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

October 30, 2006

38th Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2006-Oct-30 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Monday 30 October 2006 Lundi 30 octobre 2006

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

WATER QUALITY

INTERNATIONAL PLOWING MATCH

HOSPITAL FUNDING

CHILD CARE

ONTARIO TRILLIUM FOUNDATION

FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL CO-OPERATION

OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY

HEALTH CARE

HYDRO RATES

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

FISH AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION AMENDMENT ACT (DOUBLE-CRESTED CORMORANTS), 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LA PROTECTION DU POISSON

ET DE LA FAUNE

(CORMORANS À AIGRETTES)

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

VISITORS

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

FAMILY MEDICAL LEAVE

ORAL QUESTIONS

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

HOSPITAL SERVICES

HOSPITAL FUNDING

TUITION

PHARMACISTS

CLIMATE CHANGE

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

WATER AND SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE

SCHOOL FACILITIES

ONTARIO ECONOMY

FISH AND WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT

HEALTH CARE

IMMIGRATION POLICY

GRIDLOCK

PETITIONS

LONG-TERM CARE

IMMIGRANTS' SKILLS

PROSTATE CANCER

FAIR ACCESS TO PROFESSIONS

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

TUITION

IMMIGRANTS' SKILLS

SCHOOL FACILITIES

TUITION

IDENTITY THEFT

HIGHWAY 417

TUITION

ORDERS OF THE DAY

BUDGET MEASURES ACT, 2006 (NO. 2) /

LOI DE 2006 SUR LES MESURES

BUDGÉTAIRES (NO 2)

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

WATER QUALITY

Mr. Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): Last week, the McGuinty Liberals spent most of their time in statements condemning the opposition parties for not supporting Bill 43. Let me make it very

clear: I do not support Bill 43, because it does not protect precious groundwater around new landfills while at the same time handcuffing the agricultural community to abide by new strict rules without compensation.

How much did the McGuinty Liberals listen to the citizens of North Simcoe site 41 following the Walkerton tragedy? Not at all. Did they listen to the opposition they received in the form of thousands of letters

and e-mails? No. Did they listen to the thousands of signatures they received on petitions? No. Did they listen to the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario in his 2004 annual report? No. Did they listen to the private member's bill Waste Disposal

Site 41 in the Township of Tiny Act, that parallels the Adams Mine Lake Act, which I introduced? No, they did not. Did they listen to the expertise provided by experts in the field from around the world? No, they did not. Did they listen to Tiny's

Residents Working Together and the five busloads of citizens who held a rally here on August 21, the opening day of the Clean Water Act? No, they did not.

What did they do? On Friday 21 October, the day after the Clean Water Act was proclaimed, they gave the final approval of site 41. Site 41 will contaminate the groundwater. Shame on Dalton McGuinty for allowing

this to happen to the people in the township of Tiny.

INTERNATIONAL PLOWING MATCH

Mr. Jeff Leal (Peterborough): I am pleased to rise in the House today to congratulate the organizers of the 2006 Peterborough county International Plowing Match and Rural Expo. I wish to thank

the Ontario Plowmen's Association, the Peterborough County Plowmen's Association and the more than 2,200 volunteers for ensuring that the highest standards set by the North American Farm Show Council were met, if not exceeded.

Congratulations to local IPM Chairman Norm Blodgett, who has volunteered his time since 2004 to create Ontario's premier outdoor Rural Expo.

Finally, host farm family Jim and Marg Glenn deserve a special thank you for welcoming more than 81,000 visitors to their family farm. On Friday night they were honoured by the Greater Peterborough Chamber of

Commerce and the Peterborough County Federation of Agriculture with the 2006 Peterborough Farm Family of the Year Award.

Now that the dust has settled on Mather's Corners, we can all reflect on the tremendous success of this year's IPM. You've made Peterborough and Ontario very, very proud.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Mr. John Yakabuski (Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke): As you know, P3s are public-private partnerships by which a government gets a consortium of private companies to finance, build and maintain

buildings for a set amount of money.

Let me remind the House what Dalton McGuinty had to say about P3s just a few short years ago: "P3s represent an extraordinary departure from our history when it comes to public hospitals." "We don't support the

Americanization of hospitals." But oh, how times have changed.

On Friday, the Royal Ottawa Hospital, a P3 initiative of the former Conservative government, was officially opened with Premier McGuinty front and centre -- part of his self-congratulatory tour. What is galling

is that, during the 2003 campaign, Dalton McGuinty and the Liberals spoke strongly against the Conservatives' P3 hospital initiatives. In Brampton, Liberal candidates actually went door to door fear-mongering, telling the voters that their brand

new hospital would be charging patients high fees because it was a triple-P project.

The former PC government knew that P3s were the way to rebuild our province's aging hospital infrastructure; Dalton McGuinty and the Liberals knew that as well. Clearly, this is yet another case of saying

anything, doing anything, just to get elected -- then flip-flop. This is ironclad proof that the Premier's words, promises and positions are nothing more than shallow attempts to get a vote.

A warning to the people of Ontario: He has done it before; he will try to do it to you again.

CHILD CARE

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): Several significant developments have occurred recently on the child care front. Last Wednesday, the Ontario Coalition for Better Child Care released their

guide book, which identifies their expectations of the McGuinty government. It's an excellent report. I highly recommend it, and congratulate the many hard-working individuals and groups that produced it. In fact, I have order forms here for

anybody who would like to order the guide.

It reflects the participation of working women, people with disabilities, lower-income groups, single parents, rural and First Nations communities, immigrants, refugees and other racialized communities. It talks

about the need for inclusion, for subsidies and investment, for decent wages in the child care sector.

We can't let the ever-present and growing need for regulated, not-for-profit, affordable child care drop from the radar screen just because the McGuinty Liberals haven't lived up to their promise. They say they

recognize the importance of a child's early years and the provision of quality child care for all children, yet they haven't put the funding into the expansion they promised. They say they value the role of ECE and child care workers, but have

done nothing to address the low pay and workplace issues they face.

We've seen the McGuinty government playing somewhat of a shell game over child care funding. They promised $300 million investment for new child care spaces and it never arrived. The Harper cutbacks are wrong

and shameful, but the pulling back by the McGuinty government is unconscionable.

Last week, we marked Child Care Worker and Early Childhood Educator Appreciation Day. If the McGuinty government really values child care programs and the early years specialists who provide them, then show it

with decent wages and working conditions, and flow the promised investments that never came.

ONTARIO TRILLIUM FOUNDATION

Mr. Wayne Arthurs (Pickering-Ajax-Uxbridge): I rise in the House today to draw attention to some of the many grants that the Ontario Trillium Foundation is providing to communities in my riding,

as they're doing throughout the province of Ontario. Each year, the Ontario Trillium Foundation makes approximately 1,500 grants to non-profit and charitable organizations. These grants are in great demand.

Grants announced in 2006 in my riding of Pickering-Ajax-Uxbridge included: the Uxbridge Bowling Club, some $53,800 to make recreational activities more accessible throughout the year; the Uxbridge-Scott

$71,000 for their library facility repairs; the Frenchmen's Bay Yacht Club, some $79,000 to make their entrance and washrooms accessible, and to integrate those with disabilities into their program; and the L.M. Montgomery Society of Ontario,

$50,000 for the restoration of the Leaskdale Manse Museum, a national historic site, through completion of a conservation plan.

Grants announced in 2006 also served the broader part of the region of Durham, and those include: the Durham Children's Groundwater Festival, $68,000; the Women's Multicultural Resource and Counselling Centre of

Durham, $100,000 to ensure programs are available for those who are immigrants to our community and refugees. Those are a few of the grants that the Ontario Trillium Foundation has announced in 2006.

FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL CO-OPERATION

Ms. Lisa MacLeod (Nepean-Carleton): Exactly seven months ago today, I was elected by the people of Nepean-Carleton to represent them in this place. The day before that, I was proud to work for

Canada's new government in Ottawa. As a member of this Legislature, I'm proud to work with my former colleagues in the federal government in Ottawa and with the municipality that I represent. I think working with other levels of government on

behalf of the people, for the people, is the right thing to do.

This government clearly disagrees. In a bitter and twisted moment, the Premier referred to three of his former colleagues in this place -- my predecessor, in fact -- as "a recurring nightmare," because they are

serving our province and our country in the federal cabinet, doing the job they were elected to do by the people of this province and the people of this country. Not only was the Premier as antagonistic --

Interjections.

Ms. MacLeod: -- as his members are right now, but it was a vast departure from his comments after the federal election, when he said, "Well, that was another government, at another time in

history."

The Premier will say one thing to Ontario's face but another behind its back. If he truly wanted to stand up for Ontario, he'd be working with Ministers Baird, Flaherty and Clement like the people expect him to.

But instead, day in and day out, the McGuinty model of diplomacy is played out in this Legislature like it is right now. It is polarizing, and it is wrong. It pits us against them and it pits Ontario against Canada, and that is not helpful.

Building a partnership with the rest of Canada, including with Canada's new, and I might add honest, government is what is best for the residents of Ontario. But you know what they say: When you get in trouble

at home, you pick a fight with the feds. I hardly call that standing up for Ontario. It sounds more like falling poll numbers.

OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY

Mr. Jim Brownell (Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh): Recently we had some very special guests visit us here at Queen's Park. They were the graduating class of the University of Toronto's

occupational therapy program for 2006-07. These young men and women will soon begin their careers in a field that will only gain importance in the coming years.

Ontarians as a whole work long hours on the job, and it becomes more common for them to incur injuries, ranging from repetitive stress syndrome to the all-too-common BlackBerry thumb. Occupational therapists

take a look at our work environments and strive to make them more worker friendly, leading to increased productivity, less strain and fewer hospital visits.

These students came to Queen's Park to thank the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care, the Minister of Education, the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities and this government for supporting them. By

investing in the occupational therapy program at the University of Toronto, this government has demonstrated foresight both in terms of supporting these young students and in terms of investing in the future of Ontario's workers and the health

care system.

I wish to congratulate the students of the University of Toronto's occupational therapy program for coming to Queen's Park to recognize the government that is listening, and I join them in thanking this

government for again showing leadership in planning for the future in health care. I wish to congratulate all future occupational therapists and wish them the very best in their studies in classrooms and field placements across this province.

HEALTH CARE

Mr. Phil McNeely (Ottawa-Orléans): When this government was elected to office in 2003, the health care system of this province was in ruins after years of severe budget cuts by the previous

NDP and Conservative governments. Hospitals had been closed, services were reduced, and thousands of doctors and nurses had been laid off. The only thing that increased during these difficult years was the length of time Ontarians had to wait for

life-saving treatment.

But this government puts the health and safety of Ontarians first. We invested $611 million in new medical procedures to reduce wait times. We increased hospital funding by $2.4 billion. We hired more nurses and

doctors and increased spaces in medical training programs. We invested millions to increase long-term-care beds.

I'm pleased to inform the House that Ontarians are being treated faster than other Canadians from coast to coast. Recently, the former CMA president gave us high praise when he said that Ontario has gone "from a

laggard to a leader." In fact, in every category measured in a recent survey, Ontario now consistently shows the shortest wait times of all provinces, with the shortest wait time for specialist consultations, 7.4 weeks; the shortest wait time for

treatment after seeing a specialist, 7.5 weeks; the shortest wait time for a CT scan, 4.3 weeks; the shortest wait time for an MRI, eight weeks; and the shortest wait time for ultrasounds, two weeks.

The results of this study show that the hard work of this government has paid off. It shows that this government is the only government to which Ontarians can trust their health care.

HYDRO RATES

Mr. David Orazietti (Sault Ste. Marie): Last Thursday, the member from Kenora-Rainy River, Mr. Hampton, suggested that the recent challenges faced by St. Marys Paper in Sault Ste. Marie are

solely because of energy issues and said, in reference to our government, "We see you drive hydro rates through the roof."

If the leader of the third party had bothered to get the facts straight on St. Marys, he would have found that in 2003 they were paying 6.8 cents a kilowatt hour and are now paying 6.4 cents. This comes as a

result of our government's commitment to bring new power online in this province after years of inaction.

We have produced more than 3,000 megawatts, on target for 10,000 megawatts.

The leader of the third party talks a lot about electricity, but when his party was in power they built no new electrical supply, paid $150 million to cancel the Manitoba power agreement and raised hydro rates

by 40%.

It's reprehensible that the NDP is preying on the fears of families and using this situation for cheap political gain. While they're handing out partisan flyers in the Soo, our government is working on real

solutions for St. Marys Paper, the workers and their families.

This company, like many others, has been hard hit by a high Canadian dollar, and we all know that this factor alone is having the greatest effect on the company's ability to meet its pension obligations. So

we're working to find efficiencies in areas that we, as a province, can influence.

We've provided $900 million to support the forestry sector. We've introduced innovative purchasing agreements to help create projects like the Brookfield wind farm and ASI's cogen project.

Funding is available for St. Marys Paper to help them build a cogeneration project. We're at the table for St. Marys Paper, the workers --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

FISH AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION AMENDMENT ACT (DOUBLE-CRESTED CORMORANTS), 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LA PROTECTION DU POISSON

ET DE LA FAUNE

(CORMORANS À AIGRETTES)

Mr. Parsons moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 156,

An Act to amend the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act, 1997 / Projet de loi 156, Loi modifiant la Loi de 1997 sur la protection du poisson et de la faune.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

The member may wish to make a brief statement.

Mr. Ernie Parsons (Prince Edward-Hastings): This bill is intended to address the crisis that is being created in rural Ontario by the astronomical growth in the number of double-crested

cormorants.

It is believed that the double-crested cormorants consume more fish in Ontario, at the rate of one pound per bird per day, than commercial fishing, sport fishing and poaching all put together. In addition, they

are devastating the landscape in parts of rural Ontario, making public beaches unusable.

This bill will reclassify the double-crested cormorant to be considered in the same family as American crows, brown-headed cowbirds and common grackle and in fact will allow for greatly increased opportunities

for the harvesting of these double-crested cormorants.

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

Hon. James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism, minister responsible for seniors, Government House Leader): Once again, the much-anticipated motion, as follows -- the member for Bruce-Grey-Owen

Sound is awaiting this; the member for Niagara Centre is awaiting this. I move that pursuant to standing order 9(c)(i), the House shall meet from 6:45 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. on Monday, October 30, 2006, for the purpose of considering government

business.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry?

All in favour will say "aye."

All opposed will say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1349 to 1354.

The Speaker: Mr. Bradley has moved government notice of motion 219. All those in favour will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

Arnott, Ted

Arthurs, Wayne

Balkissoon, Bas

Bartolucci, Rick

Bentley, Christopher

Bountrogianni, Marie

Bradley, James J.

Broten, Laurel C.

Brownell, Jim

Bryant, Michael

Cansfield, Donna H.

Caplan, David

Colle, Mike

Crozier, Bruce

Delaney, Bob

Dhillon, Vic

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duguid, Brad

Elliott, Christine

Flynn, Kevin Daniel

Hardeman, Ernie

Hoy, Pat

Jeffrey, Linda

Kular, Kuldip

Kwinter, Monte

Leal, Jeff

Levac, Dave

Marsales, Judy

Matthews, Deborah

McNeely, Phil

Miller, Norm

Munro, Julia

O'Toole, John

Orazietti, David

Parsons, Ernie

Peters, Steve

Phillips, Gerry

Racco, Mario G.

Ramal, Khalil

Rinaldi, Lou

Ruprecht, Tony

Sandals, Liz

Smitherman, George

Sorbara, Gregory S.

Tascona, Joseph N.

Van Bommel, Maria

Watson, Jim

Wilson, Jim

Witmer, Elizabeth

Zimmer, David

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

Nays

DiNovo, Cheri

Horwath, Andrea

Kormos, Peter

Marchese, Rosario

Murdoch, Bill

Prue, Michael

Tabuns, Peter

Yakabuski, John

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 51; the nays are 8.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

VISITORS

Hon. Rick Bartolucci (Minister of Northern Development and Mines): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I'd like to welcome -- and I know I speak for everyone in the House here -- Lynn Peterson,

the mayor of Thunder Bay. Her dedication to northern Ontario is truly appreciated by all.

Mr. Mario G. Racco (Thornhill): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I want to introduce the students from Leo Baeck Day School from Thornhill on this side of the House.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

FAMILY MEDICAL LEAVE

Hon. Steve Peters (Minister of Labour): Today I'm pleased to announce that family medical leave has been expanded to allow many more people to take the time they need to care for a gravely ill

loved one. They can do this without worrying about losing their jobs. Before today, the people who could take family medical leave were limited to a number of immediate family members. Family medical leave can now be taken to care for brothers,

sisters, aunts, uncles, grandparents, nephews and nieces. It can also be taken to care for certain relatives of an employee's spouse. Even a close friend who is not a direct family member may now be eligible for family medical leave.

This government recognizes that people need assurances that while they are caring for the gravely ill, their jobs will be protected. By expanding the number of people who can benefit from family medical leave,

we are now creating a new level of fairness. Members will recall that our government introduced amendments to the Employment Standards Act to create family medical leave in 2004 that were subsequently passed by this Legislature. Family medical

leave ensures that Ontario employees who must take time off work to care for seriously ill loved ones do not lose their jobs. Our government is on the side of families who need to support loved ones during their final days.

Now, because we see the benefit in providing this leave, we believe it is right to make it possible for more Ontarians to qualify for this program. In doing so, we recognize today's society, where family

members may be hundreds if not thousands of miles apart; we recognize those people who are not in a traditional family situation; we also recognize the diversity of today's multi-ethnic society, with many groups relying on extended family to

support one another. Our government understands that many can provide critically important support when illness strikes, not just a family member.

Under family medical leave, an employee can take up to eight weeks of job-protected leave to provide care or support to a person who has a serious medical condition with a significant risk of death occurring

during a period of 26 weeks. Family medical leave also allows people to better balance their work and family responsibilities, similar to pregnancy and parental leaves. Some employees may also be eligible for the employment insurance compassionate

care benefit program.

You don't have to look far to see the growing level of employee stress due to work-family conflict caused by an aging population and increasing workplace demands. Employees are more likely to miss work because

of caregiving responsibilities. Caregivers, we have to recognize, are under stress. Someone they love is gravely ill. Family medical leave provides support to individuals in that time of need.

It also is a positive step for businesses. Providing job-protected leave supports business by creating a more positive, loyal and productive workplace for employers. Employers know that family caregiving has a

direct impact on workplaces. We believe in supporting Ontario families during difficult times. The approaching death of a loved one is one of the most difficult passages in life. The availability of care from family members will allow many to

remain in familiar surroundings for much longer. They will have the comfort and support of those dearest to them.

This government is committed to improving the quality of life for the people of Ontario. This change provides support to even more families when they need it most. It further strengthens the working

relationship between employers and employees, and it will provide comfort to more people who are seriously ill.

Family medical leave is the result of a compassionate government that cares for Ontario families. The expansion of family medical leave is good for families, it's good for employees and it's good for

employers, but most of all, it's good for the citizens of Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Responses?

Mr. Jim Wilson (Simcoe-Grey): In response to the Minister of Labour's statement on expanding family medical leave, I want to say that certainly we're in support of that. It's a program that

was put in place in 2004, and we're certainly supportive. I don't know anyone who wouldn't be supportive, except maybe those people who don't have a job in Ontario because of the punitive taxation and the levels of wasted spending that this

government has been putting on the people of Ontario.

They wasted $6 million to drop the "C" from the OLGC, $20 million for raises for Liberal appointees in government agencies and boards, $100 million for partisan government advertising, $91 million to fire

nurses, and $219,000 to pay a Liberal ad firm to redraw the trillium logo. This government is out of touch with the middle class. You are overtaxing them, wasting money, and therefore people are out of jobs.

Ninety thousand manufacturing jobs have been lost since the beginning of 2005. At least 4,000 forestry jobs were lost in that time. Ontario's unemployment rate is higher than the national average for only the

second time in 30 years. RBC forecasts that Ontario will be dead last in Canada in economic growth this year and is on the cusp of a recession.

Some of those jobs that have been lost -- I'll just read: Imperial Tobacco at Guelph and Aylmer, closure, 555 jobs; GM in various locations, layoffs, over 1,000 jobs lost; Ford, layoffs, over 1,100;

DaimlerChrysler, over 1,000 jobs lost; Sears in various locations, 1,200 jobs lost; Backyard Products in Collingwood, 230 jobs lost; Blue Mountain Pottery, Collingwood, 37 jobs lost; Kaufman Furniture, Collingwood, 147 jobs lost; Nacan Starch

Products, Collingwood, 87 jobs lost; Automation Tooling System, ATS, in Cambridge and Burlington, over 139 jobs lost; Nestlé plant in Chesterville, closure, 300 jobs lost; La-Z-Boy in Waterloo, closure of that plant, 413 jobs lost;

Ferranti-Packard, St. Catharines, 212 jobs lost; Norampac Inc., Red Rock, 175 jobs lost; Uniboard Canada Inc., New Liskeard, 73 jobs lost; Trent Rubber in Lindsay, closure of the plant, 124 jobs lost; ERCO Worldwide, Thunder Bay, 26-plus jobs

lost; Glenoit, Elmira, closure, 75 jobs; Hemosol, Mississauga, 50 jobs lost --

Interjection.

Mr. Wilson: It has everything to do with the statement. You get up and you expand a program, but if you don't have a job, family medical leave isn't going to do you any good.

Sleeman, Guelph, 40 jobs lost; Glis Inc., Sarnia, 35 jobs lost; Bazaar and Novelty, St. Catharines, 200 jobs lost; Rheem Canada, Hamilton, closure, 150 jobs lost; Ball Packaging, Burlington, 100 people laid

off; Redpath Sugar, Niagara Falls, 20 jobs lost; Harrowsmith cheese, Harrowsmith, 89 jobs lost; World's Finest Chocolate Factory, Campbellford, 125 jobs lost; Hershey Chocolates, Smiths Falls, 50 jobs lost; KUS Canada Inc., Leamington, 120 jobs

lost when that plant closed; Prescott Shirt Co., Prescott, 53 jobs lost; Nexen, Amherstburg, 20 jobs lost; Columbia Forest Products, Rutherglen, 63 jobs lost; Cascades Inc., Thunder Bay, 375 jobs lost; Fleetwood Metal Industries, Tilbury, 130 jobs

lost; ABB, Guelph, 280 jobs; AFG Glass, London and Concord, 250 jobs; Humpty Dumpty, Brampton, 188 jobs lost; Saint-Gobain, Brantford, 39 jobs lost; Domtar, Ottawa and Cornwall, almost 1,000 jobs lost; Dana, Burlington, 80 jobs lost;

Smurfit-Stone, Pembroke, 140 jobs lost; GDX Automotive, Welland, 150 jobs lost; ABC Taxi, Sudbury, 60 jobs lost; VSA LLC, Kitchener, 150 jobs lost; Ford, St. Thomas and Windsor, 1,200 jobs lost; John Deere, Woodstock, 325 jobs; Bowater, Thunder

Bay, 280; Curwood Packaging, Georgetown, 147 jobs lost; Goodyear, Collingwood, 37 jobs lost; Winpack Technologies, Toronto, 250 jobs lost; Maytag, the head office in Burlington, 90 jobs cut there; Sterling Truck, St. Thomas, 600 jobs slashed

there; International Truck, Chatham, 500 jobs lost there; Wallaceburg Preferred Partners, 250 jobs lost there.

I've got six more pages here of hundreds and hundreds more jobs that have been lost because there's no economic plan from this government. They're wasting taxpayers' money and they don't care about the middle

class and people having good jobs.

Mr. Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): The irony of this announcement is that the people who have the greatest need to care for their own families -- because they don't have the economic means,

they don't have the assets and the resources to pay for private care -- are the ones working at such low-wage jobs that they can't afford to take unpaid time off work to engage in that care. Here's a government that talks about compassion, yet

it's a government that refuses to raise the minimum wage, the bare-bones minimum of $10 an hour, like New Democrats have advocated and like Cheri DiNovo put forward in a private member's bill just a week ago, that even the Toronto Star endorses

editorially.

When you've got workers, most of them increasingly women, working not just at one job but literally, no longer proverbially, at two and three jobs, we know where they're working. We know these women. We see

them at 6 a.m. in the 7-Elevens, on their feet all day to 3 o'clock, until they get the kids home from school. Then they go off to the evening job in a restaurant or tavern, again working for minimum wage and hoping for a few tips.

These are not anonymous people, these are not non-people, these are not mere statistics; these are real people. Ms. DiNovo has spoken of them most graphically and passionately when she addressed that issue but

a few days ago here in this Legislature.

Here's a government that talks about compassion for workers and their families, but it still won't let every worker in this province belong to a trade union and engage in free collective bargaining, not just

around wages but around workplace health and safety.

The Liberals in the year 2006 still say to agricultural workers in this province that, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms notwithstanding, agricultural workers will not be allowed, in Dalton McGuinty's

Ontario, to belong to a trade union and to organize and collectively bargain around wages and workplace health and safety.

Here's a government that talks about compassion for workers and their families, but will they extend card-based certification to every worker in this province so that the poorest workers, so that the workers

who are most at risk in their workplaces, so that the lowest-paid workers, so that the workers doing some of the most dangerous jobs in this province, could form a trade union and collectively bargain as well? Compassion, my foot. It takes a lot

to sit and listen to Liberals talk about compassion for workers and their families when Wal-Mart is running rampant with anti-union campaigns and this government refuses to give those poorest workers some of the most modest tools to permit them to

engage in trade union organization.

Over the course of the last two years alone, you accommodated 118,000 workers. They've got all the time in the world now to take care of ill family members because they don't have jobs. Just last week, at

Casino Niagara: 104 people tossed out like that in a New York minute; 300 positions eliminated, and the minister had the compassion to stand and say that the government would aid these people in their retraining. They've already been retrained,

Minister. They were the people who used to work at Ferranti-Packard. They were the people who used to work at Atlas Steel. They were the people who used to work at E.G. Marsh. They were the people who used to work at Ford glass. They already lost

their jobs in Dalton McGuinty's Ontario. They're one of the 118,000. You retrained them. You trained them to be blackjack dealers, and now you've laid them off. You've tossed them out the door. You introduced technology that's going to guarantee

bigger and bigger profits for casinos and more and more revenues for the province but fewer and fewer jobs for those workers for whom the casino was the workplace of last resort.

I say that this government hasn't displayed compassion for workers and their families. This government has displayed disdain for workers and their families. This government has displayed disdain for single

moms who work at two and three jobs, working incredibly hard, oftentimes in incredibly dangerous workplaces and under dangerous circumstances and for the lowest of wages. This government hasn't shown compassion for senior citizens, people who've

worked all their lives trying to continue to support themselves on pensions that become worthless over the course of a few years of this government's skyrocketing electricity prices and this government's refusal to tackle property taxes going

through the roof, which is forcing senior citizens in their retirement years into literal homelessness after spending a lifetime of working, a lifetime of investing and often paying for that home twice as they put kids through university or

community college.

This government has betrayed workers in this province. This government has betrayed workers and their families. This government has betrayed retirees. I take no solace from today's announcement --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order.

ORAL QUESTIONS

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

Mr. Jim Wilson (Simcoe-Grey): My question is to the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities. Minister, if you walk out the front doors of the Legislature you'll notice that there are

students holding a mock funeral for post-secondary education in Ontario. This protest doesn't seem to jibe with Mr. McGuinty's self-appointed claim to be the education Premier. You claim to be funding an additional $6.2 billion of post-secondary

education, while the Ontario Undergraduate Student Alliance points out that you are spending half that money during this mandate, and the other half won't be spent until after the next election.

On over 40 occasions you've used the $6.2-billion figure as if it's already been invested. In fact, the finance minister said last Thursday in this House, "Today, hundreds of thousands of students are

benefiting from our historic $6.2-billion investment in post-secondary education." Minister, why do you continue to use a figure that has no bearing on what is actually happening? You'll certainly say anything to get re-elected.

Hon. Christopher Bentley (Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities): It's a great question coming from the party that raised tuition between 100% and 1,000% on the students in the

province of Ontario. It's a great question coming from the member. The first act they did was to cut universities' and colleges' budgets by up to 20%.

We have invested in post-secondary education and skills training in the following ways: $6.2 billion over five years. That's money going out the door. It means that college and university budgets are

increasing by 26.4% over just four years. It means almost 200,000 students are receiving OSAP and 120,000 students are receiving grants. More opportunities, more assistance, more grants and higher-quality education for the students of Ontario:

That's what Ontarians need from a party on post-secondary education, not the cuts that you delivered.

Mr. Wilson: This is a government that continues to live in the past.

Here's what the Ontario Undergraduate Student Alliance says: "A detached look at the numbers reveals that the public should not be left with the impression that all is well with higher education."

Here's what the Council of Ontario Universities says: "The government funding announced to date and the tuition revenues ... will not keep pace with anticipated enrolment growth. When university inflation ...

is factored in, the resources per student are likely to leave Ontario still near last place among provinces in per-student funding for universities."

Why don't you just admit that rather than putting in unprecedented levels of funding, what you're really doing is an unprecedented number of photo ops and announcements using inflated numbers?

Hon. Mr. Bentley: I think the member clearly outlines the challenge, that after their government and the NDP years, we have a huge mountain to climb. That's why we needed the investment of

$6.2 billion in post-secondary education and training. What have we accomplished? Eighty-six thousand more students today are receiving post-secondary education than when we started, and that's progress; 120,000 students are receiving grants,

including the restoration of upfront tuition grants to 60,000 students, which were cut by the NDP; 27% more assistance to students who need to be able to afford post-secondary education. During all of their years and all of their rhetoric, the NDP

and the Tories raised tuition, but they didn't raise student assistance after 1993. And 800 more professors, better equipment, updated student support services -- more students, better opportunities, higher-quality education. That's our

commitment.

Mr. Wilson: Minister, not only have you been inaccurate in terms of the funding numbers you've used, you're also spreading inaccuracies in your statements about the student access guarantee

program. Last week, in estimates, you admitted that 20,000 potential students a year apply but do not qualify for OSAP, and therefore do not qualify for your student access guarantee program. When you announced this initiative, you said, "No

qualified Ontario students will be prevented from attending Ontario's public colleges and universities due to a lack of financial support programs." How can you call this a guarantee, when you've admitted that 20,000 students a year are turned

away from this program?

Hon. Mr. Bentley: Unbelievable: The party that raised tuition between 100% and 1,000% without increasing student assistance by one penny per student now worries about affordability. When we

brought in the Reaching Higher plan, we doubled the student aid budget. Every individual student now qualifies for more, with 120,000 students receiving grants, and 60,000 upfront tuition grants, when two years ago there were none.

He had a guarantee: a guarantee of paying more and getting less. Our guarantee is more opportunities, more assistance in grants, higher-quality education and a commitment to the future of the province of

Ontario. And what did you say to the colleges and universities when you cut their budget in the first year by 20%? What was the statement that you made then?

HOSPITAL SERVICES

Mrs. Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener-Waterloo): My question is for the Minister of Health. After three years of delay and denial, you finally acknowledged that you were aware of the crisis in

emergency rooms across the province of Ontario. However, your response has focused not on the emergency room crisis but rather on your public relations crisis. Your announcement on Friday contained no timelines and no measurements. Will you tell

us why Friday's announcement did not contain timelines or measurements?

Hon. George Smitherman (Deputy Premier, Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): The reality is, of course, that for three years now we have been working to rebuild the system capacity that the

honourable member's pen struck away from health care. The reports that we had worked on for Friday's successful response have been written by health care institutions -- the Ontario Hospital Association, the Ontario Medical Association -- and

their report laid the responsibility for the challenges of ERs on the decisions of previous governments, particularly with respect to doctor shortages and too small acute care capacity.

That minister's party reduced acute care capacity in Ontario by 22%. We're the party that's moving forward by reconstructing and, at 9%, bringing significant new capacity to the system while at the very same

time adding community capacity as well. I think it's appreciated how much work was done by the Ontario Hospital Association, by the Ontario Medical Association and by community-based health care organizations working together, moving forward

together. We're going to improve circumstances in Ontario's emergency rooms.

Mrs. Witmer: I would recommend to the minister that he look at all of the facts. The reality is that our government added 20,000 long-term-care beds to the system and we expanded community

care services. I would suggest, as far as the statements that he's making, he knows that they're far away from the truth.

Minister, you said this summer that "addressing Ontario's increasing demand for health care services is a complex task, and we know that the answers aren't as easy as simply spending more money." True, and

yet, throwing money at the problem is the only thing you've done in this case.

You've now had two reports. You've sat on some of them and you've ultimately ignored the recommendations. You received this last one. It had 16 recommendations and you've largely ignored them. As you know,

they recommended performance targets, accountability frameworks, standards for emergency departments, and a methodology to define bed needs. Why are you ignoring the recommendations in this report?

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: It takes a considerable degree of chutzpah on the part of the honourable member to stand in this place and so directly contrast her comments with those of Dr. Bob Bell. On

Friday, I was joined by one of the authors of the very report that the honourable member has just stood in her place and said that we sat on and that we ignored. I understand, for partisan purposes, why the honourable member brings her temperament

and style to the Legislature and brings it on to me. But I don't understand, at the heart of it, why, when we're joined by the president of the Ontario Medical Association, by the head of the Ontario Hospital Association, by the president of our

largest hospital, the signatory to the very report that the honourable member speaks about, she criticizes the sector. I don't understand that.

The report that she said we haven't responded to said this: "The main overarching causes of overcrowding are twofold: a lack of bed availability and a lack of integration between community and hospital health

care resources. The number of acute care beds in Ontario fell by 22% during the mid- to late 1990s."

Mrs. Witmer: If we want to be truthful, the report also -- by the way, I have recently met with Dr. Bell myself, and I would say to you that the report says that it "provides a rational

framework ... to assess whether funding of additional acute care capacity is required." This "may include funding of additional acute care beds, long-term-care beds, mental health beds, rehabilitation beds ... and community resources." So there's

the truth, as opposed to what you're saying. It also says, "It is imperative that the ... recommendations be read and implemented as a collective ... a system-wide problem cannot be remedied by selecting only portions of a system-wide

solution."

I ask you again, Minister: Why have you resisted the opportunity to introduce benchmarks and targets for emergency room wait times?

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: Here the member goes again, one more time. She's hard at it, attacking the health care system. Here's what was said on Friday: "`We congratulate Minister Smitherman for

acting on the issue of emergency department overcrowding and for recognizing that more acute care and long-term beds is at the heart of an effective systemic solution,' said Alan Drummond, an emergency physician and spokesperson for CAEP."

The point was made so clearly on Friday. We're taking these important steps forward and we're building on a critical care capacity that added $90 million in January. As for health care and emergency rooms,

there's really important and challenging work that must yet be done. We all agree on that point. But I don't think it's very helpful for the honourable member to come in here and attack the health care system like that. We're so grateful for the

work that's being done on the front lines by people who are dedicated, passionate and committed. Working alongside them, we will improve access to health care in Ontario.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): To the Deputy Premier: When the former Conservative government announced profit-driven, privately financed hospitals, one in Ottawa, Dalton McGuinty

was very critical and was opposed. In fact, he said, "We believe in public ownership and public financing.... I will take these hospitals and bring them inside the public sector." But on Friday, Dalton McGuinty completely reversed himself. He

participated in the official opening of the same profit-driven, privately financed hospital he was critical of, a hospital which advertises itself as "Canada's first hospital to partner with the private sector." What's more, it's a secret deal.

The public isn't allowed to know the financial workings of this private hospital deal.

Deputy Premier, can you tell us why Dalton McGuinty reversed himself once again, this time in terms of now accepting private hospitals?

Hon. George Smitherman (Deputy Premier, Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I think the honourable member is significantly mistaken, particularly on one point. One of the things we were

privileged to do as a government soon after we came to office was to ensure that in the agreements related to both William Osler and the Royal Ottawa, public ownership and control was maintained. At the heart of it, we believe fundamentally in

those principles. Accordingly, I can assure the people who will enjoy service at those two hospitals that those hospitals are public hospitals, that the people who work in them are as dedicated as ever to the underlying challenges for which they

are working on behalf of patients.

I want to say very clearly that we're proud to be a government that has moved forward so much hospital construction. We know that long-awaited hospital facilities are coming to life across the province of

Ontario, and that the patients who await the services in those hospitals are very excited in anticipation. They know as well that as they come in and receive services in those hospitals, it will always be, as has been appreciated, with dedication

to the patients at hand. Nothing has been altered in that circumstance.

Mr. Hampton: In that case, I think the Premier would have been embarrassed if he'd read the hospital's own press release, where they say very clearly that this is private financing. The

hospital's press release says that the private corporation will continue to provide hospital services, including laundry, dietary and food services, security, and building maintenance and operations -- all of that by a profit-driven private

corporation. What's worse is that since the last election, the McGuinty government, instead of protecting the public health care system, has now put forward 33 such profit-driven private hospital schemes.

Before the election, Dalton McGuinty said that it was self-evident that private financing of hospitals costs more. So can you tell me again, Deputy Premier, when did Dalton McGuinty suddenly become a fan of

profit-driven, privately financed hospitals?

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: Notwithstanding the laundry list of services that the honourable member went over, what we haven't had in the two minutes of presentation so far from the honourable member

is an explanation of why, during the time he served -- sat on his hands, apparently -- in cabinet, these very same services were outsourced at a variety of Ontario hospitals.

The circumstances are very clear. With respect to what the honourable member speaks of, he doesn't talk about the necessity of building new hospital capital. Of course, as a party, they've never been dedicated

to that. That's why the stock of hospitals is so old. Way more to the point, that same list of services, the same order of services that the honourable member has just gone on a tirade about, are exactly the kinds of services that were privatized

under his watch and saw a different operation. But the core services of hospitals, where the patients are getting the services they desire from our doctors and from front-line health care providers, have not been altered. These are public

hospitals, and they are hospitals that people in those communities will be proud of.

Mr. Hampton: There's a third problem with these profit-driven, privately financed hospitals, and that is that the McGuinty government wants to keep the financial deals completely secret. If

these are public hospitals, if indeed they belong to the public of Ontario, I would think that you'd want the public of Ontario to know what the financing is and how much is going where. What we know is this: If there's $100 for patient care,

maybe $80 will go to patient care under your profit-driven scheme, but $20 of that will be siphoned off to corporate profit.

Deputy Premier, can you tell us, if these profit-driven, private-finance deals are such good deals, why won't you make them public? Why does the Ontario Health Coalition have to go to court to try to force you

to divulge what the public should already know? Why are you trying to keep this secret from the taxpayers of Ontario?

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: The honourable member is referring to secret information that's available on our public website. This is what we've been reduced to in question period because of the

leader of the third party: Come in and say anything you want, but without any regard for the reality, which is that this information is broadly disseminated. I remember the circumstances related to the contracts on the first agreements: They were

available in a room where people were given the opportunity to come in and sit and review them.

There is a legal issue at hand that the honourable member refers to, and he knows that the courts will resolve that appropriately. But at the heart of it, we believe that public accountability and transparency

are core commitments and fundamental elements of our public health care system. At the end of the day, similarly, the patients who go into these hospitals in search of service will experience a hospital as they ever have. With pride, they will

experience part of the public health care system in Ontario, and I'm sure they will be grateful for the quality of service provided by our public health care providers working hard on the front lines.

Mr. Hampton: The reality is, the Ontario Health Coalition is in court today trying to force the courts to open up these secret, profit-driven private hospital deals.

TUITION

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): To the Deputy Premier: Today in Ontario, too many of our students are denied the fair opportunities we hope for them as parents. Before the last

election, Dalton McGuinty said that tuition fees for colleges and universities were already too high. He promised to stop skyrocketing tuition fees and help make post-secondary education affordable. Instead, what we're seeing is a proposed 36%

increase in tuition fees. Deputy Premier, increasing tuition fees by up to 36% over the next four years is not affordable --

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): The Minister of Labour will come to order. I won't warn the Minister of Labour again.

Mr. Hampton: My question, before government members so rudely interrupted me, was this: You want to increase tuition fees by 36% over the next four years. How are modest- and middle-income

students supposed to pay for a 36% increase in tuition fees and education costs?

Hon. George Smitherman (Deputy Premier, Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): To the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities.

Hon. Christopher Bentley (Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities): I'd be delighted to check the Hansard and find out what answer the member gave when his party raised tuition 50%

over five years -- a 50% increase from a party that has long promised to freeze tuition or, indeed, to reduce it; a party that has long said it cares about affordability. But of course, what about the poorest students in the province of Ontario?

What about the students who need those up-front tuition grants? They cut those up-front tuition grants.

We doubled the student assistance budget. We restored the up-front tuition grants: 120,000 students are receiving a grant, 60,000 of them up-front tuition grants; 30% more in assistance. More spaces, more

Mr. Hampton: I think we have another McGuinty Liberal cabinet minister complaining about the wannabe leader of the Liberal Party. Here is the reality, Minister: Modest --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Attorney General.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Leader of the third party.

Mr. Hampton: The wannabe leader of the Liberal Party says that big tuition fee increases are okay, and the McGuinty government agrees with him. But here's the reality for modest- and

middle-income families: Wages aren't going up by 36%. The minimum wage is certainly not going up by 36%. The lowest-income people in Ontario certainly aren't getting a raise. Even when you work in your so-called increases in student assistance,

you're still increasing tuition fees more.

So my question, again, to the McGuinty government is this: How are students of middle- and modest-income families supposed to pay a 36% increase in tuition fees over the next four years?

Hon. Mr. Bentley: So the avowed leader of the party of principles says that for five years, while he sat in cabinet, he had no choice but to go along. He couldn't stand up on principle and

attack the 50% increase.

So what did we do? We've increased the operating support so that institutions can support high-quality education. We've doubled the student assistance budget. We restored the tuition upfront grants for

students from families up to $75,000 that they cut. We've increased the amount of assistance you can get. We've introduced the student access guarantee and, for the most vulnerable students such as those from first-generation families, aboriginal

students or persons with disabilities, special programs to ensure that they can get in. The proof's in the pudding: 86,000 more students now than when we started. The grants are in. We're going to make sure everyone has a fair shot at success.

Mr. Hampton: Bob Rae was wrong to increase tuition fees then and you're wrong to agree with him in increasing tuition fees now.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. I can wait.

Interjection.

The Speaker: Member for Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound, I will not warn you again.

Interjection.

The Speaker: I won't warn the Minister of Northern Development and Mines again.

Leader of the third party.

Mr. Hampton: Today, college and university students held a funeral for affordable post-secondary education, and for good reason. A 36% increase in tuition fees over four years is not

affordable for anybody -- any modest- or middle-income family. This is a far cry from what Dalton McGuinty promised. He promised to improve quality. What we find is that the faculty-to-student ratio is amongst the worst across North America. You

promised that low-income students were going to get a better deal, but their tuition fees are increasing faster and more than student aid.

I say again to the McGuinty government, how are hard-pressed students supposed to be able to afford this? Why don't you keep your original promise and bring in a tuition freeze longer than two years -- a real

tuition freeze?

Hon. Mr. Bentley: Unlike the member opposite, we kept our promise. We froze tuition for the first time ever. He never did. The NDP constantly promises freezes, and students everywhere should

listen. They'll promise you a freeze, and they'll deliver you a 50% increase. You were there for 1,500 days. The leader of the NDP was in government for more than 1,500 days -- 1,500 chances to stand up and speak up for a tuition freeze, and he

never did.

So what we did was create more spaces for all students. We chose 86,000 more opportunities; increased student assistance for all students -- it's up 27%; increased the number of grants available for all

students -- one in four students gets a grant; restored the upfront tuition grant -- $60,000; and introduced a student access guarantee. We're determined to not let students fall through the cracks, unlike his --

The Speaker: Thank you. New question.

PHARMACISTS

Mr. John Yakabuski (Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke): My question is for the Minister of Health. Minister, now that the regulations surrounding Bill 102 have been rolled out, pharmacists in rural

communities are as dissatisfied as they were before. When I speak to pharmacists in rural communities in my riding of Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke, they tell me that this bill means that some of them will have to close and that, at the very least,

there will be a reduction in services. Minister, in small communities, pharmacists are a bedrock, primary part of health care in those communities. A threat to them is a threat to health care in small communities. Why will you not admit that your

bill amounts to another brutal cut to health care in rural Ontario, and why won't you stand in your place and do something to fix it before we lose pharmacists in rural Ontario and rural people lose primary health care?

Hon. George Smitherman (Deputy Premier, Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): If the honourable member really wants to talk about brutal cuts to health care, he's only got about a foot of

distance to make up, and it's directly to his left.

Circumstances are such that we're in the midst of implementation of Bill 102, working very vigorously on that with all the various stakeholders. I agree that at the heart of it the independent pharmacist is

crucial, particularly in those parts of rural Ontario where there are fewer pharmacies. We worked very hard in the development of our package to ensure that, from an economic standpoint, they were kept whole, and we're continuing to work with the

Ontario Pharmacists' Association to see that through. That's the commitment we offer, acknowledging that it's a significant bill. It's very complex; there's lots to it. We're working carefully with all of these stakeholders on implementation to

ensure that the circumstances that the honourable member predicts are not, in fact, true.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Supplementary, the member for Parry Sound-Muskoka.

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): Minister, I would like to suggest that you keep working on the regulations for Bill 102. Like the member from Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke, I've heard from

pharmacists all around Parry Sound-Muskoka -- from Parry Sound, Huntsville, Bracebridge and Gravenhurst -- and they're very concerned about the regulations in Bill 102. One pharmacist writes, "I am concerned that my business will soon not be able

to operate under this new drug system. There are a few scenarios which will lead to financial loss for my business. I do not believe I am being overly alarmist. We have a crisis."

Until last week, Minister, pharmacists could rely on a cost-to-operator provision which would ensure they were not forced to fill prescriptions at a loss. Now your new regulations have removed that provision.

A pharmacist I met with on Friday said that he might as well close his doors and leave Ontario. Your regulations force pharmacists to choose between going bankrupt and patient care.

Minister, we already have a doctor shortage in Ontario. Will you take steps to rectify this situation so we don't have a pharmacist shortage?

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: I want to say to the honourable member very directly that I take seriously the responsibility we have to ensure that small, independent, rural pharmacies more particularly

are appropriately supported. The work we did in Bill 102 was designed to ensure the survivability -- in fact, the thriveability -- of these very same organizations. Caucus members of mine and on all sides of this House take appropriate concern

with respect to how these independent pharmacists deal with the implications of Bill 102, and I take that very seriously. I do know that there's concern. Any time there is change, there is difficulty around that. I offer to the honourable members

who have asked questions and to others who have spoken to me about it that I continue to work on this to ensure that, working with groups like the Ontario Pharmacists' Association, as we move forward we have a stable, small, rural, independent

pharmacy in the province of Ontario, recognizing fully that these people provide tremendously important services to our patients.

CLIMATE CHANGE

Mr. Peter Tabuns (Toronto-Danforth): My question's for the Minister of the Environment. Minister, today the British government released a report warning that the impact of climate change on

the world will be equivalent to that of the Great Depression and two world wars.

Minister, you've stated that climate change is a vital issue, and yet your actions have not matched your words. During estimates in September, I asked you what your target was for Ontario to reduce greenhouse

gas pollution. You had no target. So today, Minister, I ask: Do you have a target for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in Ontario that meets Kyoto obligations?

Hon. Laurel C. Broten (Minister of the Environment): I'm pleased to have a chance to rise in the House and speak once again about a critical issue facing our province. It's a critical issue

facing Canada and the world, and it's one where we look forward to demonstrating Ontario's leadership and building on the leadership we've already taken.

We are the first jurisdiction that is going to say no to coal. As a result of that singular commitment as a province, we will be providing the country with the single largest contribution in the reduction of

greenhouse gases right across this country: 30 megatonnes of greenhouse gases, somewhat like taking seven million cars off the road.

Right now, we are looking for the federal government to step up and take leadership, along with Ontario. We signed an agreement with the federal government some many, many months ago and look forward to their

contribution. Some $538 million is on the line. That $538 million will help us move forward with our very difficult goal of closing coal and taking on many other steps with respect to climate change. We look forward to doing that and we look

forward to your input in that regard.

Mr. Tabuns: If this is the way leadership is shown, I'd be very scared to look at what happens with issues they don't care about.

Minister, the report that's being released today underscores the need to eliminate carbon emissions from the generation of electricity. Your government has broken its promise twice on phasing out coal.

You and your Premier have talked about how you support Kyoto. Minister, will you see to it that the coal plants in this province are closed down to meet the Kyoto timelines? Are you going to meet the Kyoto

timelines?

Hon. Ms. Broten: Although my friend participated in my most recent climate change breakfast, he apparently did not listen to the many efforts we're undertaking across a number of ministries.

The Ministry of Energy is undertaking work with respect to the reduction of CO 2 , and let me tell you, my friend: We have reduced CO 2 by 15% in our coal-fired facilities. We are taking a number of other steps across a variety

of ministries, including the Ministry of Transportation, with historic investments in public transit which, too, will help us meet those critical commitments with the reduction of greenhouse gases here in our province. Our greenbelt, our gas tax,

closing our Lakeview generating facility, reducing our overall coal reliance by 17% -- the list goes on. We continue to take many, many steps across a variety of ministries.

Is there more to do? Absolutely. Are we going to undertake that work? You'd better believe it.

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

Mrs. Liz Sandals (Guelph-Wellington): My question is for the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities. I would like to ask the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities about the

investments we have made in student aid to ensure that our students are able to attend post-secondary if they are qualified.

Hon. Christopher Bentley (Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities): There has been a lot that has been going on. Under the Reaching Higher plan, we, in fact, doubled the amount of

student assistance, and I know that's very important to the member's constituents, many of whom attend the University of Guelph or the Conestoga campus in Guelph.

We have doubled the student aid budget. We've increased the amount of assistance that any individual student can get -- for the first time in nine years -- by 27%. We restored the upfront tuition grants that

had been eliminated by the NDP in 1993, so now, 60,000 students this September are receiving an upfront tuition grant covering between a quarter and all of their tuition, from families up to $75,000 in income. We've introduced a student access

guarantee so that, as we harmonize and integrate the government's assistance program with those found in institutions, we don't want students falling through the cracks. We want to make sure that every student in need can find the assistance they

need to attend post-secondary education.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Supplementary, the member for London North Centre.

Ms. Deborah Matthews (London North Centre): My supplementary is to the very popular Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities today. We know that the government is investing an extra

$6.2 billion in post-secondary education and training. This historic investment has helped our colleges and universities increase their enrolment by 86,000 students since 2002-03, a 20% increase -- 86,000 more students getting the skills they need

to be competitive in this knowledge-based society. My riding, as you well know, is the home of the University of Western Ontario, and enrolment there has gone up over 2,000 students. That's 2,000 more students getting what they need.

Yet today at Queen's Park we've got people saying that they're protesting to mourn the death of accessible post-secondary education. With so many students going on to post-secondary, how can anyone argue that

The Speaker: The question's been asked.

Hon. Mr. Bentley: In fact, post-secondary education is more accessible in so many ways. Our intent is to ensure more opportunities of higher quality for students in the province of Ontario,

and the proof is in the results: 86,000 more student spaces. We choose 86,000 more opportunities for Ontario students, and others say, "No, freeze." We choose to increase the amount of assistance available by 27% while maintaining the repayable

amount at $7,000, and others say, "No, freeze." We choose to restore upfront tuition grants so that 60,000 more students than just two years ago get those, and others say, "No, freeze." We choose to invest in programs for first-generation students

-- students who've never had a break in their life -- so they can get into post-secondary, and others say, "No, freeze." We choose to invest in 800 more profs and higher quality education.

WATER AND SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE

Ms. Laurie Scott (Haliburton-Victoria-Brock): My question is to the Minister of the Environment. The Ontario Sewer and Watermain Construction Association has expressed their concerns with your

lack of action on the condition of the water pipes that bring water to and from our homes and workplaces. I'm sure you're aware that several water mains burst last week in the GTA and a huge problem occurred this week in Scarborough.

The Watertight report released over 15 months ago has not seen any action from your government. In 2002, Bill 175 laid the foundation to address the issue of aging water pipes. We've been waiting almost four

years for your government to develop regulations for this legislation, yet the loss of business and residential use continues to occur due to serious water main issues. Minister, when will you provide regulations for consultation with respect to

Bill 175, the Sustainable Water and Sewage Systems Act?

Hon. Laurel C. Broten (Minister of the Environment): It is interesting to see our friends on the opposite side of the House agreeing with us that investments are long overdue with respect to

our infrastructure in this province. For many, many years, our friends on that side of the House had the opportunity to ensure that proper investments were made in sewage and infrastructure right across this province, and they chose not to make

those investments.

As a result of the responsibility that we hold, the Ministry of the Environment works closely with the Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal -- again, a cross-ministry approach across this government,

because we know it is time to see those investments. We are working very closely with folks right across the province to make sure that those necessary investments are made, that people right across this province can have clean, safe water to

drink, and that when we put water back into our system, it is also safe and clean.

Ms. Scott: You campaigned that you would implement all of Justice O'Connor's recommendations. You didn't do it with source water protection and you haven't done it with aging infrastructure.

Your government commissioned a report from the water strategy expert panel, and you have not even responded. In a recent news article, Minister Caplan's communications adviser is quoted as saying that the ministry might look into the other

recommendations in the report. While we wait, we see more broken water mains and sinkholes. In Collingwood, in spite of the state-of-the-art filtration plant, they still have to superchlorinate the water because of the corroded pipes that deliver

the water. In some municipalities, up to 50% of treated water may be lost through leaks in the system. I asked you this question five months ago and you refused to respond.

Minister, too many businesses are losing money; too many residents are affected. When will you release your response to the expert water panel report, and when will you hold consultations on regulations for

Bill 175? When will you do it?

Hon. Ms. Broten: It is very shocking to receive these questions from friends on the opposite side of the House who have chosen to vote against 12 of Justice O'Connor's recommendations and the

Clean Water Act. If my friends truly cared about water investments, they would have made them in the past. But now we are pleased to have the responsibility because we have turned the page from where we were in the past.

We are currently developing the regulations with respect to OSWCA to move forward in a flexible approach to ensure that water investment strategies are made right across the province so that we will meet every

single one of Justice O'Connor's recommendations. Our party is the party that will not go back to the days of Walkerton, unlike my friends opposite, who do not want to move forward with those really critical recommendations that Justice O'Connor

made.

We look forward to moving forward with those regulations and fixing the mess that my friends opposite have left.

SCHOOL FACILITIES

Mr. Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): My question is to the Deputy Premier. Across Toronto, indeed, across Ontario, public schools are in disrepair. A recent study by the Toronto Parent

Network pointed to vermin, exposed asbestos and poor air quality. Our children deserve better. Can you explain why you're encouraging the Toronto school board to spend $40 million designated for school repairs on operating expenses?

Hon. George Smitherman (Deputy Premier, Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): It's always nice to get a question from the honourable member. I have the privilege of living across the street

from a school that includes infrastructure that's about 130 years. I also noticed, living close to these schools, that there's been an unprecedented amount of maintenance activity around them over the last few years. I had the chance to attend

with the chair of the Toronto District School Board at the announcement of a $1.8-million expenditure, related to the replacement of windows at Nelson Mandela Park school on Shuter Street. These are the personal experiences that I can relate to

the honourable member.

We've made good progress in terms of reinvestment in education: $2.7 billion so far. We were very, very proud that the Toronto District School Board has accepted the responsibility of dealing with their budget

circumstances. There are challenging decisions to be made every single day, and we're very, very appreciative that those appropriately responsible to do so have made those decisions. We'll be working closely with them through our colleague the

Minister of Education to continue to see that Toronto and other school boards' kids get the support they need.

Mr. Marchese: Deputy Premier, your government has promised $275 million in the last three years to leverage $4 billion worth of capital projects. You've only spent $30 million of the $75

million that you said would happen in Good Places to Learn; that's all you've spent so far.

Students in our schools deserve a real solution, not a political quick fix. You've pushed Toronto trustees to scrap plans for desperately needed repairs and use that money to pay for day-to-day operations. But

when trustees at the Dufferin-Peel Catholic board attempted to try the same thing, your minister, in a private meeting with trustees, refused to let them do it.

If raiding the maintenance budget to pay for day-to-day operations is good for students in Toronto, why did you forbid it for students in Dufferin-Peel?

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: The honourable member brings onto the floor of the House a private meeting that I wasn't a part of and, accordingly, I think it's more appropriate that the parties who

might have been there have a chance to address that.

I do think it's crucial to know that across multi-billion dollar budgets, there are always opportunities, challenges, that we are forced to look at to address the circumstances we are at present expected to

address. Look at it: 3,000 projects started or completed already, 3,000 projects done or underway, bringing new life and restored capacity to, in some cases, dated capital facilities.

This is but one more example of the work we've been very involved in to address the capital deficit that we inherited. The Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal can provide much more information, as

required, to demonstrate the commitment we've made to enhancing the capital stock of a variety of sectors.

There is, of course, on all of these matters more work to be done. I'm very glad to see that the Toronto District School Board has decided to do that work and that our colleague the Minister of Education has

already been proactive in working with them and will continue to do so on behalf of Ontario --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you. New question.

ONTARIO ECONOMY

Mr. Jim Brownell (Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh): My question is to the Minister of Finance. Minister, my riding of Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh has suffered its share of economic

setbacks over the last year, so I took particular interest in hearing our government's fall economic statement last Thursday. I am pleased to say that my riding is showing some encouraging signs of economic turnaround and that our government has

played a key role in spurring that growth. A planned $4.9-million upgrade to the McConnell site of the Cornwall Community Hospital has helped push the city's building construction value this year above the $68-million mark. We are also seeing

healthy building construction values in many of the townships; examples, $7.6 million in south Stormont and $9.3 million in south Dundas to September 2006.

Still, Minister, there is much more work to be done before Cornwall and the surrounding area can reach its full potential. What impact will the measures taken by the government have on eastern Ontario in the

coming years?

Hon. Greg Sorbara (Minister of Finance, Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet): I appreciate the question from my colleague because I know the extent to which he is a very modest man. He

may not want me to mention in this House the extent to which some of those good things that are happening throughout his riding are directly as a result of the work that he is doing. In fact, I had an opportunity to visit the riding during the

summertime, and my colleague took me around from community to community. Individuals, whether mayors or leaders of various community organizations, would take me aside and tell me what a great job my colleague was doing. So I want to congratulate

him for that.

I want to say to him, just in answer to his question, that amongst the four things that I put on the table, I think one that's going to impact his community is this additional energy we're putting into local

tourism. He lives in and represents a magnificent part of the province. We want more and more Ontarians to visit those communities over the course of the next year.

Mr. Brownell: Our government understands that one of the keys to promoting a truly sustainable economic future is investing in solid public services and infrastructure. New businesses seek to

establish where their employees can enjoy good hospitals, roads and schools. Meanwhile, strong public and post-secondary education systems help our future workforce compete for the best-paying jobs. Minister, our government has made great strides

investing in public services and works like health care, education and roads while facing the challenge of balancing our books. Crucial to our ability to continue with this progress is a solid funding partnership with the federal government. In

light of last Wednesday's news coverage that the federal government is already $2 billion ahead of its projected surplus for this fiscal year, what steps are you taking to ensure that the federal government honours its commitments to preserving

Ontario's public services and infrastructure?

Hon. Mr. Sorbara: The answer is that we all need to take steps to try and get the attention of the federal government and get it to honour its obligations to the people of this province. So

I'm inviting people in this Legislature -- whether they're with the Tories or the New Democrats or with our own party -- just to communicate with the government. I'm saying to my friends in the Conservative Party, they have a special relationship

with Stephen Harper. The leader of that party, John Tory, was endorsed by Stephen Harper not very long ago. I invite them to try and wake the federal government up and let them know that they've made financial commitments to this province, and the

people of Ontario expect the federal government to honour those commitments. We all need to join in that exercise, and I know my friend from Charlottenburgh is going to help us out with that.

FISH AND WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): I have a question for the Minister of Natural Resources. Minister, your party promised in writing in the last election to fully fund the fish and

wildlife program of the Ministry of Natural Resources. You've broken that promise and we are now seeing the results of this broken promise. I'm hearing from conservation officers around the province that they are not able to do their job.

Earlier this month I asked you about the chronic underfunding of conservation officers. You responded that everything was just fine. You said, and I'd like to quote you: "I'd like to assure the member that

compliance and enforcement of our fish and game laws is a core function of the Ministry of Natural Resources and it will remain so in the future." Minister, do you stand by that response?

Hon. David Ramsay (Minister of Natural Resources, minister responsible for aboriginal affairs): Since I stood up in the House a couple of weeks ago and said that, I do stand by my response. It

is a core function of the ministry and always will remain so. We obviously take very seriously the responsibility that we have to protect the wildlife of the province of Ontario. We are right now in the midst of hunting season and our COs are out

there doing their job and making sure that those who don't want to obey the rules and who abuse the privilege of harvesting our wildlife are prosecuted. They're doing their jobs and the funding is just about the same as it was last year.

Mr. Miller: Minister, let me refer you to a recent Sun Times newspaper report. I'd like to quote it: "If the Ministry of Natural Resources can't provide enough staff to enforce laws, the OPP

may be able to help. Blue Mountains council voted Monday to approve spending of up to $1,000 for the local OPP detachment to use toward hiring a fish and wildlife conservation contract training officer. The MNR employee is needed to train OPP

officers to enforce the rules under the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act, a job normally done by the ministry's conservation officers. Provincial cutbacks have left the MNR short-staffed."

The already overtaxed OPP are being trained to do the job of conservation officers because the Ministry of Natural Resources can't provide enough staff. Minister, do you think it's right that municipalities

and the OPP should have to assume the responsibilities for one of your ministry's core functions?

Hon. Mr. Ramsay: We work in partnership with the OPP on many of the operations, some of those being undercover and some other types that we do together. To find some efficiencies, we are doing

some of the enforcement that other agencies historically have done. So if our conservation officers are out there patrolling the backwoods and they come across people who have, for instance, liquor law violations, they are able to lay those

charges now. We're working more closely together, and through that we're getting efficiencies and making sure the laws of Ontario are upheld.

HEALTH CARE

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): My question is for the Minister of Health. On Friday, you announced what you called a solution to Ontario's emergency room crisis, but it sure isn't a

solution to the crisis affecting health care in Hamilton. Agencies in Hamilton will begin laying off nurses from home care any day now because you have failed to fund the high level of need in Hamilton's CCAC. Your underfunding is pushing our CCAC

into a deficit and forcing it to cut home care for pediatrics, respite care, nursing care and patients with the highest needs.

When are you going to step up and provide adequate funding to the Hamilton CCAC so people will get the health care they need, nurses won't be laid off and emergency departments can free up their beds?

Hon. George Smitherman (Deputy Premier, Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I want to tell the honourable member that we're very proud of the investments we've been able to make in home

care over our time as a government: about a third of a billion dollars. We recognize that some CCACs in particular are facing more pressures than others. There's $5 million in one part of Friday's announcement and a further $30 million in another

that will be flowed to CCACs to assist these circumstances.

I cannot yet confirm an exact amount for the honourable member related to a distribution to the Hamilton CCAC, but I can confirm to the honourable member that they will be getting some additional resources

in-year to address the circumstances that are possible, those reflecting on the comprehensive strategy that's necessary to support the appropriate operation of our emergency rooms.

I agree, at the heart of the honourable member's question, the necessity of better supporting community services, and there was a significant element of that in our announcement on Friday.

Ms. Horwath: Minister, Hamilton's problem is extremely acute at this point in time. But at this point, it seems like you're denying there's a crisis that we have in Hamilton. Numerous

communities across Ontario, including Windsor, Niagara and Cornwall, are all experiencing crises in their local health care systems. For years, New Democrats have been calling for investments in long-term care and home care to relieve hospital

overcrowding. Minister, why did you shortchange health care in Hamilton so badly, and, as with many other communities across Ontario, why did you let us down in this round?

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: If the honourable member wants to talk about being let down, she should look around at her colleagues who were there when Ontario got shortchanged on the number of doctors

we have.

The circumstances are clear in the announcement that we made on Friday. We're rolling out $142 million of resource to hospitals all across the province of Ontario. The honourable member likes to speak about

one circumstance versus the other. We recognize that our obligation is to work with all Ontario communities and the 160 emergency rooms that exist there. Accordingly, you can see increased resources for communities experiencing

greater-than-proportional growth. You can see resources, particularly for the smallest and most rural hospitals in the province of Ontario. You can see specific resources targeted at 10 communities in Ontario experiencing the lowest proportion of

long-term-care resource.

We've responded comprehensively to the opportunities that were available. We believe this will make important progress for the people of Ontario. I want to say, I'm very proud to be part of a government whose

record with respect to health care stands in contrast to the honourable member's party. They made cuts; we have not.

IMMIGRATION POLICY

Mr. Brad Duguid (Scarborough Centre): My question is to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. In November 2005, the McGuinty government signed Ontario's first-ever immigration agreement

with the former Martin federal government. It quadrupled federal funding on language training and settlement services from $819 to $3,400 per immigrant. It seems that the federal Tories are dissing Ontarians in other Canada-Ontario agreements, and

I'm concerned about the status of the Canada-Ontario immigration agreement. My question to the minister is: How is this funding directed, and what is the status of this agreement at this time?

Hon. Mike Colle (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration): I'd like to thank the member from Scarborough Centre for the question. Every year there are 140,000 newcomers who come into Ontario,

and they need language training; they need settlement services. That's why the Premier fought so hard to ensure that we had federal investment in Ontario like they had in other provinces. So we signed that agreement. It was signed by the former

Liberal government, and the present Conservative government has agreed to uphold it. So we're very anxious to see that money, because that money does not go to the government of Ontario; the money goes to the NGOs in the communities across

Ontario. It goes to federal programs in Ontario. The only problem is that the money is coming, but very slowly. We want that money quickly to improve the life and the career aspirations of these highly skilled foreign-trained people, and we're

waiting for that money anxiously because it'll be good for Ontario, good for Canada. So the money has got to be sped up into all Ontario communities.

Mr. Duguid: It's becoming increasingly frustrating to see how difficult it is for Ontario to get what we're due from the federal government. I appreciate and greet with some degree of relief

the fact that this particular agreement appears to be intact. It's too bad that the other agreements that we have with the federal government weren't being honoured in the same way. Recent media reports criticized the federal government's position

with regard to the issue of undocumented workers in Ontario. The plight of these undocumented workers has highlighted the flaw that exists in the federal immigration selection process.

My question to the minister is the following: What can be done to make sure that the immigration system works better for Ontario's newcomers?

Hon. Mr. Colle: In Canada, we have hundreds of thousands of undocumented workers. They're coming into Canada by the back door, they're working here, yet there's no system in place to ensure

that people can get in the front door. So the government of Ontario has said very clearly to the federal government that we need an immigration selection system that matches the labour market needs of Ontario. We need an immigration selection

system that matches immigrant selection with jobs that exist.

Right now the system is broken. We are offering to help the federal government fix this system, because it is really shameful that a country like Canada has so many undocumented workers, job needs and a points

system that does not relate to reality. We want to fix this system that will benefit not only undocumented workers but benefit employers and benefit the economy of this province. So we need to fix it and fix it yesterday.

GRIDLOCK

Mr. John O'Toole (Durham): My question is to the Minister of Transportation. Minister, you'd be aware of the reports from Statistics Canada as well as the chambers of commerce and boards of

trade, who have all been commenting, as well as the media outlets, on the state of gridlock on Ontario's highways. In fact, you would also know, Minister, that not just from my riding of Durham but from across the GTA, the commute can be as much

as an hour and a half to two hours each day. If you look at this, it's worse than most of the large cities in North America, like New York, Chicago, Los Angeles. Not only that, it's a loss to the economy of about $1.8 billion; it's bad for the

environment.

Minister, there's so much evidence that this is something you should deal with and yet you've done nothing. You've made lots of promises on the Greater Toronto Transportation Authority. You've made lots of

promises, but you've delivered nothing. In fact, my question to you today: Minister, what is your plan, if you have one, to deal with gridlock in the province of Ontario?

Hon. Donna H. Cansfield (Minister of Transportation): I'm more than pleased to respond to the member. The first thing I can suggest is the member go to

www.mto.gov.on.ca . He can take a good look at the five-year plan that rolls out $3.4 billion worth of improvements to roads and services. We have put in HOV lanes on Highway

404, HOV lanes on 403.

Interjection.

Hon. Mrs. Cansfield: I know that the individual may not be very particularly interested; however, 11,000 people every day use that 404 HOV lane. We put in place the Greater Toronto

Transportation Authority to look at the issues with gridlock that follow into the processes around the greenbelt and the moraine. We've continued to invest with our municipal partners on how they can upgrade their roads and their bridges by

putting $400 million into Move Ontario.

So there's no question we have a plan in place. It's a five-year plan that will enable us to move forward on gridlock --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you.

PETITIONS

LONG-TERM CARE

Mr. Joseph N. Tascona (Barrie-Simcoe-Bradford): I've got a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario which reads as follows:

"Whereas long-term-care funding levels are too low to enable homes to provide the care and services our aging seniors and parents who are residents of long-term-care homes need, with the respect and dignity

that they deserve; and

"Whereas, even with recent funding increases and a dedicated staff who do more than their best, there is still not enough time available to provide the care residents need. For example, 10 minutes, and

sometimes less, is simply not enough time to assist a resident to get up, dressed, to the bathroom and then to the dining room for breakfast; and

"Whereas those unacceptable care and service levels are now at risk of declining;

"We, the undersigned, who are members of family councils, residents' councils and/or supporters of long-term care in Ontario, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to increase operating funding to

long-term-care homes by $306.6 million, which will allow the hiring of more staff to provide an additional 20 minutes of care per resident per day over the next two years (2006 and 2007)."

I support the petition and affix my signature.

IMMIGRANTS' SKILLS

Mr. Lorenzo Berardinetti (Scarborough Southwest): I have a petition. I want to thank the members and clients of the Peel multicultural community in western Mississauga for this petition. It's

addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Access to Trades and Professions in Ontario

"Whereas Ontario enjoys the continuing benefit of the contributions of men and women who choose to leave their country of origin in order to settle in Canada, raise their families, educate their children and

pursue their livelihoods and careers; and

"Whereas newcomers to Canada who choose to settle in Ontario find frequent, arbitrary and unnecessary obstacles that prevent skilled tradespeople, professional and managerial talent from practising the

professions, trades and occupations for which they have been trained in their country of origin; and

"Whereas action by Ontario's trades and professions could remove many such barriers, but Ontario's trades and professions have failed to recognize that such structural barriers exist, much less to take action

to remove them, and to provide fair, timely, transparent and cost-effective access to trades and professions for new Canadians trained outside Canada;

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

"That the Ontario Legislative Assembly urge the members of all parties to swiftly pass Bill 124, the Fair Access to Regulated Professions Act, 2006, and to require Ontario's regulated professions and trades to

review and modify their procedures and qualification requirements to swiftly meet the needs of Ontario's employers, Ontario's newcomers and their own membership, all of whom desperately need the very skills new Canadians bring working for their

organizations, for their trades and professions, and for their families."

I agree with this petition, affix my signature to it, and give it to page Annaliese, who's here with me today.

PROSTATE CANCER

Mr. John O'Toole (Durham): I'm pleased to present a petition on behalf of my constituents in the riding of Durham which reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas prostate specific antigen (PSA) tests are frequently used to screen patients for prostate conditions, including cancer; and

"Whereas there is currently a double standard because men usually pay to have a PSA test as part of a routine medical examination, while women have all cancer screening tests covered by OHIP;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the province of Ontario to review its policy on funding PSA testing for men with a view to including this as a service wholly covered by OHIP."

I'm pleased to sign and endorse this on behalf of my constituents and present it to Sarah, one of the pages.

FAIR ACCESS TO PROFESSIONS

Mr. Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): I have a petition in support of skilled immigrants, Bill 124. It's to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, and it reads as follows:

"Whereas the McGuinty government is committed to establishing measures that will break down barriers for Ontario newcomers; and

"Whereas these measures will ensure that the 34 regulatory professions in Ontario have admissions and application practices that are fair, clear and open; and

"Whereas these measures will include the establishment of a fairness commissioner and an access centre for internationally trained individuals; and

"Whereas, through providing a fair and equitable system, newcomers will be able to apply their global experience, which will not only be beneficial to their long-term career goals but also to the Ontario

economy as a whole;

"We, the undersigned, respectfully petition the Legislature of Ontario as follows:

"That all members of the House support the Fair Access to Regulated Professions Act, 2006, Bill 124, and work to ensure its prompt passage in the Ontario Legislature."

I am delighted to read this petition because the member for York West is present with us, who's the minister of --

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Thank you.

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): I continue to receive petitions to do with Hydro One and forestry work. It reads:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas Hydro One Networks Inc. provides hydro to many communities in the region of Parry Sound-Muskoka; and

"Whereas there have recently been several lengthy power outages in this region affecting both private residences, schools and businesses; and

"Whereas rural customers pay among the highest distribution and delivery charges for electricity;

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

"That the Minister of Energy and the Ontario Energy Board require Hydro One Networks Inc. to make improvements in line maintenance and forestry management in the region of Parry Sound-Muskoka to ensure

reliable energy for its customers."

Mr. Speaker, I support this petition.

TUITION

Mr. Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): I've got thousands of petitions here from students. It reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Ontario Liberal government cancelled the tuition fee freeze after only two years and approved fee increases of up to 36% over the next four years; and

"Whereas tuition fees in Ontario have increased by more than four times the rate of inflation over the past 15 years; and

"Whereas a majority of Ontarians oppose tuition fee increases and support greater public funding for colleges and universities; and

"Whereas improvements to student financial assistance are undermined by fee increases; and

"Whereas the Ontario government's recent increase to student loan limits is set to push student debt to approximately $28,000 for a four-year program; and

"Whereas per-student investment in Ontario still lags significantly behind the vast majority of jurisdictions in North America;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, support the Canadian Federation of Students' call to stop tuition fee hikes and petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to:

" -- reduce tuition fees to 2004 levels for all students in Ontario and implement an immediate tuition fee freeze;

" -- increase public funding for post-secondary education to promote access and quality;

" -- expand access to financial aid in Ontario, especially for part-time students; and

" -- double the number of upfront, need-based grants for Ontario students."

I support this tuition, Speaker.

IMMIGRANTS' SKILLS

Mr. David Zimmer (Willowdale): I have a petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, and it reads as follows:

"Whereas newcomers to Canada who choose to settle in Ontario find frequent, arbitrary and unnecessary obstacles that prevent skilled tradespeople, managerial and professional talent from practising the

professions, trades and occupations for which they have been trained in their country of origin...;

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

"That the Ontario Legislative Assembly urge the members of all parties to swiftly pass Bill 124, the Fair Access to Regulated Professions Act, 2006, and to require Ontario's regulated professions and trades to

review and modify their procedures and qualification requirements to swiftly meet the needs of Ontario's employers" and employees.

I'm happy to affix my signature to this.

SCHOOL FACILITIES

Mr. Jim Wilson (Simcoe-Grey): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the parents of St. Paul's elementary school in Alliston have raised many issues regarding the security, cleanliness and state of repair of their school; and

"Whereas a 2003 condition assessment completed by the Ontario government identified the need for $1.8 million in repairs to St. Paul's elementary school; and

"Whereas the Simcoe Muskoka Catholic District School Board has approached the Ministry of Education with the intention of having the school deemed prohibitive to repair as they believe the school requires

$2.28 million in repairs, or 84% of the school replacement cost; and

"Whereas there are ongoing concerns with air quality, heating and ventilation, electrical, plumbing, lack of air conditioning and the overall structure of the building, including cracks from floor to ceiling,

to name a few;

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

"That the Minister of Education immediately deem St. Paul's elementary school prohibitive to repair, secure immediate funding and begin construction of a new facility so that the children of St. Paul's can be

educated in a facility that is secure and offers them the respect and dignity that they deserve."

I want to thank Milva Biffis and Gaynor McLeary for sending me that petition.

TUITION

Ms. Cheri DiNovo (Parkdale-High Park): This is one of the thousands of petitions from the Canadian Federation of Students. It reads:

"To Stop Tuition Fee Hikes and Improve Access and Quality In Post-Secondary Education

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Ontario Liberal government cancelled the tuition fee freeze after only two years and approved fee increases of up to 36% over the next four years; and

"Whereas tuition fees in Ontario have increased by more than four times the rate of inflation over the past 15 years; and

"Whereas a majority of Ontarians oppose tuition fee increases and support greater public funding for colleges and universities; and

"Whereas improvements to student financial assistance are undermined by fee increases; and

"Whereas the Ontario government's recent increase to student loan limits is set to push student debt to approximately $28,000 for a four-year program; and

"Whereas per-student investment in Ontario still lags significantly behind the vast majority of jurisdictions in North America;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, support the Canadian Federation of Students' call to stop tuition fee hikes and petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to:

" -- reduce tuition fees to 2004 levels for all students in Ontario and implement an immediate tuition fee freeze;

" -- increase public funding for post-secondary education to promote access and quality;

" -- expand access to financial aid in Ontario, especially for part-time students; and

" -- double the number of upfront, need-based grants for Ontario students."

I'm proud to affix my signature to this.

IDENTITY THEFT

Mr. Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): I have another petition sent to me by the Consumer Federation Canada, and it's in support of Bill 38. It reads as follows:

"To the Parliament of Ontario and the Minister of Government Services:

"Whereas identity theft is the fastest-growing crime in North America;

"Whereas confidential and private information is being stolen on a regular basis, affecting literally thousands of people;

"Whereas the cost of this crime exceeds billions of dollars;

"Whereas countless hours are wasted to restore one's good credit rating;

"We, the undersigned, demand that Bill 38, which passed the second reading unanimously in the Ontario Legislature on December 8, 2005, be brought before committee and that the following issues be included for

consideration and debate:

"

(1) All consumer reports should be provided in a truncated (masked-out) form, protecting our vital private information such as SIN and credit card numbers.

"

(2) Should a credit bureau discover that there has been a breach of consumer information, the agency should immediately inform the victimized consumer.

"

(3) Credit bureaus should only report inquiries resulting out of actual applications for credit and for no other reasons.

"

(4) Credit bureaus should investigate any complaints within 30 days and correct or automatically delete any information found unconfirmed or inaccurate."

Since I agree with this petition, I'm delighted to affix my signature to it.

HIGHWAY 417

Mr. John Yakabuski (Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke): I have a petition here for the Legislature.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas modern highways are the economic lifelines to communities across Ontario and crucial to the growth of Ontario's economy; and

"Whereas the Ministry of Transportation has been dealing with the planning and design of the extension of Highway 417 for several years; and

"Whereas the previous Conservative government followed through with their commitment to extend Highway 417 to Arnprior; and

"Whereas Highway 417/17 is part of the Trans-Canada Highway system; and

"Whereas local municipal governments, the county of Renfrew and MPP John Yakabuski have continued to press the Liberal government on this issue;

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

"That the Liberal government move as swiftly as possible to approve the extension of Highway 417 through Arnprior to Renfrew and beyond and that this be included in their next five-year plan."

I agree with this petition and affix my name to it.

TUITION

Mr. Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario from the University of Toronto Students' Administrative Council. It reads as follows:

"Whereas the Ontario Liberal government cancelled the tuition fee freeze after only two years and approved fee increases of up to 36% over the next four years; and

"Whereas tuition fees in Ontario have increased by more than four times the rate of inflation over the past 15 years; and

"Whereas a majority of Ontarians oppose tuition fee increases and support greater public funding for colleges and universities; and

"Whereas improvements to student financial assistance are undermined by fee increases; and

"Whereas the Ontario government's recent increase to student loan limits is set to push student debt to approximately $28,000 for a four-year program; and

"Whereas per student investment in Ontario still lags significantly behind the vast majority of jurisdictions in North America;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, support the Canadian Federation of Students' call to stop tuition fee hikes and petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to:

"Reduce tuition fees to 2004 levels for all students in Ontario and implement an immediate tuition fee freeze;

"Increase public funding for post-secondary education to promote access and quality;

"Expand access to financial aid in Ontario, especially for part-time students;

"Double the number of upfront, need-based grants for Ontario students."

I am in agreement and would affix my signature thereto.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

BUDGET MEASURES ACT, 2006 (NO. 2) /

LOI DE 2006 SUR LES MESURES

BUDGÉTAIRES (NO 2)

Mr. Sorbara moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 151,

An Act to enact various 2006 Budget measures and to enact, amend or repeal various Acts / Projet de loi 151, Loi édictant diverses mesures énoncées dans le Budget de 2006 et

édictant, modifiant ou abrogeant diverses lois.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Mr. Sorbara.

Hon. Greg Sorbara (Minister of Finance, Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet): It's a delightful opportunity that I have to speak for a few minutes this afternoon on Bill 151. I want to

advise my colleagues that I will be sharing my time with my parliamentary assistant, the member for Pickering-Ajax-Uxbridge. I think he's going to be making the real strong points. Perhaps I could just do the job of introducing the matter, and

then he'll really give it the strength this bill deserves.

I should begin by saying that this bill really implements the second part of the budget plan presented by my predecessor, Minister Duncan, earlier on in March of this year. Let me say, parenthetically, that I

think the budget was one of the real strong suits of this government this year, particularly its emphasis on public transit and transportation. Obviously, as a 905 member, as a greater Toronto area member, I was thrilled that Minister Duncan put

so much emphasis on renewing our public transit infrastructure in the budget that he presented.

I know that members of this House have given a great deal of time and attention to the first budget bill. This bill -- the title is a mouthful -- simply puts into place the other measures that require

consideration by this Legislature to implement the full force and effect of the budget.

One other point that I want to make is that Bill 151 is very much a companion piece to the full economic statement that I delivered in the House last week. If members recall, the statement really made four

points.

We're in the midst of a period of somewhat more modest growth, we're taking some very specific steps in response to that reduction in the rate of growth and we're going to take some very specific steps to help

workers whose jobs are threatened or who have been laid off.

We are expanding the ability of our own government to market Ontario as a tourism destination. I see the Minister of Tourism here, and I know he's going to be making some announcement on this initiative over

the course of the next few weeks. But the message is clear: We have a beautiful province here -- winter, spring, summer and fall -- and we're going to be encouraging people to take their holidays in one or other part of the province.

Thirdly, we are going to move up some infrastructure projects that are already on the books. This will have an immediate, positive impact on job creation and strengthen the economy.

The fourth thing is something that my friend the Minister of Economic Development and Trade will undertake. In Canada the western provinces, particularly Alberta, are growing at a very rapid rate. They have

industrial demands there that really, in the history of that province, are unprecedented. It's driven, as you know, by the strength of the oil and gas economy. We have industrial capacity here at present because of the impact that a slower economy

has had primarily on our manufacturing sector. Minister Pupatello is going to try and link those two so that working people in Ontario are producing products that are in very high demand in western provinces, including Saskatchewan, Alberta and

British Columbia but primarily the province of Alberta.

We think those four elements will carry us over the hump. As I said in my statement, we anticipate a much stronger rate of economic growth as we move towards the second and third quarters of 2007.

The other point that I made in the fall economic statement that really is part of everything that we need to think about when we think about the Ontario economy is the fact that we look forward to the federal

government honouring its obligations to the people of Ontario and the province of Ontario. There's no doubt that we've got some real structural problems in the way in which we finance public services in this great nation. That's been the subject

of debate for many, many years, and over the course of the past three years our Premier, Dalton McGuinty, made that point with great clarity as he described the burden that Ontario had to carry as a result of the $23-billion gap.

What's the $23-billion gap? It's the difference between the amount of money that Ontario sends out of the province in federal taxes and federal levies and this and that and the amount of money that we receive

back. It represents, as the economist David MacKinnon pointed out, $100 million a day that the Ontario economy sends to the rest of Canada every business day of the year in support of public services in other parts of Canada.

As I mentioned in the fall economic statement, the Premier waged that battle successfully with Prime Minister Martin when he signed the Canada-Ontario agreement. It's an agreement that Mr. Harper said he would

fully fund if he became the Prime Minister. Lo and behold, he's become the Prime Minister, and as of yet the federal government has not honoured the Canada-Ontario agreement.

Why is that so important for us? Because it represents $6.9 billion for the people of Ontario over the course of the next six years. That means better hospitals, better health care and better education -- all

sorts of public services. It means better labour adjustment in times of slower economic growth, as we're experiencing right now. That's why it was such an important part of the statement.

As I wind up my remarks on Bill 151, I have to ask out loud in this Legislature what the Conservatives and the NDP are doing to create a unified voice from Ontario on this issue. This is not a partisan issue.

I want to say to my friends in this House that the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Tory, ought to be speaking to his friend Stephen Harper about Stephen Harper honouring his agreements to Ontario. If John Tory wants to hold a joint press conference

with me, calling upon the Conservative government to redress the grievances of Ontario, I am available at the drop of a hat. Thus far, we haven't heard one word from the Leader of the Opposition in Ontario about the ill treatment of Ontarians when

it comes to funding from the federal government -- and that treasury in Ottawa is bursting. Last year, they had a surplus of $13 billion-plus; 40% of that, I tell my friends in this Legislature, came from 12.5 million hard-working people in the

province of Ontario.

Mr. John Yakabuski (Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke): Then give it back to the people. You'll only waste it.

Hon. Mr. Sorbara: My friends in the Conservative Party say that if that money comes to Ontarians, they'll only waste it. Is that their view? Is investment in infrastructure, in bridges in

Renfrew, in better roads in Simcoe, I say to my friends from those ridings, wasting the money?

It's not a partisan issue. It's not about what the Conservatives believe or what the governing Liberal Party believes or what the NDP believes; it's about us joining together to make a strong case for 12.5

million people in Ontario. I wonder when we're going to start to hear from members of the opposition on this matter, because their constituents expect them to speak up. I say the same thing to Liberal members in the federal Parliament.

When Paul Martin was in government, we were very direct with the Liberal government in Ottawa about the burden and the unfairness for Ontarians in the current fiscal arrangements in Canada.

Mr. Yakabuski: You wouldn't support Mike Harris on the same issue.

Hon. Mr. Sorbara: We didn't dampen our enthusiasm for this issue because there was a Liberal government. Now I'm saying the very same thing to Liberal members in the federal House,

Conservative members in the federal House from Ontario and Jack Layton members in the federal House from Ontario. When are we going to hear from them? This is not about partisan politics; it's about Ontario and a better deal for Ontario, a fairer

deal for Ontario.

I remind my friends opposite and I remind federal members that a worker in Ontario who has been laid off, who's lost his job and who looks to the employment insurance system, will receive some $3,600 less in

regular benefits compared to the benefits that a laid-off worker would receive in the other nine provinces and three territories. Do New Democratic Party members think that's fair? Do Conservative Party members think that's fair? Why haven't we

heard from you on this issue? Why aren't you standing up and saying that it's high time that the federal government, now led by Prime Minister Stephen Harper, come to the table and acknowledge the burden and start redressing the burden?

Mr. Joseph N. Tascona (Barrie-Simcoe-Bradford): Quit your whining.

Hon. Mr. Sorbara: My friend from Barrie says, "Quit your whining." Is that his view of what this is all about -- whining? I don't think so. I think it's about a fairer deal. I think the people

in Barrie want him to stand up and speak to this issue as eloquently as the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs or the Premier has spoken up on this issue. I'm inviting him to do that during the course of this debate.

We're debating a budget bill. Budgets are made up, in this province, of revenues that come from the taxpayers of Ontario, and the taxpayers of Ontario understand the burden that they carry. But revenues also

come from the federal government, and it's high time that the federal government paid its fair and just share to services in this great province. I'm inviting my friends opposite in both the New Democratic Party and the Conservative Party to come

to the table, stand up in their place and support the government on these initiatives.

Mr. Wayne Arthurs (Pickering-Ajax-Uxbridge): I'm pleased to rise this afternoon and follow the finance minister and his comments. The finance minister has the privilege of looking at things at

30,000 feet and having that broad overview. It's the parliamentary assistants who get to grind it out on the details in these kinds of processes.

This very important piece of legislation delivers on our spring budget bill and our commitments to strengthen Ontario's economic advantage by strengthening its people and investing in their priorities. The

bill proposes amendments to some 32 statutes, proposes three new statutes and makes consequential amendments to an additional 31 statutes. So it touches upon a broad range, obviously, of matters within the Legislature and within the statutes of

the province of Ontario.

Among those worth noting, Bill 151 addresses the enforcement of the tobacco tax laws in the province of Ontario and, more specifically, our commitment to strengthen the enforcement of those provisions. There's

no question that the illegal cigarette market has an impact on tobacco tax revenues, but our government, through our smoke-free Ontario, is working hard to reduce the number of Ontarians who actually smoke, and this, in addition, has had an impact

on the revenue stream for the province.

We've already strengthened Ontario's Tobacco Tax Act by increasing fines and penalties, improving enforcement powers, providing for new offences and permitting sharing of enforcement information with other

agencies that also have responsibility for the enforcement of tobacco-related legislation. In fact, convictions under the Tobacco Tax Act have doubled during the past three years as a result of the actions this government has taken. Measures in

this bill aim to increase penalties for delivery of tobacco for resale without a wholesaler's permit and penalties for unregistered importers and exporters. We're taking these steps as part of our strategy to aggressively combat illegal and

contraband cigarette sales in the province of Ontario. In addition to the changes in