look very far to understand the effect of the agenda of this government on different parts of our province, whether it be groups of people, geographic areas or organizations.

Up in northern Ontario, those of us who are struggling with an economy that has gone into serious recession know that this government in one fell swoop, over a period of a year or so, got rid of those vehicles that governments of various stripes, Tory, Liberal and New Democrat, put in place to deal with the cyclical nature of the economy up there: NODC, the Northern Ontario Development Corp -- gone; NOTC, the Northern Ontario Transportation Commission -- on its last legs, soon to be gone; NOHFC -- its terms of reference changed so badly that nobody can qualify to apply for it any more, never mind that the private sector, the engine that, so said by the government, will drive the recovery and the economy, has been changed so that the private sector cannot even apply.

The Ministry of Northern Development and Mines has been hollowed out. The Ministry of Natural Resources has been shrunk to a point where they can't do their job any more. Just look at last week, when we discovered that Brascan, up in northern Ontario, drained a whole lake. The Ministry of Natural Resources didn't have the resources to go in and check that out. If you try to add an inch to the end of your dock, they'll be there tomorrow, but they don't have the resources and the government doesn't have the political will to send them in to check up on their friends at Brascan when they drain a whole lake.

This is the kind of damage that the agenda of this government is imposing upon this province, not to speak of Walkerton, where seven people died; not to speak of the fact that Dudley George was killed while trying to clear up this government's attempt to clear out a park; not to speak of the fact that Kimberly Rogers passed away in Sudbury a year ago, and that Joshua Fleuelling, trying to find a hospital to get into, passed away in the back of an ambulance. This is the kind of thing; this is the kind of result we can expect from this government.

We're concerned that this new omnibus bill will have that kind of effect on this province as well.

ORAL QUESTIONS

BIRTH CERTIFICATES

Mr Bruce Crozier (Essex): My question is for the Minister of Business and Consumer Services. September 11 last year was supposed to be a wake-up call. When Dalton McGuinty raised questions with serious concerns about loopholes in the process to get birth certificates, the government promised to fix it. In fact, just last year your predecessor assured members of this House and the people of Ontario that the system was more secure than ever and that all the holes had been plugged. But they haven't.

We've confirmed with police that blank birth certificates and an unknown amount of personal information were stolen from a Brampton land registry office in June. At least 500 blank certificates have been recovered through three police search warrants.

How did you allow this to happen, and, in light of this information, can you tell me how it was that we were assured last year that birth certificates are safe and secure when they surely are not?

Hon Tim Hudak (Minister of Consumer and Business Services): I appreciate the question from the member opposite. I can say with confidence that we have increased the safety and security of the birth certificates within the system -- my predecessor, Minister Sterling, followed by myself -- including increasing the information required by the applicant, including shared secrets. We've launched a campaign to alert consumers about the risks of identity theft, to take care of their own birth certificates, requiring lost or stolen birth certificates to be reported to the government and limiting the amount of documents that can be used as proof of citizenship.

The member has been right. There was a story in the paper some time ago that we've been working with the Peel regional police with respect to some missing documents at the land registry office. We've worked very closely with the police. I think if you ask the Peel police, you'll be very satisfied with the response the ministry has had to clear up the issue.

Mr Crozier: We have, in fact, asked the police. For weeks, though, ministry staff were telling the public and members of this Legislature that the service problems were due to a computer glitch.

You've been covering up that truth. Now you've failed to give us any concrete evidence of how you're going to protect the security of birth certificates. There's been another breach of security. Clearly, this is a massive breach, and clearly, you are responsible. When approximately 300 birth certificates disappeared from an office in Toronto 10 years ago, Mike Harris asked the minister of the day to step down.

You've allowed false statements to be fed to the media, to MPPs and members of the general public. How do you defend these actions, and why should we trust you to fix this problem when you haven't acted so far?

Hon Mr Hudak: The government has acted in the past, we continue to act today and we'll continue to act in the future to ensure that essential documents like birth certificates and others are kept very secure. In fact, I think we have a great record to be proud of. We'll continue to be proud of that into the future.

As I mentioned, when alerted by police about that particular incident, we acted immediately. I think you'll find that the police are quite satisfied with the response of the ministry. We will continue to work to make sure that essential documents like birth certificates are kept high-security and that we won't have any incidents like that in the future.

Mr Crozier: Your high security isn't much, and you didn't act immediately. A fraudulent birth certificate, frankly, is a criminal's ticket for a free ride. With a birth certificate, you can get a driver's licence, you can get a health card, you can access welfare and the health system and, most importantly, it helps you get a passport. With blank certificates in hand, all that a criminal would need to forge one and in fact get a false identity is to have a typewriter.

You know all of this, and yet when the documents were stolen right from beneath your nose, you didn't do anything to begin reviewing your systems until an OPP officer called and said they had someone in custody.

Why did you wait two and a half months after the theft was reported to start an internal investigation on the security of these blank birth certificates?

Hon Mr Hudak: As I said, the ministry had co-operated fully with the police in terms of making sure that information was supplied and to make sure we notified -- as is common; some of the new rules we brought in -- if there are missing numbers out of there, we communicate those numbers to other areas so that those birth certificates cannot be used to assume a false identification.

Identity theft is something we take very seriously in the ministry. We act to shut that down, with the changes the previous minister brought in and that we continue to enforce. If there's a lost or stolen birth certificate, those numbers are shut down so they can't use those to get other pieces of ID and to assume identities.

SPECIAL EDUCATION

Mrs Marie Bountrogianni (Hamilton Mountain): My question is for the Minister of Education. I have a letter by a board official responding on behalf of your supervisor which shows that the most vulnerable schoolchildren in the Hamilton public board are denied access to timely assessments. Specifically, the $274,000 in one-time funding to support intensive assessments has not been allocated by your appointed supervisor. Why is your hand-picked supervisor denying the most vulnerable students in the board immediate access to funds for these professional assessments?

Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Deputy Premier, Minister of Education): On the issues of special education and assessment, our government has moved forward in a way to ensure that all the children in the province who need special help can receive the additional support that is necessary. I am sure the supervisor will be moving forward in a way that is responding to the direction he is being given by the staff of the board.

Mrs Bountrogianni: This supervisor is the same person your government hired to cut the budget for Hamilton CCACs, which led to the loss of home care for hundreds of disabled and senior citizens. You can see why the community is anxious. There's urgency to this particular matter. The deadline for the provincially mandated review of files for 800 high-needs students is coming up in November. This cumbersome paperwork is of your making. The students will simply have to wait to get the help they need.

Minister, I ask you again: why is your provincially appointed supervisor refusing to allocate this $274,000 immediately to support the neediest students in the community?

Hon Mrs Witmer: I can assure you that the comprehensive review of the intensive support amount has resulted in the identification of many children. Certainly, if the money has been allocated and provided, the money will flow to the students as directed.

Mrs Bountrogianni: We saw what you did to special education in Ottawa. We won't let you do this in Hamilton. First, you cut the board's budget so that they could not meet the students' needs. You then introduced massive paperwork to access these assessments. Finally, you've appointed a supervisor who refuses to allocate the ministry funds for timely assessments for the most disabled students.

I've worked in this field for 20 years and I know the importance of these assessments for the success of students. If we are judged by how we treat our most vulnerable, your government has failed miserably. On behalf of the most vulnerable and most disabled students in my community, I must demand that you direct your supervisor to allocate these funds immediately.

Hon Mrs Witmer: Perhaps I could correct the record on one of the points that was made regarding Ottawa. One of the accomplishments of the supervisor in Ottawa -- and you raised the issue, I would say to the member -- is that it was the supervisor in Ottawa who actually lifted the hiring freeze on teachers, and there were about 150 additional teachers hired in Ottawa. That includes special education teachers who also are part of that 150. So I think it's time to make sure we don't confuse fact with fiction.

I would also quote from a comment you made at one time about our funding formula. You identified the fact that our funding formula is good because it's the first time we've "mandated special services, psychologists, social workers and speech and language pathologists." Then you went on to say, "I applaud the government for that."

I can assure you that we will continue to meet the needs of special education students in Ontario.

HYDRO RATES

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Minister of Energy. Earlier this week, the Premier said he was not concerned about sky-high electricity bills. He tried to say that the problem was merely a hot summer.

Well, today the Independent Market Operator says that it's the Premier who's full of hot air, that in fact the electricity shortages are going to continue into the fall and that consumers across Ontario -- farmers, homeowners and businesses -- will continue to pay through the nose for electricity.

Admit the obvious, Minister. The problem isn't a hot summer. The problem is your government's scheme to privatize and deregulate our hydro. On behalf of consumers of electricity, will you commit now to cancel your disastrous strategy of privatizing and deregulating our electricity?

Hon John R. Baird (Minister of Energy, minister responsible for francophone affairs): I read the Independent Electricity Market Operator's report and their 18-month outlook, and it says, "The energy production capacity is generally expected to be well above energy demand levels in each month of the outlook period." About the reference resource scenario and the delayed resource scenario: "No additional energy is expected to be needed to meet the Ontario forecast energy demand." Maybe he should read the full report.

Mr Hampton: This is the

summary of it: coverage in the Toronto Star, "Power Shortage to Continue"; coverage in the National Post, "Electricity Supply Trouble"; coverage in the Globe and Mail, "Ontario Power Prices Rival Rates Set in US."

Minister, it also says that if you continue down the road with hydro privatization, you are going to put Ontario consumers in a more and more vulnerable position, a position where people are vulnerable to the Enron-style rip-offs we saw in California.

Just a simple commitment from you: on behalf of the consumers of Ontario, will you commit not to sell off any more of our hydro generating stations?

Hon Mr Baird: My job as Minister of Energy is that I've actually got to read the report. I can't just read the Globe and Mail and the National Post and the Toronto Star. You actually have to read the report. I suggest to the member opposite that he do that.

One of the things we're tremendously committed to doing is to decontrol; that is to say, the Ontario Power Generation Corp shouldn't have the market power it now has to set prices. That's why we're following a process of decontrol. If he's suggesting that isn't a good idea, I suspect once again that he'd be alone.

Mr Hampton: Minister, just read the second paragraph of the Independent Market Operator's release. It's very clear that reserve levels -- in other words, the levels to protect Ontario consumers from price rip-offs -- are going to be below the Independent Market Operator's standard. What he's saying is that you're exposing more consumers across this province to hydro rip-offs.

Now, you may think that's a joke, but I'll tell you, industries, businesses, farmers and consumers don't think it's a funny joke when they're paying double the price for hydro. Seniors living on fixed incomes don't think it's a joke when the hydro bill doubles but the pension cheque doesn't.

You're looking after your Bay Street friends. You're looking after them tremendously. Will you do something for the consumers of Ontario besides just sticking it to them?

Hon Mr Baird: I think if you check the report, the word "rip-off" isn't a word that's used in the report. As minister, I take the concerns outlined in the Independent Electricity Market Operator's latest forecast about reserves quite seriously. It's something obviously we're working on with respect to building new generation facilities in the province of Ontario. We have seen a good number of new generation facilities come on-line. To date, we've seen another $180 million in new investment in the waterpower industry, where nine waterpower projects are currently being built.

We see new generation capacity being brought on-line in Sarnia. We see new generation power being brought on-line in Windsor.

If I read the report -- he's read the newspaper and the press release; I suggest he read the report -- it says, and I'll read it again for the member, "The energy production capacity is generally expected to be well above energy demand."

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is to the Deputy Premier. I would say to the Deputy Premier, yesterday was a very shameful day in Ontario. It was a shameful day because in effect homeless people, some of the poorest, most vulnerable people in this province, essentially had the police sent out to round them up. Your government's way of dealing with a social problem is simply to send in the police and turn them out.

Minister, it's pretty clear that there is a big problem growing, that there is not enough affordable housing, not in this city, not in many other cities. We have put forward a plan that would allow us to build not only 8,000 units of affordable housing each year, but 2,800 units of supportive housing for people who need a hand up. What is your plan for affordable housing, or do you have a plan for affordable housing in this province? Or do you just send in the police?

Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Deputy Premier, Minister of Education): I'm going to refer that to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Hon Chris Hodgson (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): I think yesterday's events are tragic in the sense that a lot of people need shelter, need all kinds of assistance. I know the city of Toronto is working on that with their agencies, and the province of Ontario, as you heard yesterday, is there to support with the homeless shelters.

In terms of the housing policy, there is good news. More than at any time in history, most people are into home ownership. There are more vacancies coming on-line; 40% of condos are rented. Clearly, you're talking about the affordable end.

Interjections.

Hon Mr Hodgson: I'm just telling you the facts and the history. If you don't want to hear the good news, if you want to concentrate on the bad news --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Order. The minister has the floor.

Hon Mr Hodgson: I'm trying to point out that there is some good news happening in the housing industry itself. We have record numbers of people being able to buy their first home. That's good news. There's still a problem with affordable rents at the low end. Quite frankly, it's because of past policies, where we killed the market.

We're also planning to implement the federal program. For the first time in 10 years, the federal government has put forward dollars for an affordable housing program. We're going to participate in that and roll that out this fall. There's also assistance for rent-geared-to-income subsidies, which in August, if you have been following it --

The Speaker: The minister's time is up. Supplementary?

Mr Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): Minister, quite frankly the policies of your government surrounding housing and a great many other things are quite shameful. Your first act as a government was to slash welfare. Your second act was to deregulate housing so that today in Toronto it costs about $2,500 a year more to live in an apartment than it did when your government deregulated housing. It's been a windfall for the landlords.

You've refused to increase ODSP for some of our most vulnerable and disabled citizens. The streets are meaner. The streets are full of desperate people. We have tent cities not only in Toronto, but under literally every bridge and every overpass and in every ravine in every town in this province. You have watched and you have done nothing but let your friends grow richer.

We talked to you and we gave you a copy of our urban vision some months ago, and you commented that it was a good vision and that you appreciated the fact that we put it on paper. Having read it now, will you give money from the land transfer tax to the municipalities to build co-ops and non-profits? We're asking you right now, will you implement the provisions that we gave you some months ago?

Hon Mr Hodgson: Just for the record, you talked about things that have happened to drive up the cost of rent. Probably the most atrocious thing to happen was what you voted for on council, to raise the taxes paid --

Interjection.

Hon Mr Hodgson: I can read the resolution for you. That translates into about $200 on average for every tenant in this city, when you wanted to raise the property taxes for multi-residential four and a half times higher than for residential condos. That had the biggest impact.

The second thing we're not going to do is go back to the failed policies of past governments. The auditor talked about a billion-dollar boondoggle. No government of any responsible partisan flavour wants to go back to that. The federal Liberals don't want to own the mortgages and have government doing that; the provinces don't want to do it. But we do want to assist in having more affordable housing built on the supply side, and that's what we're doing.

HYDRO RATES

Mr Michael Bryant (St Paul's): My question is to the Minister of Energy. It's not just residents, Minister, who are livid at receiving unaffordable electricity bills; it's also businesses that employ Ontarians and drive our economy, businesses like Dubreuil Forest Products, who wrote their great MPP, Mike Brown, to say that their hydro bill this summer went up not 40%, not 80%, but 110%. This general manager said, "We cannot afford this type of additional increase and expect to survive." This is 500 jobs in this community. This is the community employer.

Thousands of jobs are imperilled across this province because of your evisceration of energy policy in Ontario. What do you say to these people who want answers from their government and want to know how you're going to fix it?

Hon John R. Baird (Minister of Energy, minister responsible for francophone affairs): We realize we can't run an Ontario Hydro system like we did back in the early part of the 20th century. We realize you've got to change with the times. We realize that the $38-billion debt run up by the former Ontario Hydro, a debt every single individual in the province of Ontario is responsible for to the tune of $3,000, every family to the tune of more than $10,000, was unacceptable. Indeed, we could not continue along that route.

We did see this summer the hottest summer on record in 50 years, in half a century. That put a huge demand on the system. That's why we're working very hard to bring additional generation on-line. We've seen a good number of wind-power projects on-line around the province. We've seen new investments in construction in Sarnia, in Windsor and indeed in many other parts of the province of Ontario. We can do a lot, but we can't control the temperature of the environment.

Mr Bryant: So let me get this straight. Last spring you were blaming your appointment, Eleanor Clitheroe, for energy problems. Earlier this week you were blaming your appointment, the former NDP finance minister, Floyd Laughren, for your problems. Now you're blaming Mother Nature for your problems. You know what? Mother Nature is not the Minister of Energy. Mother Nature wasn't elected to represent and answer to the people of Ontario about skyrocketing prices.

I say to you, it is the government's failure to get electricity supply on-line after seven long years in power. I say to you, it is your radioactive blunder in failing to get Pickering up and running on time. I say to you, it is your absolute shipwreck of electricity transmission which has left investors not wanting to come into Ontario. As a result, we have artificial inflation of hydro prices, which means that it's not Mother Nature, it's not Mother Teresa: you are to blame for electricity prices going up.

Ontarians want to know, when are you going to stop blaming everybody from Mother Nature to Mother Teresa, account to the people of Ontario and tell them how you're going to fix the problem?

Hon Mr Baird: A rather colourful question from the member opposite. Let's look at two quotes from two respected individuals. I read in the Hamilton Spectator: "Tom Adams, head of the lobby and watchdog group Energy Probe, argues that the system is `tired' and that once needed repairs are done and capacity is back on stream, prices should come down."

I read in the Globe and Mail today: "Jonathan Dickman-Wilkes, a consultant with Navigant" -- a Toronto energy consulting firm -- "cautioned that it is still too early to give an accurate prediction on the direction of Ontario's electricity rates and that a full year might be required to get an indication of the market price for power."

I don't know where the Liberals stand on this issue. When we brought in an open market, they voted for Bill 35 on second reading, which is reading in principle, but by third reading the Liberals under Dalton McGuinty had flip-flopped again and they changed their minds one more time.

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

Mr Raminder Gill (Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale): My question is for the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities. Minister, Ontario's colleges and universities are entering a period of growth. An important part of our government's plan for increased enrolment is expanding the number of spaces available for these new students to learn. Parents and students in my great riding of Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale are very interested in the choices available to them in post-secondary education and the impact that this expansion will have on campuses across Ontario.

Minister, can you give this House an update on the SuperBuild program in post-secondary education and the important work being done to prepare our colleges and universities for the new generation of students?

Hon Dianne Cunningham (Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities, minister responsible for women's issues): Just to update my colleagues in the House, as well as my colleague who has just asked the question, everyone knows that the plan has been, of course, to expand the number of student spaces, also to expand the number of student aid and student assistance programs.

Interjections.

Hon Mrs Cunningham: Mr Speaker, I don't know whether I should carry on or not, but you're not standing up.

We have in fact increased our operating grants and we've provided funds, $337.5 million, to renovate facilities that are already there. So I am pleased to inform this House that the size of the SuperBuild initiative since it first began -- it is now larger by far since the House was last in session. We now have some 61 new buildings, $2.1 billion, and the growth number is from 73,000 spaces to 79,000 spaces. We should take this opportunity, all of us who have been at our own SuperBuild announcements, to thank our colleges and universities for the excellent work they have done.

Mr Gill: Thank you, Minister. I do appreciate your sincerity and caring; 79,000 new student spaces is a large number and doesn't even take into account new spaces created by renovations. With 18 universities and 24 colleges in Ontario, many of my constituents and parents across Ontario want to know how this affects their children who are preparing to go to post-secondary institutions. Minister, could you provide the House with specific examples of the type of new post-secondary facilities that are opening across Ontario and tell us what this will mean for students and working families?

Hon Mrs Cunningham: Mr Speaker, my colleague from St Catharines added, "How are you doing such a good job?" I will say to both of my colleagues that in fact we have huge leadership with our students, we have huge leadership in our colleges and our universities, and we work together. That's how you get things done.

Just in September this year -- in some instances, a year ahead of time -- on the 12th the Premier and I were at the University of Ottawa to help open a beautiful new facility. It's called SITE, the new School of Information Technology and Engineering. For the members from Ottawa, I should say from listening to the dean speak and from the number of graduate programs in engineering, they are second to none and are competitive in the world. We should be so very proud.

On the 6th we were at Brock University in St Catharines, creating new spaces for 1,700 new additional students, a great success story for the peninsula. Of course, my colleague from St Catharines was there. We always have a little discussion and introduce each other. That's how you get things done.

In closing, we were at Huron College at the University of Western Ontario. The story goes on. We are ready for the double cohort. We are ready for the number of students, not only in buildings but operating grants as well.

SLOT MACHINES

Mr Monte Kwinter (York Centre): I have a question for the Attorney General. Minister, I want to return to the matter of the government's relationship to Picov Downs, by far the smallest racetrack in Ontario. Despite their small size, they were very large donors to Jim Flaherty and also to Ernie Eves. As a matter of fact, Jim Flaherty's largest contributor was Picov Downs, with at least $80,000 worth of contributions.

Minister, despite the fact that Picov Downs only generates $280,000 worth of tax betting, the cabinet gave them the initial go-ahead for slots that could generate $146 million in revenues and $14.6 million in annual profits for the operator. Why did such a small track receive initial approval for such a lucrative windfall from your cabinet?

Hon David Young (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs): I must confess, I'm rather disappointed and somewhat surprised that over the course of the summer the Liberals, who I thought were paying some attention to matters of import to the people of Ontario, had nothing better to do than to try, through a fanciful, imaginary process, to come up with some concerns that they wanted expressed in question period.

I said to you the other day and I say again to you today that there has been no decision made as to how many slots will be placed at that racetrack. What we are doing is following the exact same procedure that was followed with the other 16 tracks that have already received slot machines. Those are racetracks that are located in many of the ridings now represented by Liberal members. It is the exact same procedure.

Mr Kwinter: The reason I'm asking the question today is because of your answer yesterday and the answer you just gave now. You are totally either misinformed or you're not paying attention. The truth is that a very important decision was made. If no decision was made, we wouldn't be discussing this. Just so you'll know, Janet Ecker, the member for the region, told the Ajax News Advertiser that Picov Downs has been approved. The cabinet decision said that up to 800 slots could go to Picov Downs, and that information was conveyed to the operators.

On March 5, 2002, Jane Holmes, executive director of the Ontario harness horse racing association, wrote to the government saying, "It seems incomprehensible that Picov Downs may be allocated 800 slot machines."

What is happening is this. Absolutely, the decision was taken; otherwise they wouldn't have conveyed it to the operator. I understand that you have asked for it to be reviewed. What I would like to know is, will you share your concerns and share the information with us as to how that decision --

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

Hon Mr Young: "Up to 800," means up to 800. It may be one, it may be two, it may be 799. That is not a difficult concept, sir.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. The Attorney General, continue. Sorry for the interruption.

Hon Mr Young: I can understand why the Liberal members might have difficulty with this concept. If I may read to you a quote: "I went to Bay Street. I went to Bay Street and took in $1 million in one night from the business community. We established a national record in terms of the amount of money raised in one event by a provincial party." That was said by Dalton McGuinty, the Liberal leader, on June 27, 2002.

Yesterday we hear Dalton McGuinty say, "Anybody who receives that much money, you know, you've got to start asking some questions about whether or not they happen to be beholden to those people who made those contributions." That's the way of the Liberals, and that's why you've come to that erroneous conclusion.

VISITOR

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Stop the clock for a moment. While we have a quick moment here, joining us in the members' gallery east is the Honourable Doug Lewis, the former cabinet minister from the House of Commons. Please join us in welcoming our honoured guest.

URBAN STRATEGY

Mr Bob Wood (London West): My question is for the Associate Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing responsible for urban affairs. The minister is, of course, in the midst of a seven-city tour across the province gathering direct local input in order to develop new ways to help strengthen our cities, and in particular the possibility of special municipal tax programs to attract investment and jobs. The minister is aware of my concern that any initiative build on strength and real opportunities. Does the minister see her mandate as looking for ways to subsidize areas of economic weakness or to find ways to enhance economic strength?

Hon Tina R. Molinari (Associate Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): I want to thank the member from London West for his question and tell him how delighted I was to include the city of London in my urban tour. As was stated, I am visiting seven urban centres across the province. I've already been to Windsor, London and Hamilton.

I see as my mandate creating an urban strategy that makes sense in all areas. Some areas, like London, are looking to build on the current strength and yet other areas, like Windsor or Hamilton, certainly have different views. I want to quote the mayor of Windsor, Michael Hurst, who said when asked about the tour, "The surest way of advancing everyone's agenda with regard to urban affairs is to sit down at the table, exchange ideas and put forward practical suggestions for improvement." I couldn't agree more with the mayor.

This government is developing different approaches as there are different municipalities across Ontario; one size doesn't fit all. I'm looking forward to touring the other four cities in Ontario.

Mr Wood: I hope that the minister, in crafting solutions, will bear in mind that one solves problems by building on opportunity and strengths. What ideas has the minister heard to date that she sees as promising?

Hon Mrs Molinari: In developing a more comprehensive urban strategy, our government's goal is to work with everyone, all the stakeholders in Ontario, and to find some common vision to build strong and vibrant communities and healthy environment.

I'm hearing that greater co-operation between all levels of government and a partnership with the private sector are important. I'm also hearing that we need to continue to work with the federal government and have them come on board. It's pleasing to see that they have finally recognized that the issues of cities are not only a provincial concern but also a federal concern.

I'm pleased to say that today's announcement of the Premier and the Prime Minister to commit a combined $300 million to improve truck traffic approaching the Windsor-Detroit border is just an example of the beneficial co-operation that is happening now in working together to better the urban cities in the province.

LONG-TERM CARE

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I have a question for the associate minister of health. Your cancellation of the minimum standards for bathing will make life worse for residents in long-term-care facilities.

The previous regulation, which you cancelled July 31, read, "The nursing staff shall ensure that residents who are confined to bed or who are incontinent shall have a complete bath daily, or more frequently where necessary to maintain cleanliness, and that ambulant residents have a complete bath at least once a week." Your new regulation says, "The nursing staff shall ensure that proper and sufficient care of each resident's body is provided daily to safeguard the residents' health and to maintain personal hygiene." There's no mention of a bath daily or a bath weekly. In fact, there's no mention of a bath at all in your new regulation.

Minister, why did you cancel the minimum standard for baths for residents in long-term-care facilities?

Hon Dan Newman (Associate Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): On June 26 this year we committed to review the bathing regulations in this province for each and every long-term-care facility to ensure that the best quality of care is consistently being provided to each and every one of the 61,000 people in long-term-care facilities in our province.

In fact we did have that review of the regulations for all long-term-care facilities, and I was pleased to announce on July 31 this year that along with the largest infusion of money into nursing and personal care, which is $100 million, we had amended the bathing regulation because we wanted to ensure that our rules and regulations with respect to bathing were indeed clear and consistent, regardless of whether you lived in a nursing home, a charitable home or a municipal home for the aged.

The amended regulation ensures that each and every resident receives the care they need when they need it. Every resident in a long-term-care facility has a plan of care to reflect the individual needs of that patient. Some residents in long-term-care facilities may be mobile while others may be bedridden, but the needs of each resident are different. This regulation reflects that.

Ms Martel: The question was, why did you cancel the minimum standards for baths for seniors in long-term-care facilities? The new regulation doesn't even mention the word "bath" at all. I would have thought your government would have learned, after you cancelled the minimum standards of nursing and personal care, that you need better standards, not less.

PricewaterhouseCoopers reported in January 2001 that in comparison to other jurisdictions, seniors in long-term-care facilities in Ontario ranked last -- dead last -- in terms of nursing care, rehabilitation and care of those who present with behavioural problems. You should have learned from that report, and you should be moving to improve standards, not cancel them. Your most recent move was to cancel even the most minimum of standards for bathing for seniors in long-term-care facilities.

I ask you again: why have you cancelled the minimum standard for bathing for long-term-care residents in long-term-care facilities?

Hon Mr Newman: The new regulation is outcome-based. There is a daily requirement to ensure that the proper and sufficient care of each and every resident's body is provided to safeguard the residents' health and to maintain their personal hygiene. That's what the regulation states.

This change indeed reflects our government's commitment to ensure the best quality of care for each and every one of the 61,000 residents in Ontario's long-term-care facilities. We have increased the amount of time for nursing and personal care through that record investment of $100 million.

But I tell you this: this government will not take a lecture from the NDP when it comes to the provision of long-term-care services in our province. The NDP did nothing -- nothing -- to add additional beds to the system.

This government has moved ahead to build 20,000 new long-term-care beds across our province, and we've also made that major investment of $100 million. That's going to ensure that another 2,400 nurses and personal care workers are added to the system, improving the quality of care in all of those long-term-care facilities.

SLOT MACHINES

Mr Monte Kwinter (York Centre): I'd like to go back to the Attorney General. Minister, you keep saying that due process is being followed and everything is being done according to the book. There's no doubt, because it's in the record, that Janet Ecker said when she spoke with the Ajax News Advertiser that Picov Downs has been approved. There is no doubt that a letter was sent to the operators of Picov Downs saying that in fact they had been approved for up to 800 slot machines.

What is happening is that if the procedure was being followed properly, this particular track would have gotten one and a half slot machines. If you compare it to the Windsor Raceway, if you compare it to some of the others, it is outrageous the numbers that they're getting.

Could you tell me why you keep insisting that no decision has been made when your colleague is saying that the decision has been made and when that information has been conveyed to the operator?

Hon David Young (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs): I'm going to repeat what I said yesterday because I think it's going through the minds of many in this legislative chamber. I am sincerely disappointed that a member with your reputation has stooped to this level.

I tell you, sir, that you know well that this government has been consistent in saying that we are prepared to consider slots at Picov Downs after they meet the Ontario Racing Commission licensing requirements, after they develop a business plan supporting a racetrack with slot machines, after they negotiate a revenue-sharing agreement with the province and after they enter into a site-holder agreement with the OLGC.

As to the number of slots --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Come to order. The member for Hamilton Mountain, come to order, please. Sorry, Attorney General; continue.

Hon Mr Young: As to the number of slot machines that will ultimately be placed there, no decision has been made to date.

Mr Kwinter: You keep telling me that story, but you don't give me the answer that I'm trying to get. Number one, why did your colleague in cabinet publicly declare that the decision has been approved? Answer that question: why was the operator informed that they would be getting up to 800 slot machines?

It's very, very simple. You either have made the decision or you haven't made the decision. If you haven't made the decision, then why don't you publicly say, "There is no commitment whatsoever to Picov Downs and when we decide that we're going to do it, we will put it out for open competition, we will hear proposals and we will make a decision"? If you're going to say, "We're following procedures," then give them one and a half slot machines.

Hon Mr Young: There are 18 racetracks in this province; 15 of them already have slot machines. Each of those racetracks followed the exact same procedure I have just described.

There is one racetrack, Elora, that has gone through this procedure and is in the midst of construction but has been awarded slots, as long as they fulfill certain requirements. There are two racetracks that don't have slots today. One of them is the Quinte establishment and the other is Picov. Sir, I say to you that the remaining two racetracks will go through the same procedure that the other 16 racetracks have gone through.

EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION

Mr Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): My question today is for the Deputy Premier and Minister of Education. With the new school year underway, approximately two million students are back to learning the skills they will need to achieve their goals, both in the classroom and in life. Some of these kids are excelling while other children need extra help. I have spoken with many parents in my community who are anxious to learn about what initiatives this government is undertaking to ensure their children succeed. Can you elaborate on what this government is doing to ensure that children are prepared to succeed in this world?

Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Deputy Premier, Minister of Education): Yes, certainly. We have made a considerable amount of investment in recent years into education, into supporting our children in order to ensure that they get the best education possible. I'd like to speak in particular to $30 million that has been made available for early literacy and math.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Order. Sorry. I assure the Deputy Premier I was listening. Sorry for the interruption. You may continue.

Hon Mrs Witmer: That's OK. If you were listening and you could hear it, then --

Interjections.

Hon Mrs Witmer: I was talking about the investment that we've made in our children, particularly in the early years. Our government did invest $30 million into an early literacy and an early math program.

Interjections.

The Speaker: The member for York Centre, come to order. It's not helpful shouting across. You've had your time now.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Come to order, both of you, please. I'm afraid the Deputy Premier's time is up.

Mr Dunlop: Thank you very much, Minister. I'm sure that children in my community and across the province will gain a solid foundation as they learn the basics of education: reading and math. Without the proper foundation, success in the classroom is often difficult and limited later in life. We need to work together as parents and as teachers to ensure that today's children leave school with the tools they need to become successful and productive members of our society.

Since this is the first year that all grades from K to 12 are learning the new curriculum, can you enlighten us as to the tools and support teachers and school boards are receiving to carry out this very important initiative?

Hon Mrs Witmer: I'll try again, because this is a very important issue. As the member has indicated, we are into a totally new curriculum. It has been important for our government not only to invest in new textbooks and learning materials, but we have also invested money into making sure that we can provide resources and training for our teachers in order that they can teach the new reading and math strategies from grade 1 to 6 that I talked about. So we have given them additional support.

I think when we talk about education we need to keep in mind there are partners: parents, families are very important partners with students and teachers and the government. So we now have a guide for parents entitled Helping Your Child Learn to Read, and we're also making one available, Helping Your Child Learn Math.

RURAL EDUCATION FUNDING

Mrs Leona Dombrowsky (Hastings-Frontenac-Lennox and Addington): My question is for the Minister of Education. In my riding there are many small rural schools in remote locations. They provide quality programs for small numbers of children and they are an integral part of the infrastructure of rural Ontario. Your funding formula does not provide the dollars necessary to adequately support many of these schools. In my riding, closing small rural schools is not an option because it means four-year-olds would be on a bus for upwards of three hours a day. The problem is compounded by the fact that the funding formula creates further burdens for boards with declining enrolment.

Rural boards must not close schools and they cannot afford to fix the older ones. The Ministry of Education has indicated to the Hastings and Prince Edward school board that $17.5 million in deferred maintenance is required, but your funding formula only allows them $2.5 million. Minister, students in rural Ontario are suffering because of your funding formula. Will you act immediately to assign the dollars your ministry says this board needs? It says it needs $17.5 million; you're only giving it --

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

Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Deputy Premier, Minister of Education): I'm not sure if the member opposite is aware of the fact that we have actually given additional money to respond to the needs of small schools in Ontario. We have remote and rural funding that is intended to meet the unique needs of remote and rural school boards. We have listened and we are providing -- in fact, I would just say to the member that remote and rural allocation funding has almost tripled from $40 million in 1997 --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Sorry again to the Minister of Education. Come to order, please. There are conversations going back and forth. If you want a question, get on the order paper. Minister, sorry for the interruption again.

Hon Mrs Witmer: This is an important issue, and I just want to stress that small school allocation funding has more than tripled from $40 million in 1997 to a projected $117 million in 2002 and 2003, an increase of 192%.

Mrs Dombrowsky: The needs in the schools are immediate; in fact, they are yesterday. The rural and remote grants are not based on actual needs; in fact, they are a mathematical formula. Your funding formula is so inadequate, so skewed, so punitive, that the Hastings and Prince Edward board is forced to consider the unthinkable: closing schools in remote locations or closing the only primary school in the town of Bancroft.

Boards today receive less per student than when your government came to power and created this crisis in education. Our children cannot wait. The needs in our schools are immediate. They are now. They are yesterday. While you are waiting for a report, I am asking you to act to provide school boards with the money they need so that schools don't close and children don't ride buses for three hours.

Hon Mrs Witmer: The member obviously doesn't have any recollection of the additional money the government provided in the budget this year to respond to the unique needs of remote and rural communities. I would just say as well that small school allocation funding has more than doubled, from $26.7 million in 1997 to $70 million in 2002-03, an increase of 162%. Furthermore, we have asked Dr Rozanski to take a look at the issue of making sure that rural and urban schools have equal access to the same resources for students.

ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES LEGISLATION

Ms Marilyn Mushinski (Scarborough Centre): I have a question for the Minister of Citizenship. I noticed with interest the announcement to proclaim in the Ontario Gazette additional sections of the landmark Ontarians with Disabilities Act. I just wanted you to know, Minister, that there are many individuals in my riding of Scarborough Centre who are --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Order. Take your seat. The member for Windsor West and the minister, please. Sorry for the interruption. We've got another conversation going back and forth. I apologize to the member for Scarborough Centre. You may continue.

Ms Mushinski: To repeat, I know there are many disabled individuals in my riding of Scarborough Centre who will be affected by this new legislation, Minister. I wonder if you could inform this House what this particular proclamation means for those individuals, as well as for the additional 1.9 million Ontarians who are living with disabilities.

Hon Carl DeFaria (Minister of Citizenship, minister responsible for seniors): I appreciate the member's question as it gives me an opportunity to address a very important piece of legislation, the Ontarians with Disabilities Act.

Last December, our government led the way by passing the ODA. This is the first and most comprehensive piece of legislation in Canada that puts persons with disabilities at the forefront of change.

Ms Mushinski: Thank you, Minister, for that response. As you mentioned, this proclamation will indeed bring into law obligations on the part of municipalities and other affected organizations. I wonder if you could further clarify those steps that the government will be taking to ensure that municipalities and the broader public organizations have information and support in implementing these particular changes.

The guidelines the municipalities are required to follow have been developed by our ministry in partnership with the municipalities. I was at the AMO conference and I was very pleased with AMO's reception of our guidelines that they received from us during that conference. Those guidelines will provide all the assistance they need to advise the municipalities.

DIAMOND MINE

Mr Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): My question is to the Deputy Premier. My question simply put is this: what does your government want to do or what is it prepared to do to assist the community of Attawapiskat with regard to the De Beers situation?

Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Deputy Premier, Minister of Education): I'm sorry, I didn't --

Mr Bisson: I repeat the question: what are you prepared to do as a government to assist the community of Attawapiskat in order to advance the De Beers project?

Hon Mrs Witmer: I will certainly take the question under advisement. We will respond very specifically and, I know, in great detail to the question you've asked, because I can understand that this is an issue that is of obviously grave and personal interest to yourself.

Mr Bisson: You see, Madam Minister, the problem is exactly that: the province has been nowhere as the lead on this particular project.

Let me explain what it is: west of Attawapiskat by 70 kilometres, you've got De Beers Canada working at developing a diamond mine, the very first diamond mine ever to be developed here in the province of Ontario. There has been some difficulty with regard to the negotiation of an agreement between the Attawapiskat First Nation and De Beers for the work that would take place this winter.

The community is very clear. At a meeting I attended last Friday with De Beers and the community, the community said, "We're prepared to allow that project to go forward this winter, but it is important that we negotiate an agreement that makes sure the community interests are respected by De Beers Canada."

They are looking to your government to assist them to get De Beers back to the table by this Friday so they can start the process of negotiations to get that project on track. They expect the negotiations to be fruitful, no more than about three weeks, but they need the province to play their role.

My question for you is simple: will the province play their role?

Hon Mrs Witmer: As I said before, I know this issue is of personal interest to yourself, and obviously it's of deep interest to people in the community.

We were pleased that De Beers had been attracted to this province. We certainly know that the tax rates in this province were part of what attracted them. I will take this under advisement. I know that Mr Wilson, the minister, is going to be working with all the parties to ensure that there can be a resolution of this issue. We thank you for bringing it to our attention today.

PETITIONS

HIGHWAY 69

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): I'd like to begin the introduction with a 20,000-name petition I have regarding Highway 69. I'd like to start with the 4,205 names which were gathered by Henry and Colette LeBouthillier of Sudbury. This is a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas modern highways are economic lifelines for the north; and

"Whereas the stretch of Highway 69 from Sudbury south to Parry Sound is a treacherous road with a trail of death and destruction; and

"Whereas the carnage on Highway 69 has been staggering; and

"Whereas the Harris-Eves government has shown gross irresponsibility in not four-laning the stretch of highway between Sudbury and Parry Sound; and

"Whereas immediate action is needed to prevent more needless loss of life; and

"Whereas it is the responsibility of a government to provide safe roads for its citizens, and the Eves government has failed to do so;

"Be it resolved that we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to urge the Eves government to begin construction immediately and four-lane Highway 69 between Sudbury and Parry Sound so that the carnage on Death Road North will cease."

I want to thank Henry and Colette. I affix my signature and give it to Paula to bring to the table.

LONG-TERM CARE

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I have a petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. It reads as follows:

"Whereas the Ontario government abandoned the minimum requirement for 2.25 hours per day of nursing care for seniors in nursing homes; and

"Whereas the Ontario government's own study in January 2001 showed Ontario's long-term-care residents receive less nursing, bathing and general care than elderly people in comparable jurisdictions in Canada, the United States and Europe; and

"Whereas poor management of residents leads to excessive acute care hospital stays and added strain on staffing levels in long-term-care facilities; and

"Whereas Ontario long-term-care residents now receive an average of only 2.04 hours of care per day, well below the level of care of 4.2 hours even the state of Mississippi provides; and

"Whereas US studies have indicated that total nursing care hours for long-term-care residents should be in the range of 4.55 total hours of care per resident per day;

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

"We call on the government of Ontario to regulate a minimum requirement of at least 3.5 hours of nursing care per resident per day."

I agree with the petitioners and I've affixed my name to this.

RENT REGULATION

Mr David Caplan (Don Valley East): I have a petition entitled "Fair Rent Increases Now."

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the number of tenants receiving above-guideline" rent "increases is growing exponentially; and

"Whereas many of these increases are for increases in utility costs, many of which have gone down since; and

"Whereas tenants should not have to pay for improvements forever, even when the costs have been realized by these rent increases; and

"Whereas the Tenant Protection Act does not give a tenant relief due to the costs being realized or a drop in utility costs; and

"Whereas tenants should not be receiving rent increases where there are work orders issued for the building;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, petition the Ontario Legislature to immediately pass MPP David Caplan's Bill 134 entitled the Fair Rent Increases Act at the earliest possible opportunity so that tenants can get relief from above-guideline" rent "increases once the bills have been paid."

I appreciate all the residents who have signed this petition. I support it and I affix my signature to it.

ONTARIO NORTHLAND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION

Mr Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): I have a petition here addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, and it reads as follows:

"Whereas the Ontario Northland Internal Solutions Group has submitted its reports to the Ontario Northland Transportation Commission respecting the divestiture of the ONTC services; and

"Whereas council for the corporation for the city of North Bay is supportive of having all the ISG avenues fully explored to determine what the new organization can provide on improved services and enhanced economic activity in northeastern Ontario;

"Be it therefore resolved that the corporation of the city of North Bay does hereby petition the Ontario Northland Transportation Commission and the Ministry of Northern Development and Mines to review the plan submitted by the Ontario Northland Internal Solutions Group and give their plan full consideration; and

"Further, that a moratorium be placed on the RFP process of divestiture of ONTel from ONTC services being provided to northern Ontario; and

"Further, that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the minister, to the Premier, and to the member," being myself.

I must say, Mr Speaker, I have a whole box of these, about 10,000 of them --

The Acting Speaker (Mr Bert Johnson): No, you must not say. Further petitions?

KIDNEY-PANCREAS TRANSPLANTS

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

"Whereas many seriously ill diabetics are in need of kidney-pancreas transplantation in southwestern Ontario; and

"Whereas the London Health Sciences Centre currently has on staff physicians and surgeons who specialize in kidney-pancreas transplantation and possess both the expertise and willingness to perform kidney-pancreas transplantation; and

"Whereas the referral to Toronto for kidney-pancreas transplantation would only serve to further compound the problem of the already lengthy waiting period that exists in Toronto; and

"Whereas travel to Toronto by western Ontario dialysis patients for the prerequisite assessment process causes undue hardship and potential health risks;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned" 4,500 people, citizens of southwestern Ontario, "strongly petition the Ontario Legislature to demand the Ministry of Health provide the necessary funding to establish a kidney-pancreas transplantation program at the London Health Sciences Centre in London, Ontario."

I'm in full agreement, and I thank Sheryl Sardo for her efforts. I have signed this petition in full support.

LONG-TERM CARE

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I have a petition whose signatures were gathered this summer by Chris Charlton and a number of volunteers on Hamilton Mountain. It reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Conservative government increased fees paid by Ontario seniors and other vulnerable people living in long-term-care facilities by 15% ... instead of providing adequate government funding for long-term care; and

"Whereas the Conservative government has therefore shifted the cost of long-term care on to the backs of the frail elderly and their families; and

"Whereas this increase is 11.1% above the rent increase guidelines for tenants in the province of Ontario; and

"Whereas in 1996 Ontario abandoned its minimum requirement of 2.25 hours of nursing care per nursing home resident; and

"Whereas the Ontario government's own contribution to raise the level of long-term-care services this year is less than $2 per resident per day; and

"Whereas, according to the government's own study, government cutbacks have resulted in Ontario seniors receiving just 14 minutes a day of care from a registered nurse ... ; and

"Whereas the report also found that Ontario residents receive the least nursing, bathing and general care of nine other comparable locations;

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

"We demand the Conservative government eliminate the 15% fee increase for residents in long-term-care facilities, increase the number of nursing care hours for each resident to a minimum of 3.5 hours per day, and provide stable, increased funding to ensure quality care is there for Ontario residents in long-term-care facilities."

I agree with the petitioners and I have affixed my signature to it.

CHILDREN'S HEALTH SERVICES

Mr Richard Patten (Ottawa Centre): Mr Speaker, as you well know, I have received thousands of petitions from people in the Ottawa area concerned about the government of Ontario shutting down the heart surgery at the Children's Hospital.

"Whereas every year CHEO treats 140 cases of seriously ill children close to home; and

"Whereas centralizing children's heart surgery in Toronto will force patients and their families to travel 400 to 600 kilometres away from home at a traumatic time" in their lives; and

"Whereas there is a waiting list for cardiac surgery in Toronto but not at CHEO; and

"Whereas the people of eastern Ontario demand accessible, quality health care" close to where they live;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to immediately override the government's intent to close this life-saving program and to ensure that top-quality, accessible health care remains accessible to every child in eastern Ontario."

SOINS DE LONGUE DURÉE

M. Gilles Bisson (Timmins-Baie James): Cette pétition est encore signée par les amis de M me Chris Charlton et d'autres personnes sur la montagne de Hamilton. Ça se lit:

« Attendu que le gouvernement conservateur a augmenté de 15 %, ou de 213 $ par mois, les frais que paient les aînés de l'Ontario et les autres personnes vulnérables qui habitent les établissements de soins de longue durée, au lieu de financer adéquatement les soins de longue durée; et

« Attendu que le gouvernement conservateur fait maintenant porter aux aînés fragiles et leur famille le poids du financement des soins de longue durée; et

« Attendu que cette augmentation dépasse de 11,1 % l'augmentation que stipulent les lignes directrices sur l'augmentation de loyer pour les locateurs de la province de l'Ontario; et

« Attendu qu'en 1996, l'Ontario a laissé tomber l'exigence minimale de 2,25 heures de soins infirmiers par pensionnaire d'une maison de soins infirmiers; et

« Attendu que cette année, le gouvernement verse moins de 2 $ par jour par pensionnaire pour augmenter le niveau de service en matière de soins de longue durée;

« Attendu que, selon une étude gouvernementale, en raison des compressions du gouvernement, les aînés de l'Ontario n'obtiennent que 14 minutes par jour de soins d'une infirmière autorisée (moins que la demi-heure consacrée aux résidents de la Saskatchewan); et

« Attendu que, selon ce rapport, les pensionnaires ontariens obtiennent le plus faible niveau de soins infirmiers, de soins balnéaires et de soins généraux comparativement aux pensionnaires de neuf autres endroits comparables;

« Par conséquent nous, les soussignés, présentons à l'Assemblée législative de l'Ontario la pétition qui se lit comme suit:

« Joignez-vous au Parti néo-démocratique pour demander au gouvernement conservateur d'annuler l'augmentation de 15 % des frais imposés pour pensionnaires des établissements de soins de longue durée, d'augmenter le nombre d'heures de soins infirmiers pour chacun des pensionnaires à au moins 3,5 heures par jour et d'accorder un financement stable et accru pour assurer les soins de qualité aux pensionnaires ontariens qui habitent les établissements de soins de longue durée. »

Je signe cette pétition aussi.

LONG-TERM CARE

Mr John Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands): This is a petition I received today signed by people in Toronto, Guelph and Mississauga. It deals with the long-term-care situation. It's addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas the Eves government has increased the fees paid by seniors, the most vulnerable living in long-term-care homes, by 15% over three years, or $3.02 per diem in the first year and $2 in the second year and $2 in the third year, effective September 1, 2002;

"Whereas this increase will cost seniors and our most vulnerable more than $200 a month and after three years;

"Whereas this increase is above the rent increase guidelines for tenants in the province of Ontario for the year 2002;

"Whereas, according to the government's own funded study, Ontario still ranks last among comparable jurisdictions in the amount of time provided to a resident for nursing and personal care; and

"Whereas the long-term-care funding partnership has been based on government accepting the responsibility to fund the care and services that residents need;

"Whereas the government needs to increase long-term-care operating funds by $750 million over the next three years to raise the level of service for Ontario's long-term-care residents to those in Saskatchewan in 1999; and

"Whereas this province has been built by seniors who should be able to live out their lives with dignity, respect and in comfort in this province;

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

"Demand that Premier Eves reduce the 15% increase over three years in accommodation costs to no more than the cost-of-living increase annually and that the provincial government provide adequate funding for nursing and personal care to a level that is at least at the average standard for nursing and personal care in those 10 jurisdictions included in the government's own study."

I agree with the petition and I've signed it accordingly and I'm passing it on to you, Speaker.

HEALTH CARE WORKERS

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I have a petition that was sent to me from the residents of Sarnia and it reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Minister of Health has been travelling the province announcing capital funds for bricks and mortar and equipment expenditures; and

"Whereas health science professionals, including X-ray and medical laboratory technologists, respiratory therapists, radiation and ultrasound technologists and physiotherapists and occupational therapists, once paid on par with or higher than nurses, have fallen further and further behind over the past 10 years; and

"Whereas hospitals are able to fund double-digit raises to many CEOs and administrative personnel, and the number of administrators in the $100,000 club is growing steadily each year; and

"Whereas the shortage of health care professionals in Ontario threatens patient care and services in many hospitals, causes delays in results, delays in therapy and longer hospital stays and poor working conditions across the province; and

"Whereas physicians across the province need the services provided by these professionals to diagnose and treat patients; and

"Whereas a competitive central contract is needed to keep these professionals working here in Ontario;

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

"To act now and give a renewed commitment to the people of Ontario by adequately funding the services provided by our hospital professionals so that our hospitals remain fully staffed and able to provide all essential services."

I agree with the petitioner and I've signed my name to this.

LONG-TERM CARE

Mr Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North): The petitions do keep coming in related to the increase in long-term-care residency.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Eves government has increased the fees paid by seniors and the most vulnerable living in long-term-care facilities by 15% over three years or $3.02 per diem in the first year and $2 in the second year and $2 in the third year effective September 1, 2002; and

"Whereas this increase will cost seniors and our most vulnerable more than $200 a month after three years; and

"Whereas this increase is above the rent increase guidelines for tenants in the province of Ontario for 2002; and

"Whereas, according to the government's own funded study, Ontario will still rank last amongst comparable jurisdictions in the amount of time provided to a resident for nursing and personal care; and

"Whereas the long-term-care funding partnership has been based on government accepting the responsibility to fund the care and services that residents need; and

"Whereas government needs to increase long-term-care operating funding by $750 million over the next three years to raise the level of service for Ontario's long-term-care residents to those in Saskatchewan in 1999; and

"Whereas this province has been built by seniors who should be able to live out their lives with dignity, respect and in comfort in this province;

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

"Demand that Premier Eves reduce his 15% increase over three years in accommodation costs to no more than the cost-of-living increase annually and that the provincial government provide adequate funding for nursing and personal care to a level that is at least at the average standard for nursing and personal care in those 10 jurisdictions included in the government's own study."

I'm very grateful to those who sent petitions in to me. I'm most happy to sign them.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

TORONTO WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION

CORPORATION ACT, 2002 /

LOI DE 2002 SUR LA SOCIÉTÉ

DE REVITALISATION

DU SECTEUR RIVERAIN DE TORONTO

Mrs Ecker moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 151,

An Act respecting the Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation / Projet de loi 151, Loi concernant la Société de revitalisation du secteur riverain de Toronto.

The Acting Speaker (Mr Bert Johnson): The Chair recognizes the Minister of Finance.

Mr Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: The NDP whip is in agreement with the House leaders in order to allow us to stand down our lead today because Mr Prue has to be in estimates committee. It was agreed to -- just to make sure it's on the record.

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of the Environment, Government House Leader): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I think we should wait until the leadoff to see if that is true. I haven't checked that with the other parties.

Mr Bisson: I thought you had.

Hon Mr Stockwell: No, I haven't, so I think we should wait for unanimous consent on that one.

The Acting Speaker: That is a point of order that will be resolved at some time in the future, perhaps.

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: To be perfectly honest with you, the government House leader hadn't talked to us, but certainly if there was an agreement between the two, we have no problem with it.

The Acting Speaker: That is not a point of order but it's certainly a matter of interest.

Hon Mr Stockwell: I give consent to defer the leadoff speech for NDP until a future time.

The Acting Speaker: Mr Stockwell, the government House leader and the Minister of the Environment, has asked for consent. Is there consent? It is agreed.

The Chair now recognizes the Minister of Finance.

Hon Janet Ecker (Minister of Finance): I'll be sharing my time today with my colleagues the member for Scarborough Centre and the member for London West.

As finance minister, I'm very pleased today to rise to begin the second reading debate of Bill 151, the Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation Act. This bill was first introduced last December. As members will recall, the proposed legislation, if passed by this House, would create a permanent Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corp. The permanent corporation would replace the interim corporation that is currently in existence today. When the new body is in place, the redevelopment of Toronto's waterfront can proceed in earnest. That will mark the beginning of an important new phase in Toronto's development.

I don't think it's news to this House to say that Toronto has experienced tremendous growth over the past several years. It actually wasn't that long ago when the Royal York Hotel was considered the dominant building on the skyline. As I think all visitors to Toronto will recognize, there are many other new and interesting structures that dominate that skyline.

Over the next 20 years, when we look into the future, some three million more people are expected to come to central Ontario. Many of them will move into Toronto. They'll be attracted here by good jobs, by a good cultural life, by strong neighbourhoods, all of those important characteristics that we know Toronto has. But this growth is going to represent a significant challenge for not only the city but also the province. It is a challenge that, if handled well, represents a tremendous opportunity for all of us to create an even stronger, healthier downtown core than we have today.

To do that is going to require new infrastructure, new jobs, new housing, new entertainment venues, new restaurants, new parks, playgrounds and recreational facilities. Toronto's waterfront can play a key role in that. I think it's a logical next step in starting to meet those future needs that are coming at us.

Waterfront revitalization will be an opportunity to put into practice the principles of the province's Smart Growth initiative, which is very ably led by my colleague the Honourable Chris Hodgson, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. The principles that he's established in co-operation with municipalities will help build strong communities with competitive economies and a strong, healthy environment. Smart Growth is designed to manage Ontario's growing population and economy in ways that avoid urban sprawl and the destruction of valuable farmland and recreational land.

For example, I am very pleased to have seen that with the initiatives under Smart Growth started by this government, with my colleague Minister Hodgson, we are preserving agriculture lands in my community -- Pickering, Ajax, Uxbridge, just east of Toronto -- a growing community but one that recognizes the importance of protecting key features in the community. Smart Growth has helped us to do that.

The waterfront revitalization project here in Toronto will be an excellent opportunity to make full use of the province's brownfields redevelopment initiative as well. Our goal here is to transform derelict and contaminated land into more productive uses.

As members may recall, the three levels of government have agreed to invest $500 million each, for a total of $1.5 billion, in an incredible new investment in the city's waterfront. This money is going to be used to make investments that will kick-start revitalization and transformation of the waterfront. It will help strengthen the city's international competitiveness, a very important goal. Because of that it will create thousands of new jobs, new neighbourhoods and new facilities for living and working in the city's downtown core.

In this way, waterfront revitalization can serve as a model for other Smart Growth initiatives throughout the greater Toronto area. The legislation fulfills Ontario's commitment to take the lead by creating a permanent waterfront revitalization corporation. If it becomes law through this bill, we will be very much closer to unlocking the waterfront's potential.

The proposed Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corp would be responsible for developing business strategies and implementing those projects along the city's waterfront. It would also act as a champion for innovative approaches in how those projects are planned, are financed, are delivered. The proposed legislation would provide the waterfront corporation with the framework to leverage the initial investment provided by the three governments and to find private sector partners to attract their investment as well. The goal here is for the corporation to achieve financial self-sufficiency.

With support from the government's private sector initiatives, we think this goal is very achievable and the board is certainly committed to that.

To ensure that the corporation is accountable, the bill stipulates that the approval of all three governments would be required for the corporation to borrow funds, to mortgage its assets or to generate revenues. The proposed legislation would mandate the new corporation to create an accessible, active waterfront where people can live, can work, can play. While the corporation would have a mandate to encourage private sector involvement, as I mentioned, in various waterfront projects, it would also be obliged to ensure that the public has an opportunity to participate and to provide input to its plans.

I think that's very important. So it is in the legislation to make sure the public understands that they, too, have a role in this very, very important project.

The proposed Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation Act provides a broad outline of the corporation's purpose, powers and mandate. It also provides a framework for the corporation's future decisions in key areas such as business planning, financial accountability and annual reporting requirements. The draft legislation sets out the structure of the corporation by providing for a publicly appointed board of directors of up to 13 people. Each of the three partner governments would be empowered to appoint up to four members to the board.

On passage of the bill, Robert Fung, who currently serves as chair of the interim corporation -- and I think many people will be familiar with Mr Fung's name because of the visionary work he has done in terms of what can happen on Toronto's waterfront -- will become the chair of the permanent corporation.

The draft legislation is designed to ensure a smooth transition from the interim corporation that exists today to a permanent structure, a permanent governing body. Moreover, the bill also provides a process for conducting a sunset review, which I think is very important, and a cooperative wind-down plan when the corporation completes its mandate.

Since the first reading of the bill, the province has consulted with the federal government, the city government and the corporation on some proposed amendments that we will be bringing forward in this process. As a result of these consultations, we will be tabling amendments that we think would clarify certain sections of the legislation and would respond to suggestions from the federal government, the city and the corporation to improve the bill.

The proposed amendments -- and I'll just briefly go through them for you -- include a requirement for the corporation to conduct a review of the act and report back to the three governments within 12 months of its enactment on any suggested amendments to the act. You can quite appreciate that, as a new initiative going forward, as projects come forward and get pursued, there may well be needed some additional changes to the legislation. We wanted to make it very clear that the corporation could bring those forward to the government.

The second amendment is a requirement that the corporation's business plan include a public consultation plan -- I think that's very important -- and that every fifth year there be a five-year revitalization plan. So we want to make sure we are constantly checking our progress, constantly checking to make sure that this is indeed working in the way all the three governments of the community would like to see.

The third amendment deals with a requirement that the province consult with the federal government and the city prior to making any regulations under the act. I think one of the things that's very important here is, of course, that the city has zoning authority and the province has other regulatory authority, and I think all three levels of government here need to have some comfort that they can work as partners. I think we've had a good track record to date and I think we can continue that. We felt that this amendment might well give some comfort to our two partners that the three of us will continue to work in partnership on this.

I think all the partners in this initiative recognize that it's going to take time to plan and to deliver the new infrastructure and remediation of the contaminated lands on Toronto's waterfront. That's why, when the interim corporation was first created, it received a mandate to start working immediately on long-term business and development plans.

To get the process started, last year Canada, Ontario and Toronto announced the first four capital projects that will be undertaken under this initiative. So we are not waiting around for all that work to be done. We've gotten off to a good start with four projects that are worth approximately $300 million, and include expanding Front Street to the west, from Bathurst to Dufferin Street, and building a new interchange for the Gardiner Expressway near the grounds of the CNE.

The second project is to build a second subway platform at Union Station and expand passenger access between the subway station and the GO Transit concourse in Union Station. The third project is to begin the site preparation and the remediation work in the port lands and the west Don lands. Finally, the fourth project is to undertake environmental assessment work to re-naturalize and implement flood protection solutions near the mouth of the Don River. The costs of these projects will be shared equally by all three levels of government.

In June of this year, I had the pleasure of participating in a ceremony to kick off the Front Street extension -- that's one of the projects that is going forward -- with my colleagues Chris Hodgson, the Minister of Municipal Affairs; Tina Molinari, the Associate Minister of Municipal Affairs; and several federal ministers and members as well. That was the kick-off in June, and I understand that planning and design work for the Front Street extension is progressing well.

Next week, the corporation is expected to present a development plan and a business strategy for the Toronto waterfront central area to the three levels of government, and we look forward to receiving that. This business plan is going to form the basis for waterfront investment priorities and decisions over the next five years. So we're quite looking forward to it, as I said. In this regard, I think it's worth pointing out that there has been outstanding co-operation between the three governments on the waterfront initiative.

I want to assure the Legislature that Ontario intends to continue working with the federal government and the city of Toronto in the best interests of the people and businesses of Toronto.

We know we're not always going to see eye to eye on every issue; governments never do. But when it comes to the waterfront, we have not only been able to make great progress by creating this corporation to begin with, by pledging the money and the commitment to work ahead and by starting on these four projects, but I'm pleased to say that, as regards the waterfront, we are on the same page -- the federal government, the provincial government and the city. That is not always the case, as readers and watchers of the media will know.

For our part, the government of Ontario has identified five criteria that we believe will be very helpful in this project and other projects in other cities -- five criteria to achieve healthy and competitive cities. These include strategic, long-term investments in infrastructure, which we have been doing in partnership with the federal and provincial government through SuperBuild.

For example, today I had the privilege, with my colleague Norm Sterling, the Minister of Transportation, my caucus colleague Marcel Beaubien and the Premier -- we were there in Windsor to announce a project with the federal government and the Ontario government to invest $300 million from both levels of government in improving Windsor border access. It is an extremely important project that this government, through transportation and through the Minister of Enterprise, Opportunity and Innovation -- my colleague Jim Flaherty has also been working on this.

We have demonstrated that it is possible for the provincial and federal governments to work together to come to the conclusion of successful projects We have indeed been doing that with long-term investments in infrastructure. There are many other examples, but today I felt I had to mention Windsor since it was a very successful event for all of us.

Besides the strategic long-term investments in infrastructure, providing the right conditions to ensure competitiveness is very important. We as a government, in terms of our economic policies and tax policies, see ensuring competitiveness as a very, very important goal of that.

Pursuing opportunity and innovation -- another important goal, as are shared intergovernmental priorities and partnerships, strong urban leadership and a high quality of life.

Those are some of the factors that will be guiding us in our participation in this unique partnership.

We are committed to working with municipalities, the federal government and other stakeholders to ensure that these criteria are met and to realize what I believe is our shared vision of a revitalized Toronto waterfront.

I would like to take this opportunity to invite the members of the opposition who frequently have expressed interest in Toronto from time to time -- I think this is an example where they can demonstrate that commitment, demonstrate that interest by joining with us to support passage of Bill 151, to move it through the Legislature very quickly. I would certainly ask for their support on this motion today. Thank you very much for this opportunity to address this.

Ms Marilyn Mushinski (Scarborough Centre): I am particularly pleased today to rise in the Legislature to support the second reading of Bill 151, the Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation Act, because the proposed legislation, if passed, would establish a permanent Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corp, or TWRC. That permanent corporation is intended to replace the interim corporation that was created last year. With the new corporation up and running, the redevelopment and revitalization of Toronto's waterfront, I believe, will really start to take off.

That's because the proposed legislation would give the TWRC a very clear direction and clear principles to guide it in carrying out its business.

The fact is, the revitalization of Toronto's waterfront will mark an important new phase for this great city. In the past, the lands along the central waterfront played an important role in the city's economic development. It is interesting. I happened to be in England a little earlier this year; unfortunately, there was a death in the family and I had to go to England. I was visiting with a good friend of my sister who happened to be a Cockney grocer, and on his library bookshelf he had a book called My East End which told the history of the east end of London. It was an extremely good depiction of how economic development and settlement create such an important aspect of city life.

It is important that we indeed put into context the history of Toronto's waterfront, because revitalizing these lands will truly ensure that the history will play an equally vital

part in determining the city's future, I believe.

The waterfront area has been the location of numerous factories, warehouses and other retail, com