Ontario Hansard — 1 November 1999 (37th Parliament, 1st Session)
1999-11-01
Ontario — Debates (Hansard)
role="main" class="main-container container js-quickedit-main-content" id="main-content">
November 1, 1999
37th Parliament, 1st Session
< Previous sitting day
Next sitting day >
Hansard Transcripts
vol. A
Hansard Transcripts
vol. B
Votes and Proceedings
Orders and Notices
Hansard Transcript 1999-Nov-01 vol. A (PDF)
L007A - Mon 1 Nov 1999 / Lun 1er nov 1999
MEMBERS' STATEMENTS
ANTHONY PETER TOLDO
JOHN JAMES
SPECIAL EDUCATION FUNDING
ALICE KING SCULTHORPE
HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING
OAK RIDGES MORAINE
EILEEN MCGREGOR
HIGHWAY 401
DOCTOR SHORTAGE
MOTIONS
HOUSE SITTINGS
PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS
COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP
COMMITTEE
SCHEDULE
STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES
CRIME PREVENTION WEEK
VISITOR
WIFE ASSAULT PREVENTION MONTH / MOIS DE PRÉVENTION DE LA VIOLENCE CONJUGALE
ACCESS TO LEGISLATIVE BUILDING
ORAL QUESTIONS
MINISTER'S RESIGNATION
HOSPITAL FUNDING
INTERNET ACCESS
LITHOTRIPSY
WASTE REDUCTION WEEK
SERVICES FOR ABUSED WOMEN
OAK RIDGES MORAINE
AGRICULTURAL FUNDING
RENT REGULATION
HAZARDOUS WASTE
PETITIONS
HIGHWAY SAFETY
COURT DECISION
HIGHWAY SAFETY
PARAMEDICS
HENLEY ROWING COURSE
TAXATION
HIGHWAY SAFETY
ORDERS OF THE DAY
THRONE SPEECH DEBATE
The House met at 1331.
Prayers.
MEMBERS' STATEMENTS
ANTHONY PETER TOLDO
Mr Dwight Duncan (Windsor-St Clair): Last Monday my friend and constituent Anthony Peter Toldo of Tecumseh, Ontario, was awarded the Order of Ontario.
Mr Toldo owns manufacturing plants in three countries and employs more than 1,200 people.
Born in San Fiore province in Italy, Mr Toldo started a bathroom fittings company in Tilbury. In 1980, he turned entrepreneur again and formed Centoco Manufacturing Ltd in Tilbury near Windsor to make plastic plumbing fixtures. In 1985, he built a third plant in Windsor and moved all the bathroom fittings production to Tilbury to concentrate on making automotive steering wheels there. In 1988, he created the Toldo Group of companies, which manufacture a wide range of products, including fast-food restaurant furniture.
In 1997, Mr Toldo donated $1 million to the Windsor Regional Cancer Centre to purchase medical equipment and to help restore its building. In 1998, he gave $325,000 to the same centre for the treatment of prostate cancer and contributed $100,000 towards a building for the Italian senior citizens' centre of Windsor. In this year alone, Mr Toldo has donated more than $600,000 to Windsor area hospitals.
Mr Speaker, I know I speak on your behalf and on behalf of all Ontarians, particularly people who live in my community, in saying congratulations to Mr Toldo on the Order of Ontario and, more important, a very special thanks for his enormous generosity and contributions to our community.
JOHN JAMES
Mr John O'Toole (Durham): Last week my community in Durham lost a very special individual. Mr John James, in his 89th year, passed away.
John James was well known to many in the community. He was the former publisher of one of our local newspapers, the Canadian Statesman, and a long-time reporter of many community events. Johnny, as he was fondly known, was also a Liberal member of Parliament from 1949 to 1957, but he will be best remembered for his passionate and generous support of the community of Bowmanville.
John James was born in Bowmanville in 1911. John's grandfather bought the Canadian Statesman in 1854. It was later taken over by his father and uncle, and Johnny himself assumed the reins in 1957. After 145 years of family ownership, the paper was sold earlier this year to Metroland Printing and Publishing Ltd.
Johnny James was a veteran of World War II, having served in the Midland regiment before transferring to the Directorate of Military Intelligence in Ottawa. He held many important responsibilities, rising to the rank of captain and being in charge of the security
section in England, France, Belgium and the Netherlands.
Johnny James will be remembered for many of his community events. On a lighter note, he will also be remembered by many constituents for being present at almost every community event with his notebook and camera at his shoulder.
I would like to extend my deepest sympathies to his family, especially his wife, Dorothy, who remains a strength in the community; their children, John and his wife Linda, Robert, Rick and his wife Kim; as well as to eight grandchildren. I would like Johnny's family to know that my thoughts and prayers are with them at this difficult time. John James truly helped make our community a better place to work.
SPECIAL EDUCATION FUNDING
Mr Bruce Crozier (Essex): My comments are for the Minister of Education. Minister, you will know that special-needs students are being denied services they need to reach their full potential as a result of government freezing of the intensive support amount grant. Even the government apologist, the Education Improvement Commission, has been forced to admit that special-needs students have been "adversely affected" by the funding formula.
Ontario schools are short $100 million for special education services. In my riding of Essex, the Windsor-Essex Catholic District School Board estimates a shortfall of $2 million. The Greater Essex County District School Board will fall short by $2.5 million.
To quote the Greater Essex County District School Board special education advisory committee: "The community is struggling to find funding for adequate services for students requiring children's mental health facilities. Many students are returning to their community schools."
Simply put, in the words of the Windsor-Essex Catholic District School Board superintendent of education, "There is no funding for students who register in the boards from provincial institutions or pre-school."
Last week, in answer to a question in this House brought by our education critic, you bragged about spending more money on special education per pupil but said nothing about the intensive support amount, which has been frozen.
Last Thursday, I spent an evening at Villanova high school in LaSalle. A forum on special education funding issues was held for parents and educators of children with special needs. I can tell you, Minister, these parents of kids in need of intensive support don't believe you and they don't trust you to deliver.
ALICE KING SCULTHORPE
Mr Doug Galt (Northumberland): I rise in the House today to recognize the efforts of Mrs Alice King Sculthorpe, a long-time resident of the town of Port Hope, and to congratulate her on receiving the Order of Ontario on October 25, 1999.
Since moving to Port Hope in 1949, Mrs Sculthorpe has played an important role in preserving the community's heritage buildings and landmarks. Her unmatched enthusiasm and persistence led to her position as director of the Capital Theatre Heritage Foundation, where she helped raise $1.5 million to convert the old movie house into a majestic theatre for live performances.
It is her tremendous passion for Port Hope's Walton Street heritage district that has made it one of Canada's best 19th century streetscapes. She has organized the restoration of Port Hope's historic railway station, served two separate terms as president of the Architectural Conservancy of Ontario, and served on the local architectural conservation advisory committee. In the early 1990s, she personally helped to plant more than 200 trees in Port Hope as part of the Green Streets Canada program.
It is most assuredly the appreciation, the dedication and the love for her community that make Mrs Alice King Sculthorpe herself a part of Port Hope's history.
HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING
Mr Dave Levac (Brant): Last week, St Joseph's Hospital in Brantford received a letter from the assistant Deputy Minister of Health stating that the Health Services Restructuring Commission has recommended to the Minister of Health that closure option A be adopted with regard to restructuring in Brant county.
Option A, as described by your ministry, "involves interim transfer of some program activities to the Willett Hospital" in Paris, interim "transfer of some chronic patients ... to Brantford General Hospital prior to moving all programs to their final location at BGH."
Option B, preferred by St Joe's and all physician groups, simply requests no transfer of patients until the construction to house both services and provisions for patients is completed by the year 2001.
In addition, in this government's zeal to save money, the Minister of Health has not addressed a new proposal put forward by a joint submission of St Joseph's in Brantford and Hamilton and McMaster University, to create a partnership and have St Joseph's act as a teaching facility and maintain complex continuing care, rehabilitation and palliative care.
This proposal is providing the government with an opportunity to save millions of dollars on strained health care, save and solve the doctor shortage in our riding, and forge a new partnership between two leading-edge health practitioners.
I call on the Minister of Health to personally review the decision, as she promised, because of the hardship on my riding by possibly having to transfer services twice across the riding and to personally intervene into the facility to ensure that Brantford and Ontario are better served.
OAK RIDGES MORAINE
Ms Marilyn Churley (Broadview-Greenwood): This morning I attended a very important press conference put on by the Federation of Ontarian Naturalists, Save the Oak Ridges Moraine Coalition, the Uxbridge Conservation Association, the Kettle Lakes Coalition and Earthroots, assisted by the Sierra legal defence fund.
In all the controversy over the scandal that's erupted around this issue, we must not lose sight of the urgent need to protect this environmentally sensitive land. This group of conservationists met this morning with the press to tell them that they have a very practical plan which they put forward today to protect this sensitive area.
What they've called for today is tough land-use planning controls, a freeze on all public spending related to moraine development, directing part of the SuperBuild Growth Fund to park creation, and surcharges on proposed moraine developments.
This is nothing new. In 1994, the NDP government had declared a provincial interest in this land. There were consultations across the province dealing with these issues and a report was given to our government. It's been sitting and gathering dust by this government for the past five years.
Now the time has come for this government to act and to act immediately. The work has already been done.
EILEEN MCGREGOR
Mr R. Gary Stewart (Peterborough): The Order of Ontario recognizes and honours those who have enriched the lives of others by obtaining the highest standards of excellence and achievement in their respective fields. Eileen McGregor of Peterborough is one of those indiv iduals. She has been a pioneer in the community for more than 50 years.
In 1960, she was Peterborough's first female president of the Red Cross and Community Chest and, in 1985, the first female police commissioner.
Through her remarkable achievements, she has not only broken new ground for women but has also made tremendous contributions to education, one of which has been the creation of a bursary for single mothers returning to school to further their education at Sir Sandford Fleming college, where Eileen taught for many years.
While being involved in her community, Mrs McGregor and her husband raised four outstanding children, all of whom are involved heavily in their respective communities and in their chosen professions.
My personal congratulations to Stevie McGregor, as she is affectionately known. You're an example of commitment to all of us.
HIGHWAY 401
Mr Pat Hoy (Chatham-Kent Essex): Last week I stood in this House and renewed my demands for upgrades on Highway 401 between London and Windsor. Since then the highway of death has claimed three more victims.
I want to know exactly what the government is doing to the road. When I drove home I was horrified by some of your recent work. Loose gravel several inches deep has been laid on top of the steep, grassy median, extending several feet into the centre. This looks like a recipe for disaster. Anybody who drops off the pavement would immediately lose control in the soft gravel.
On Friday, according to witnesses, a car near Woodstock hit the gravel, lost control and literally flew through the median and killed two people travelling in the opposite direction.
Yesterday a young man was killed when his car went into the centre median and flipped.
A level paved shoulder on the inside and a centre barrier might have prevented these three deaths.
Moreover, I want to know why loose gravel is being spread into the centre median. There is no improvement, except a narrow, steep median is now more dangerous.
I have 500 safety petitions for Mike Harris, collected by the Chatham Daily News. The CAA has collected 8,000. I have received almost 5,000 from my safety questionnaire. They all call for centre barriers, extra lanes and fully paved, level shoulders on both sides. I repeat, how much public pressure will it take, how many more deaths, before the government listens?
DOCTOR SHORTAGE
Mr Bart Maves (Niagara Falls): I rise today to talk about the problem of doctor distribution in Ontario.
The Mike Harris government has initiated a number of steps to encourage physicians to set up practice in underserviced areas.
These include, but are not limited to, $36.4 million annually for alternate payment plans for groups of physicians setting up in underserviced areas; a physician job registry to help match underserviced communities seeking physicians with physicians who want to move to underserviced areas; incentives to doctors, including financial incentive grants ranging from $15,000 to $40,000 over four years, to encourage them to practise in underserviced areas; discounted fees for new physicians setting up practice in overserviced areas, to encourage these physicians to work in underserviced areas.
These solutions point out that the problem is one of distribution and not necessarily oversupply. In some areas of the province, their physician-to-patient ratio is 1:3,000; in others, it's 1:600.
Thanks to Blueprint and the member for Cambridge, we will now begin to pay tuition costs for graduating doctors who locate in underserviced areas. This should help, but it may only make a dent in the problem. If this is so, I would call on the Minister of Health to begin to attach geographic zones to all new billing numbers issued in the province. This would guarantee an end to the distribution problem in short order.
MOTIONS
HOUSE SITTINGS
Hon Norman W. Sterling (Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Government House Leader): Mr Speaker, I have to be on my best behaviour. My sister-in-law Alice Sterling is here watching me.
I move that pursuant to standing order 9(c)(i), the House shall meet from 6:45 pm to 9:30 pm on November 1 and 2, 1999, for the purpose of considering government business.
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.
PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS
Hon Norman W. Sterling (Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Government House Leader): I seek unanimous consent to put forward a motion without notice regarding private members' public business.
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Is there unanimous consent? Agreed.
Hon Mr Sterling: I move that notwithstanding order 96(g), the requirement for notice be waived with respect to ballot items 1 and 2.
The Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.
COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP
Hon Norman W. Sterling (Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Government House Leader): I seek unanimous consent to move two motions without notice regarding committee organization and membership of the coming session.
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Is there unanimous consent? Agreed.
Hon Mr Sterling: I move that the membership of the standing committees for this Parliament be as follows:
On the standing committee on estimates: Gilles Bisson, Sean Conway, Alvin Curling, Gerard Kennedy, Frank Mazzilli, Toni Skarica, Gary Stewart, Wayne Wettlaufer;
On the standing committee on finance and economic affairs: Ted Arnott, Marcel Beaubien, David Christopherson, Doug Galt, Monte Kwinter, Tina Molinari, John O'Toole, Gerry Phillips;
On the standing committee on general government: Toby Barrett, Marie Bountrogianni, Ted Chudleigh, Garfield Dunlop, Dave Levac, Rosario Marchese, Julia Munro, Marilyn Mushinski;
On the standing committee on government agencies: Jim Bradley, Bruce Crozier, Bert Johnson, Morley Kells, Tony Martin, George Smitherman, Joe Spina, Bob Wood;
On the standing committee on justice and social policy: Marcel Beaubien, Michael Bryant, Carl DeFaria, Brenda Elliott, Garry Guzzo, Peter Kormos, Lyn McLeod, Joe Tascona;
On the standing committee on the Legislative Assembly: Marilyn Churley, Brad Clark, Pat Hoy, Jean-Marc Lalonde, Jerry Ouellette, Gary Stewart, Joe Tascona, Wayne Wettlaufer;
On the standing committee on public accounts: John Cleary, Brian Coburn, John Gerretsen, Shelley Martel, Bart Maves, Julia Munro, Marilyn Mushinski, Richard Patten;
On the standing committee on regulations and private bills: Gilles Bisson, Claudette Boyer, Garfield Dunlop, Raminder Gill, John Hastings, Frances Lankin, Tony Ruprecht and David Young.
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Mr Sterling has moved-dispense?
Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.
COMMITTEE
SCHEDULE
Hon Norman W. Sterling (Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Government House Leader): I move that the following
schedule for committee meetings be established for this Parliament:
The standing committee on justice and social policy may meet on Monday and Tuesday afternoons following routine proceedings; the standing committee on general government may meet on Monday and Wednesday afternoons following routine proceedings; the standing committee on estimates may meet on Tuesday and Wednesday afternoons following routine proceedings; the standing committee on government agencies may meet on Wednesday mornings; the standing committee on regulations and private bills may meet on Wednesday mornings; the standing committee on finance and economic affairs may meet on Thursday mornings and Thursday afternoons following routine proceedings; the standing committee on public accounts may meet on Thursday mornings; the standing committee on the Legislative Assembly may meet Thursday afternoons following routine proceedings; and that for the purposes of the two-thirds majority required under standing order 124(c), that number be set at five; and that the standing committee on general government be authorized to consider the matter of the appointment of the Environmental Commissioner and to report to the House its recommended candidate for the appointment as Environmental Commissioner; and that the standing committee on the Legislative Assembly be authorized to consider the matter of the appointment of the Ontario Ombudsman and to report to the House its recommended candidate for the appointment as Ontario Ombudsman.
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Mr Sterling has moved-dispense?
Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.
Hon Mr Sterling: I believe I have unanimous consent to move a motion without notice regarding some additional amendments to the standing orders.
The Speaker: Is there unanimous consent? Agreed.
Mr Dwight Duncan (Windsor-St Clair): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: We did intend to have unanimous consent. We didn't realize he was going to raise it today, and we have not reviewed them.
Hon Mr Sterling: Speaker, I'll withdraw. We can do this tomorrow.
STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES
CRIME PREVENTION WEEK
Hon Rob Sampson (Minister of Correctional Services): I'm pleased to announce that today marks the beginning of Crime Prevention Week.
Now, while crime prevention is a year-round activity, it's important to recognize the contribution of our police services and to heighten the awareness of how each of us can work together to make Ontario communities safer.
Everyone in Ontario has the right to be safe from crime. We should be able to walk in our own neighbourhoods, use public transit, live in our homes and send our children to school free from the fear of criminals.
The involvement of each individual in neighbourhoods across Ontario continues to be the most powerful force in reducing crime. Police and community organizations are demonstrating the commitment of Ontarians towards making our communities safe.
During Crime Prevention Week, we salute and encourage people from across the province to get involved in addressing crime prevention in their own communities. Working together, we can all make a difference in the quality of life in Ontario.
Mr Dave Levac (Brant): On the surface, I would say to the honourable member, there's no question that the members on this side of the House support the concept and the idea and the thrust of what he's saying. However, there are some concerns that I must raise, and those concerns are pretty obvious.
There have been implications by previous solicitors general and by other members on that side that there would be a tendency towards privatizing the police service. This, in my opinion-and it's a humble opinion at this moment, because I haven't had enough time to discuss and to delve into the real workings of the police force. But I want to say at the outset that I definitely support the concept that everyone is responsible for policing-everyone. We have been told by police officers time and time again that all of us are responsible for making sure that we take a bite out of crime.
I want this government to stand in its place and say that it will not privatize policing. They have been challenged time and time again to do so-not a word. They have been challenged to make those statements in public, in private to the OPP, in private to the municipal forces. They have not done so.
We have had reports in the media of a private firm doing a speed chase of over 120 kilometres an hour, both vehicles blowing through stop signs, blowing through stoplights in the middle of a community. Properly trained police officers would have known to turn that one off; the security firm did not, putting lives in danger-not acceptable.
The other thing I want to bring up is that this is, and should be, considered a threat to public safety, because if this ministry is not willing to subject itself to the scrutiny of this side by making it clear that we do not accept and the public and the police do not accept privatizing the police force, we're in deep trouble.
Let's lay the blame where it belongs: downloading, the fact that municipalities are now being charged with having the finances to do those things. It's not acceptable that this government is usurping its responsibility to provide public policing.
Thank you, Mr Speaker, and I share with Mr Lalonde.
Mr Jean-Marc Lalonde (Glengarry-Prescott-Russell): Mr Minister, how can you declare this week Crime Prevention Week, as in the throne speech there was no mention of crime prevention? Also, since 1995, this government has done nothing to improve crime prevention in our communities.
When the Tories first came to power in 1995, they promised to redirect funding to supervision programs. At that time, Ontario parole and probation officers reported the highest caseloads in the country, with 112 cases per officer. The national average was 72. More than 80,000 people are now on parole every day in Ontario. Instead of reduced caseloads, officers are now handling 117 cases per officer.
Despite predictions that the offender population will increase by over 2% per year, only 0.05% of your budget is dedicated to training, and it calls for a zero increase in the staffing complement. This is a recipe for disaster. It is unacceptable.
These probation officers handle 87% of the offending population within the community. We commend the probation officers for their hard work, given the lack of support from this government. We call on you to put money behind the 1995 election promise you made, or is this another shallow promise?
Mr Richard Patten (Ottawa Centre): The minister should know that the report that was commissioned by your government on early childhood development says clearly, with research, that if you want to make a contribution to crime prevention, one of the things you should be doing is paying attention to the early years of children in our society, because a lot of these things are genetic and a lot of these things are based on the abuse of children, are based on the neglect of children and are based on the poor nurturing that we have for many of our children. I suggest that you should begin to look in terms of prevention in this area.
Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): It's interesting that the Minister of Correctional Services makes this announcement today. I understand why neither the Attorney General nor the Solicitor General would want to, because clearly this is the sort of fluff that is so typical of a government that maintains a policy of depolicing our provinces and underresourcing police forces that puts communities at risk and peril and puts cops at risk and peril. We have the lowest number of police officers per capita that this province has experienced in the last 10 years. Our police forces are seriously underresourced.
If you want to talk about crime prevention, you ought to be talking about ensuring that police services boards have adequate resources, that communities have adequate resources, to have cops out there on the street doing the job that good cops in this province want to do. Response times have become more and more protracted, longer and longer.
You and your government's policy of downloading and quite frankly abandoning police forces has nurtured the option 4 program. You have done nothing in response to any number of observations of the fact that cops are out there doing fundraising. You should be familiar with option 4 because it has been raised in this Legislature more than once. Quite frankly, police officers don't like doing it, because they know that there are more important things for them to do, police services boards wish they didn't have to do it, but valuable police time is spent out there in fishing holes.
You understand how option 4 works. If you've got the cash, you show up at the police station within 48 hours, no cheques, exact change, you pay off the police services board to the tune of-what is it?-$50 or $60 and the ticket is torn up. What happens is that police forces are forced to do this because they are underresourced.
In Niagara region, you've got a police force where morale has dropped so low that they're in the course of conducting a secret ballot by way of a vote of non-confidence in their chief of police. That's a police force that, as you should know, has been ravaged by some very difficult history over the course of the last 20 and 30 years, and the last thing it needs is a government that undermines it every step of the way. I talked to a police officer at Niagara just recently who opened his trunk and showed me the spike belt that had been installed in the trunk of his car, packed up onto the underside of the hood.
Every police cruiser in Niagara now has a spike belt; not one police officer has received a minute of training in how to use them or the circumstances under which they are to be utilized. The police officer, who is an experienced police officer whom I've known for a number of years and who is very competent, explained to me he isn't quite sure how to even get the spike belt out of the container. Little good it's going to do him or other cops to have spike belts if this government won't finance police services boards so that police officers can receive adequate training.
If you want to talk about crime prevention, why don't you talk and why didn't your throne speech talk about a response to the disastrous judgment condemning your government's Victims' Bill of Rights, which the courts found had little to do with victims and absolutely nothing to do with rights and was more noteworthy in its breach, in its violation, than in any compliance with it?
If you want to talk about crime prevention, Mr Sampson, why don't you talk about making sure that crown attorneys and their offices have adequate resources so they can prepare for bail hearings, so they can prepare adequately for trial, so they can properly screen cases, so they can discuss cases with crown witnesses before the morning of the trial, if that, and why don't you take a look at some of the courts in this city alone-Old City Hall among others-and take a look at the incredible backlogs and the huge risk of misjustice being applied every step of the way?
You have touted your so-called Christopher's Law, your child abuse registry, yet it does nothing to address the fact that agencies like Big Brothers, agencies like Boy Scouts and Girl Guides have to pay user fees now when, by way of an application by a volunteer, they seek out whether or not that person has a criminal record.
If you're going to talk about crime prevention, why aren't you telling police forces in this province that they can't charge volunteer agencies $40, $50 and $60 a pop to do criminal record searches? If you want to talk about prevention of crime, why aren't you talking about your government's total indifference to the incredible crime of homelessness, why aren't you talking about your government's disdain for the poor, and why aren't you talking about your government's attack on the incredible crime of child poverty?
You folks want to talk a big game when it comes to law and order, but at the end of the day the fact is you not only don't deliver, but you've undermined police forces, you've undermined communities that have been trying to build stronger, healthier, safer communities, and at the end of the day you're the criminal's best friend.
VISITOR
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): I draw the members' attention to the west gallery. We are joined today by Margaret Harrington, the former member for Niagara Falls.
WIFE ASSAULT PREVENTION MONTH / MOIS DE PRÉVENTION DE LA VIOLENCE CONJUGALE
Hon Helen Johns (Minister of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation, minister responsible for seniors and women): Mr Speaker, I request unanimous consent so that one member from each caucus may rise and speak about Wife Assault Prevention Month.
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Is it agreed? Agreed.
Hon Mrs Johns: As the minister responsible for women's issues, I am pleased to rise in the House today to speak about the serious problem of wife assault and domestic violence. This month has been designated Wife Assault Prevention Month. This presents us with an opportunity to reflect on an all-too-common crime that hurts every one of us in this chamber.
This government will not tolerate domestic violence, nor should any of us tolerate it. Across Ontario, the government spends $100 million annually on programs and services that address violence against women. The effects of domestic violence ripple through society, leaving children at risk, families in anguish and women in crisis.
The Blueprint outlines our approach to domestic violence. Our government was the first to create special courts dedicated to domestic violence cases. As a sign of our continued commitment in this regard, we have expanded their number. We are also working towards the implementation of our Blueprint commitments to prevent domestic violence.
With our community, volunteer and private sector partners, this government is taking an active role in addressing and preventing violence against women and their children. Since our government announced our Agenda for Action violence prevention strategy in 1997, more than 40 new initiatives have helped women in crisis to get the help they need when they need it.
As the minister responsible for women's issues, I am working closely with my colleagues in nine other ministries to ensure that violence prevention initiatives across government are coordinated and that they're effective. Last week my colleague the Solicitor General, David Tsubouchi, and I launched a special Crime Stoppers campaign. This month-long radio and television campaign will raise awareness by informing Ontarians that domestic violence can now be reported anonymously through Crime Stoppers. That's not to say that if there's
an act of violence happening at the present time we should call Crime Stoppers; we should call 911. But it's very important for people to get involved and help women who are having violence against them. Ontarians have the right to feel safe in their communities, in their workplaces and in their homes.
Through improved training, children's aid society workers will be able to respond more effectively to cases involving domestic violence. In addition, this measure will help improve links between shelters for abused women and children's aid societies.
One of the real tragedies of women's abuse, of course, is the children who are involved in it. Our government will expand a school-based service program to help children who have witnessed abuse. The program, involving 65 school boards across the province, includes violence prevention education for students and staff as well as direct services for the kids.
To support victims of domestic violence and to hold abusers accountable, our government has created Canada's most extensive violence court system.
Preventing violence against women is everyone's responsibility, and we all need to do our part. I am pleased to note that the majority of the recommendations from the May-Iles inquest have been implemented or are in the process of being implemented, and in fact the chief coroner has said he is pleased with the responses and changes that have resulted from the jury's recommendations.
During Wife Assault Prevention Month, I urge my colleagues here in this room and my friends across the province of Ontario to get involved in violence prevention events in each of their communities.
Our efforts to end domestic violence and keep our communities safe don't end with these programs and initiatives I've talked about today. Our government, together with the community, volunteers and the private sector, has to take action. We have to all be responsible. Each one of us has to play a role in ending domestic violence. It's against the law. It's everyone's responsibility.
Mrs Claudette Boyer (Ottawa-Vanier): It's a pleasure for me to rise and speak on this important issue, Wife Assault Prevention Month. I am grateful to Dalton McGuinty, my leader, for the women's issues portfolio. I know I have the full support of the caucus on the important issues facing women in Ontario society.
I would also like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the presence in the public gallery of a delegation of directors of the Ontario Second Stage Housing Alliance. Through me, they would like to ask the Minister of Community and Social Services, member for Nepean-Carlton, when the funding for shelters and second-stage housing will be restored. I will follow up with a letter on the subject and ask for a reply as soon as possible.
Violence against women is a crime, but a criminal justice response isn't the only answer. Women who have been violated need counselling and compassionate assistance to heal and prepare for a life free of violence and to become financially independent.
No one should overlook the importance of community-based organizations that have committed themselves to serving victims of domestic violence.
In the course of the last four years, a number of initiatives have set back women's ability to respond to domestic violence, such as cutting welfare by 21.6%, restricting eligibility to legal aid funding for family law cases, eliminating funding for new social housing projects and axing rent control.
Laissez-moi vous dire que ces actions causent souvent des ennuis insurmontables aux femmes qui tentent de se sauver de la violence pour leur sécurité et celle de leurs enfants.
Le crime de violence envers les femmes et les enfants est également une attaque à la dignité humaine. Il est de notre devoir, comme société et comme êtres humains, d'appyuer ces femmes, victimes de violence. Nous devons nous engager afin de prévenir des tragédies et d'aider ces femmes à refaire leur vie.
The most important recommendations of the May-Iles inquest still have not been acted on. Funding has not yet been restored to shelters for abused women and children or to second-stage housing. Experts have repeatedly suggested that women who are violated prefer to turn to community-based organizations for help. These women go where they will be helped to continue to care for their children while figuring out what they will do next.
Did you know that approximately 10,800 women and children seek shelter help per year and that this represents only 8% of the real need? Let's all agree that we can do more for domestic violence so that women can carry on healthy, productive lives free of fear and of violence.
I am hopeful that naming November the Wife Assault Prevention Month will increase awareness of this important issue and will bring about progress in finding solutions to the violence women in Ontario are facing.
Ms Frances Lankin (Beaches-East York): Every November we rise in this House to mark the beginning of Wife Assault Prevention Month. I hope someday there won't have to be a Wife Assault Prevention Month because we will have eradicated violence against women and children. But the sad fact is that the problem has gotten worse, not better. Programs and services that generations of women have built in their communities have suffered enormous blows over the last five years. This issue affects all of us: our families, our communities.
Every year, an average of 40 women are killed by their male partners and ex-partners in this province. Statistics Canada reports that over 29% of women who have been married or in a common-law relationship have been subjected to sexual or physical violence from a current or former partner. When women do escape violence, the risk of stalking and escalated violence increases. They need a safe place to go and to take their children. Then they face the threat of poverty and homelessness. The fact is that for most women, leaving abusive relationships and protecting their children means raising them in poverty.
It must be said that the 22% cut to social assistance dealt another blow to abused women and their children.
I want to share a few statistics with you. In Toronto, the United Way estimates that abused women represent 10% of all users of the general hostel system. In 1996, we know that 8,450 women and their children turned to a Toronto hostel because of spousal abuse or family breakdown, categories that are often used interchangeably by abused women.
There aren't enough places for them in women's emergency shelters because of provincial spending restraints. That means they are out there in the homeless sector in that hostel system without the desperately needed safety and security measures, without help dealing with the devastating effects of being victims of abuse. Callers to the Assaulted Women's Helpline have a 91% chance of getting a busy signal. There are 50,000 calls a year turned away.
We ask women to flee violence. We ask them to protect themselves and their children. But meanwhile, we cut the programs and services they so desperately need if they are to survive.
Earlier today, a group of women who were here with us in the gallery from across this province came to Queen's Park to mark the beginning of Wife Assault Prevention Month. These women are members of the Ontario Second Stage Housing Alliance, women who work day to day providing safe, affordable transitional housing for women escaping violence and for their children.
They made it clear that the government's $2.6-million cut to second-stage housing programs means that abused women and children are no longer getting the help they need to get past the abuse, to develop safety plans, to get training, job counselling and financial advice. In short, the support they need to put their own and their children's lives back together is no longer available. It's just not a priority.
At the same time the government can find $16 million for pro sports teams, $2 million for the Ottawa Senators alone, they can't find the $2.6 million needed to restore programs to women and children fleeing abuse and trying to start a new life.
There's a quote from the May-Iles inquest jury recommendations that I would like to read to you. Minister, you referred to the jury recommendations and to your pride in those that had been implemented. You must know and you must acknowledge that the most important of them has yet to be implemented. I'd like you to listen to the quote:
"As we approach the millennium, we are faced with the reality of the violence occurring to women and children in our society. Until we as a country stand up and declare zero tolerance, this problem will not only continue, but in this jury's opinion, will escalate. It is our belief that every person has a right to be protected from abuse."
Since the government's cuts, five second-stage housing programs have closed and shelters are turning women away. I hope this month, as we approach the millennium, this government, and each of us as individuals, friends, family and communities, will take the steps necessary to ensure that women no longer have to choose between violence and poverty, between violence and homelessness.
The government is beginning a new Band-Aid. We have a new minister responsible for women's issues. We are approaching a new millennium. I pray that the government will take a new look at providing the support needed for abused women and children to truly be able to begin new lives.
ACCESS TO LEGISLATIVE BUILDING
Mr Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): Speaker, on a point of order: I need your help. The Toronto Symphony is coming here tomorrow to play in the grand foyer. But they have been told that if they distribute information outside or even make some speech, it would be a problem and they wouldn't be able to play.
While I understand and have sympathy for the concerns you might have in this matter as Speaker, I hardly think that playing Beethoven inside and distributing some leaflets outside to raise concerns they might have could pose a threat to this assembly, to this government or to the state.
I'm really urging you and hoping that you will be able to solve this matter, and I hope that if you don't have an answer for me now, we can sort that out by the end of the day.
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Thank you for raising the point. I was aware of the situation.
As you know, when anybody comes in and performs, we do make sure they're aware of the procedures in terms of handing out literature. I must say, though, probably on behalf of all of members, that having the Toronto Symphony come here tomorrow would indeed be a great honour and we will try to accommodate them. As a result of your highlighting it, I'm sure the members will have a good turnout tomorrow. I thank the member for raising the issue.
ORAL QUESTIONS
MINISTER'S RESIGNATION
Mrs Sandra Pupatello (Windsor West): In the absence of the Premier and the Deputy Premier, I direct my question to the Chair of Management Board.
In the middle of October, the Premier was on record as saying that if he responded to every allegation made about every cabinet minister, frankly he'd have no one left in cabinet. But now we realize that by that point in time there was a veritable scramble going on in the Premier's office over the Steven Gilchrist affair. In fact, we now know the nature of that allegation involved a request for money of $25,000 per developer in order to have the ear of the minister over the Oak Ridges moraine development. We also know that four top officials of the government were aware of the allegations and the nature of them.
Who were those four senior government members?
Hon Chris Hodgson (Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet): I'm not personally aware of the specific details of this matter, nor is the member opposite, I might add. The police are investigating the matter, so I caution members on all sides about making any unsubstantiated or uninformed allegations.
However, I have been informed of the following: On September 27, the Premier's office received a vague complaint by voice mail. The voice mail did not include the name of any individual against whom the complaint was directed. Staff immediately tried to contact the complainant directly. Voice mails were exchanged, but, despite repeated attempts, direct contact was not made until the afternoon of the 28th, when the complainant was reached on a cellphone. However, the complainant indicated that he could not meet until the afternoon of the next day, September 29, which is when the meeting took place.
Immediately following the meeting with the complainant, the Premier's office referred the matter to the Deputy Attorney General and the assistant Deputy Attorney General, criminal law. This referral was consistent with an existing government protocol covering complaints of this nature. According to the protocol, a decision about whether to refer a matter to the police rests with the assistant Deputy Attorney General, criminal law.
Mrs Pupatello: The dates you are giving us are interesting, because the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing did not resign until October 23, and that tells us that at some point after September 8, allegations and directed complaints were made to the Premier's office. We know that four senior government officials were aware of the serious nature of them. We also know that in all that time, the Premier continued to defend his minister, and the minister stayed in that portfolio for, at minimum, a month. All kinds of things would happen in that month's time.
I'd like to ask the Deputy Premier today, who were the top government officials who were aware of what had been going on and what were they doing in that interim four-week period? Were they interfering with what then would become an OPP investigation?
Hon Mr Hodgson: As I've mentioned, I'm not personally aware of the specific details. I have told you that the Premier's office received a voice mail on September 27, they had a meeting with the complainant on the 29th, and then, following the protocol that's in existence, immediately following the meeting with the complainant, the Premier's office referred the matter to the Deputy Attorney General and the assistant Deputy Attorney General, criminal law. As I mentioned, the referral was consistent with the government protocols.
The Premier was out of the office on September 29. On the 30th, when he returned to the office, the Premier was informed by his staff that a complaint involving Minister Gilchrist had been received and referred to the Deputy Attorney General as per the government protocol. This was the first time the Premier was made aware of the complaint. Later that day, the Premier's office and the secretary of cabinet were informed that an assistant Deputy Attorney General had referred the matter to the OPP.
Mrs Pupatello: The Deputy Premier doesn't seem to know very much information, but the rest of the public is coming to know little bits and pieces every day: names of individuals out of the Premier's office who were very much aware of what the allegations were and how serious they were. In fact, we're talking about policy for sale by the Mike Harris government to the highest bidder. Some $25,000 per developer is the allegation and complaint that was lodged in order to bend the ear of the Minister of Housing in favour, or not, of development.
My question to the Deputy Premier is: Who were those four individuals who knew? The protocols in that office happened much longer down the road when this all became a very public matter. So my question to the Deputy Premier is: Who were those individuals and what transpired in the office of the Deputy Premier in that interim? What did the Premier's office do with information? Don't you agree that a public inquiry into this matter of the Premier's handling of the situation is critical to know that the public interest was defended in that time period?
Hon Mr Hodgson: The police are investigating the matter, so I would caution the members opposite against making any unsubstantiated or uninformed allegations.
I've gone through what happened. On September 27, the Premier's office received a voice mail. They tried to contact the person who lodged the complaint. They finally got hold of him on a cellphone. They met on September 29. Immediately after that meeting, according to the protocols that exist in the government, they contacted the Attorney General's office and it was referred to the Deputy Attorney General, criminal law division, Mr Segal. At that time, it was recommended by the Deputy Attorney General, criminal law, that the matter be referred to the OPP. Those are the facts as I know them.
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): New question, the member for Windsor West.
Mrs Pupatello: To the same Deputy Premier today: We're very curious about these dates, because lots has transpired since this became very public. What we're curious to know about is what transpired before the public knew that an investigation was even going on.
There was a file that was turned over from the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to the Minister of the Environment. When exactly was that file turned over to that minister? Was it at the same time as the Premier was saying that this is a very trivial matter and that there are allegations all the time against a minister of every description in the cabinet?
We know now that at that time the Premier's office was scrambling, that four senior government officials were aware of it. We know now that the Attorney General received the file at some point and turned it over, serious as it was, to the OPP. When did the Minister of the Environment receive the file regarding the Oak Ridges moraine?
Hon Mr Hodgson: As I mentioned, on the 29th, members of the Premier's staff met with the complainant. Subject to the protocols, it was referred to the Deputy Attorney General, criminal law. The Deputy Attorney General of the criminal law division, Mr Segal, recommended that the OPP look into this matter.
At the same time that the Premier's office and the secretary of the cabinet were informed that the Deputy Attorney General had referred the matter to the OPP, Mr Segal recommended that responsibilities for decisions relating to a file involved in the complaint be transferred to another minister. On September 30, the Premier directed that responsibility for the file be transferred from the Minister of Municipal Affairs to the Minister of Environment, who was the first alternate listed in the order in council identifying alternates for ministers.
Mrs Pupatello: An awful lot of information that seems to be privileged, depending on who you are, is now out in the public eye. As early as July 20, it is now alleged that this same minister was giving very personal information about minister's directives and his potential for zoning changes around this same Oak Ridges moraine, and he said that to a member of the public.
To the Acting Premier: Is that the kind of behaviour we would expect of cabinet ministers, that they would speak in very hushed tones to certain members of the public about the future direction of policy for that ministry, as it's been alleged happened to a member of the public on July 20 by this same Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing?
Hon Mr Hodgson: As I mentioned, the police are investigating this matter. I've gone through the process on how this was conducted. I would just like to caution the member again about making any unsubstantiated or uninformed allegations. It is being investigated by the OPP. A serious allegation has been made, and it was handled in the proper manner according to government protocols.
I would like to mention that you keep talking about inquiries. Your party has asked for 57 inquiries on 16 different matters throughout the last four years alone. This matter is being handled according to the protocols that are outlined for the government to proceed under.
The Speaker: Final supplementary.
Mrs Pupatello: Just to summarize: We now know the details of the allegations involved-$25,000 per developer to influence the ear of the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing over the Oak Ridges moraine. That is the allegation. We also know that four senior government officials were aware of this detail well before it became public.
Regardless of the time that action took place in the Premier's office, the minister did not resign until October 23. That is several weeks for the minister to have his hands on all the pertinent files in question that are now before the OPP.
My question to the Acting Premier: The allegations made and publicized today about July 20 are very confidential information regarding the potential freezing of Oak Ridges moraine. Is that part of the OPP investigation? Will you be making the OPP investigation a public matter when it is complete? Do you not agree that a public inquiry, so we know the Premier's behaviour was in the best interest of the public during that interim time, is what we should be calling for and what you should support?
Hon Mr Hodgson: As I mentioned earlier, I'm not personally aware of the specific details of this matter, and I'd just like to remind her that nor is the member opposite. The police are investigating the matter. I caution members against jumping to unsubstantiated or uninformed allegations based on spurious reports.
I have outlined that when the Premier's office was made aware of this, they immediately referred the matter, according to government protocols, to the Deputy Attorney General, criminal law. When it was referred to the OPP, Murray Segal recommended that the file be transferred and it was done. We are in full compliance with the stages laid out to handle these types of serious allegations.
The Speaker: New question, leader of the third party.
Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): I wanted to ask this question of the Premier, because after all it is his government and he is the one ultimately responsible. But since he is not here, I'll go to the Acting Premier.
The Acting Premier will know that it is now the day after Hallowe'en, and there's a certain ghost hanging around your government. I might refer to it as the ghost of someone called Patti Starr. I mention that name because you'll remember that that too was a development scandal, a development scandal that went to the heart of the government, only now we've got some different actors in this particular scheme.
The allegation that was made this weekend is that-
Interjections.
The Speaker: Order. The member needs to be able to ask the question.
Interjections.
The Speaker: Order, government side.
Mr Hampton: The allegation that was made over the weekend is that Mr Gilchrist's personal lawyer was charging $25,000 per case in order to influence govern ment decision-making. That is a very specific allegation. I want to know, when did the Premier's office find out about that specific allegation, the allegation of $25,000 for changing opinion?
Hon Mr Hodgson: As I mentioned earlier, I'm not personally aware of the specific details of this matter, nor is the member opposite. The police are investigating the matter, so I caution the members opposite, but I can inform you of the following:
On September 27 the Premier's office received a voice mail that was vague in its nature.
On September 28 they tried to reach the complainant, and they finally did by cellphone. He was unable to have a meeting that day.
On September 29 they had the meeting and immediately following the meeting with the complainant, the Premier's office referred the matter to the Deputy Attorney General and the assistant Deputy Attorney General, criminal law division. The referral was consistent with existing government protocols covering complaints of this nature. So it was immediately after that meeting.
Mr Hampton: I asked you a very specific question. The allegation is that Mr Proszanski, who is Mr Gilchrist's personal lawyer, was saying to developers out there, "If you provide me with $25,000, I can influence government policy." This matter was serious enough for the assistant Deputy Attorney General for criminal law to refer it to the OPP for a criminal investigation on or about September 29. While the OPP are conducting a criminal investigation, does that mean that the Premier's office suddenly shut down, that the Premier's office doesn't take any responsibility after that for what happens?
The OPP investigation is one thing. That is meant to protect the people of Ontario from criminal conduct. Who's protecting the public of Ontario from the misuse of taxpayers' money, from the misuse of developers' money and from conflicting private interest versus public interest? Why wasn't the Premier's office doing its job while the OPP were out there doing their job?
Hon Mr Hodgson: As I've pointed out in this House today three or four times, the allegation is just that, an allegation. The matter was handled properly according to government protocol, and it was recommended by the assistant Deputy Attorney General to refer it to the OPP. That was done.
As I mentioned, September 27 was the first voice mail. It was vague; it didn't name any individuals. They tried to get a meeting. That was arranged for September 29. Immediately after that meeting it was referred through the proper protocols and the OPP were called in. I don't know how much more specific I can get.
Mr Hampton: I'm not asking about when the allegation was brought against Mr Gilchrist. I accept that was probably some time around September 27. What I'm asking you about is the allegation that Mr Proszanski was charging developers and others $25,000 a case for the purpose of influencing government decision-making.
If the OPP and the assistant deputy minister for criminal law were satisfied that this was a serious matter, so serious that it ought to undergo an OPP criminal investigation, you ought to know, and you ought to be able to tell us, when the Premier's office became aware of the $25,000-a-case allegation. I ask you that specific question again. If the OPP are investigating this, the alarm bells should have gone off everywhere in the Premier's office. When did you become aware of the allegation of $25,000 to influence government decision-making?
Hon Mr Hodgson: As I've mentioned earlier, I'm not personally aware of the specific details of the matter, nor is the member opposite. The police are investigating the matter, so I would caution the member opposite again to restrain from unsubstantiated and uninformed allegations. I've pointed out that the Premier's office did handle this matter very seriously and followed the proper protocol.
Mr Dwight Duncan (Windsor-St Clair): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: The minister has referred repeatedly to the government's protocol. Pursuant to standing order 39(a), could that protocol be tabled with the House so that all parties could see that protocol?
The Speaker: You know that the rule is that if you quote at length from the protocol, then it should be tabled. It is my opinion that the minister has not quoted at length from it. He has referred to it, but he has not quoted from it at length. I would however, though, caution the minister that he should be aware of what the rules are. They are very clear that as long as you quote from it, it should be tabled. In this particular case, he has referred to it but he has not quoted from it.
Mr Duncan: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: The question has now been asked six times, and there have been six references to that protocol. It would seem to me that that protocol is germane to the discussion that's going on. I would ask, sir, that you request that the government table that protocol so that all members of the House can be familiar with it.
The Speaker: You heard specifically what I said on the ruling on that. It is when you quote from it. He has not been quoting from it; he has referred to it. I've made my ruling.
Leader of the third party.
Mr Hampton: I want to try again with the Acting Premier. I find it surprising that the Acting Premier comes into the Legislature today and would have us believe that while an OPP criminal investigation is going on with respect to the former Minister of Municipal Affairs, the Premier's office suddenly wants to pretend that it knows nothing, hears nothing and sees nothing.
Look, while the OPP are out there conducting a criminal investigation, I would think the Premier's office would want to be acquiring all the information it could to ensure that public decisions are being made properly, to ensure that private decisions are not overriding public interest, to ensure that, once again, the public interest is being protected.
I'm asking you a very specific question: If the OPP are investigating this, if the assistant deputy minister for criminal law regards it as a serious matter, when did the Premier's office learn about the $25,000-fix allegation? When?
Hon Mr Hodgson: I've mentioned this before. The Premier's office, when made aware of this allegation, referred it specifically to the assistant Deputy Attorney General of criminal law. Mr Segal is responsible for making the recommendations about steps that should be taken to protect the integrity of an investigation. Had Mr Segal felt such a step necessary, the government would have immediately complied.
Mr Hampton: Minister, here's the situation: We've got allegations of influence peddling around Steve Gilchrist. We've had environmentalists say that before the minister resigned, he may have been ordered by the Premier's office to change his position on protecting lands around the Rouge River. We've got Mr Clement, who's supposed to be the Minister of Environment, writing letters on behalf of developers, telling municipal councils to change their position. We've got all of those things happening, and yet your answers here today are, "We don't know anything."
Well, since you don't know anything, let me ask you two questions. While you're learning what you should know already, will you impose a freeze on development on the Oak Ridges moraine? Second, will you commit to a royal commission to inquire into this so that you can learn what you should already know and the rest of the people of Ontario can learn what's going on here? Will you make those two commitments?
Hon Mr Hodgson: Your question assumes a lot. I don't think anyone in this House knows all the specific details. That's why the proper process was followed. That's why the police are investigating it. It would premature for us to be judge and jury and investigation arm. That's not the way it should work. I think you'd be the first one up talking about the rights of the accused, with your legal background. You're calling for a royal commission; you're calling for a public inquiry. We've done the proper thing by referring it to the assistant Deputy Attorney General, criminal law. They've recommended that the process be looked at by the OPP.
HOSPITAL FUNDING
Mrs Lyn McLeod (Thunder Bay-Atikokan): My question is for the Minister of Health. This morning, CBC Radio told the story of an Ottawa man, 42-year-old Jim Kirk, who broke his leg cycling and was refused admission to the nearest emergency room because it was not accepting emergencies that day. He ended up waiting three days for surgery, finally having it at 3:30 in the morning because the surgeon felt badly about the wait. He later developed a blood clot and died. His widow believes the wait for surgery was responsible for his death. The hospital says that operating room hours, like the hours in emergency rooms, were reduced because of cuts.
Minister, your only response to the Ottawa Hospital has been to tell them to cut more. How many more people like Jim Kirk may die because you're forcing the Ottawa Hospital to make even more cuts?
Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): As the member knows, our government actually has given additional money to emergency rooms and emergency services throughout the province of Ontario. In fact, we have increased funding for all hospitals in this province in this past year. We have been identifying the priority needs, and certainly emergency services and cardiac services and dialysis and hip and knee have all seen increases in spending.
Mrs McLeod: I have in my hand the letter that your ministry sent last month to the Ottawa Hospital telling them that their operating plan for this year was not approved. The letter tells them to bring in a new operating plan that gets rid of their deficit. The hospital has already had to cut back on the hours of its emergency rooms, it has had to cut back on the hours its operating rooms are open, and your response in this letter is to tell them to cut more.
This is exactly the same letter that 76 hospitals across this province received last month. Lake of the Woods hospital in Kenora last week announced that they would cut 10 more beds and cancel all elective surgery for six weeks because they are running a deficit. Your response to Kenora? Cut more. A woman in Windsor waited nine weeks for breast cancer surgery; you want the Windsor hospitals to cut millions more to get rid of their deficits. Sudbury Regional Hospital is to cut services to balance their budget. And the list goes on.
Minister, your stated plan is to take another $100 million out of hospital budgets this year. Again I ask you, how many more patients' lives will be put at risk because your government won't stop the cuts to hospitals?
Hon Mrs Witmer: First of all, I think it's important to set the record straight, and that is that there are no cuts to hospitals. In fact, last year the base funding for hospitals in this province was $6.83 billion, and this year hospitals will be receiving at least $7.2 billion in base funding.
You may be interested in knowing that at the present time, if we take a look at the health budget in the province of Ontario, which as you know has increased each and every year since we were elected in 1995 and is now at $20.6 billion and will be increasing another 20%-we all know that hospitals today use 40% of that funding-we have increased and added $130 million additional for nursing, $9.1 million for neonatal care-
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Minister, take your seat. Time. New question.
INTERNET ACCESS
Mr Bert Johnson (Perth-Middlesex): My question is to the Minister of Energy, Science and Technology. In the riding of Perth-Middlesex computer technology has improved and enhanced the lives in our communities. Many people in my area are now doing their banking, accessing their personal information and shopping on the Internet. Businesses are marketing and expanding outside of Perth-Middlesex through the use of the Internet. People are seeing opportunities through computers that have never before been available.
I've met with many local businesses and individuals and they have expressed to me the frustration they experience with the quality of Internet access in the rural communities. With so much work in my area becoming more reliant on technology, access to the Internet is a major concern.
Interjections.
Mr Johnson: Even some of those across the way may be interested in this question if they'd just listen.
Minister, what is the government doing to ensure that rural communities like Perth-Middlesex are able to compete with urban centres in the technological area?
Hon Jim Wilson (Minister of Energy, Science and Technology): I thank the honourable for the question and beg the indulgence of all members. This is a very important matter if you live in rural or small-town Ontario.
For years now in small-town Ontario our telephone exchange-yes, we've gone to Touch-Tone dialling, but the backbone of the system never changed. It wasn't economically feasible in an era of competition for Bell Canada to actually upgrade the phone system to be comparable to that of Toronto or Barrie or other urban centres.
Last week I, along with my colleagues Bob Runciman and Ernie Hardeman, was able to announce for the first time in the history of Ontario the upgrade to rural Ontario and small town data network services or your telephone services. If you live in rural Ontario today, as I do, and you're hooked up to the Internet, you know how slow it is for a page to simply load. Now people and businesses in rural Ontario, health care in rural Ontario, community services in rural Ontario, government services in rural Ontario, will have the same access speed and the same telephone quality service on the lines that our urban cousins have enjoyed for years, and it's a long overdue announcement.
Mr Johnson: Thank you, Minister. The people of Perth-Middlesex will be very pleased.
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Order. Members, please allow him to put the question.
Mr Johnson: Could you explain which areas of the province will be involved in this new initiative, and how will this work and who are the partners involved?
Hon Mr Wilson: Thank you again. By the way, our major partner, Bell Canada, has put in $8.3 million and the government of Ontario is putting in $3.5 million, a well over $11-million project.
The 270 communities are in the exchanges of 519, 905, 613 and the southern portion of the 705 exchange.
Our other partners on this project, which will be conducting a number of seminars for businesses and people in rural Ontario over the next few months, are our non-profit partners. I want to thank the Ontario Rural Council and the Regional Networks for Ontario that are each contributing resources, and as I said, will be conducting seminars.
Again, through this announcement, in a massive way, for the first time in the province, rural Ontario is being brought on-line the same as urban Ontario. Business development communities in our ridings in our small towns have asked for this for years, our mayors and reeves have asked for it, and this government is delivering modern services to rural Ontario.
LITHOTRIPSY
Mr Sean G. Conway (Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke): My question is to the Minister of Health and it concerns health service in eastern Ontario.
The minister will know that lithotripsy is wonderful medical technology which allows for the non-surgical treatment of kidney stones, surely one of the most excruciatingly painful medical conditions known to humankind.
In Ontario today there are two locations, and two locations only, for that treatment: Toronto and London. There is a third lithotripter now at the Riverside campus of the Ottawa Hospital in the national capital. Regrettably, that machine is not in use.
I want to ask, on behalf of the hundreds of patients who desperately need the service that machine can provide, can you explain why your ministry has not chosen to fund that lithotripter in Ottawa to serve the hundreds of patients who need it in my part of eastern Ontario?
Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I think it's important to put it in the context, and that is the fact that this machine was purchased without ministry approval having been given. I think that is very important. There was no endorsement of the purchase and there was also no endorsement of operating funds to operate the machine. We have indicated that certainly in the future we would support the development of a program at the new Ottawa Hospital, and we are continuing our discussion.
As I say, we approve this in principle, but I think it's important to be mindful of the fact that since 1996 there has not been an increase in the number of patients in this province using lithotripsy; it has remained about the same.
Mr Conway: I ask the minister and the House to keep in mind what we're talking about. We're talking about people who are stricken with kidney stone attacks. I'm sure all members know how incredibly painful that is. For people in Ottawa and Pembroke and Perth and Prescott, they're being told to go down the road to Montreal, Toronto or London, through a mass of traffic headaches, among other inconveniences.
The context is this: Just over a year ago, Minister, you wrote constituents in my part of eastern Ontario, and let me quote from your letter of December 1997: "The ministry has recently reviewed a proposal for lithotripsy services in Ottawa. We have advised both the Ottawa General and the Ottawa Civic that we would support the development of a lithotripsy program as one of the services offered by the new amalgamated Ottawa hospital." That's the context.
What has changed, and why will you not relieve the pressure and the pain that these hundreds of patients are currently faced with because they can't use a machine that's been bought and paid for in Ottawa but rather have to go down the road to Montreal or hundreds of miles away to Toronto or London?
Hon Mrs Witmer: The member is quoting from the same letter that I have. As I indicated to you in my first response, we do support in principle the development of this program at the new hospital. I think we have to keep in mind that at the present time all urgent cases are treated within 48 hours-
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Order. I cannot hear the reply from the minister.
Minister of Health.
Hon Mrs Witmer: We are continuing to monitor the need for these services throughout the province. Again, I would remind you that this machine was purchased without approval and there were no operating funds requested either.
WASTE REDUCTION WEEK
Mrs Julia Munro (York North): My question is to the Minister of Education. Today the Minister of Education, along with the Minister of the Environment, declared this week to be Waste Reduction Week in Ontario.
It is truly encouraging to see this government supporting programs that educate our young people about the importance of waste reduction and recycling, practices that will ensure a clean and healthy future for Ontario.
I would like to ask the Minister of Education what the students in Ontario schools will be doing to support recycling efforts and the reduction of waste in the province.
Hon Janet Ecker (Minister of Education): I'd like to start by welcoming the badger back to Queen's Park. I'd also like to thank the member for York North for her question.
Waste Reduction Week has been a very successful initiative in Ontario. Schools and teachers have been great participants in this over the many years it has been in existence.
This year we announced a new initiative called the Ontario ecoschools waste reduction recognition program, which is quite a mouthful. What it does is help schools set and achieve goals in waste reduction, and there's a contest that schools can enter to do this. This will complement the new emphasis on the environment in the curriculum at elementary and secondary schools.
I thank the Recycling Council and all their sponsors, specifically the Canada Trust Friends of the Environment Foundation, for their support.
Mrs Munro: I'm encouraged to see this government working with youth in Ontario schools to support environmentally friendly initiatives.
I am aware that Park Avenue public school, Holland Landing, attended the event at the Ontario Science Centre today. At this school, student volunteers make sure that students and staff recycle properly, and award certificates to good recyclers.
My question again is to the Minister of Education. What other programs are schools across Ontario putting in place to support the environment?
Hon Mrs Ecker: The honourable member mentioned the Park Avenue public school project. Today, Mr Clement and I heard presentations from the A.K. Wigg school in Fonthill, which had wonderful pictures of how they had taken a basically dead space around their school and turned it into a green space that actually has butterflies, a butterfly garden and composting. It is something they are using as a learning environment as well.
Hon Mrs Ecker: The Chisholm public school in Oakville has cleanups of local trails, streams and woodlots. I know the opposition across the way doesn't like good news here, but this is very much a good-news story. The Chisholm public school also planted 1,000 trees in Algonquin Park, which I think is a very significant accomplishment.
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Would the member for Windsor-St Clair come to order, please.
Minister of Education.
Hon Mrs Ecker: The Cartwright Central public school in Blackstock also has a wonderful program.
We expect that many more schools will be entering this. With the special supports that many of them have for special-ed children, I know that many of them in my own riding have the opportunity to participate in this as well.
SERVICES FOR ABUSED WOMEN
Ms Frances Lankin (Beaches-East York): My question is to the minister responsible for women's issues. As we mark the beginning of Wife Assault Prevention Month, we know how critical it is that women and children who are fleeing violence are able to find the supports they need and a place they can go where they and their children can begin to forge a new life.
Second-stage housing has made a critical difference in those women's lives in the past. It's not only a place to live, but it's the programs and supports to help them build the self-esteem and self-reliance they need to move on.
When your government came to power in 1995, you cut $2.6 billion from the funding of programs for second-stage housing. You did it without warning, you did it without consultation and you have left those programs unable to provide the counselling support that women and children so desperately need.
As a result of your cuts, five second-stage housing programs have now closed in the province.
Minister, this is a critical step in transition for women and children to new lives. I ask you today: Will you restore the funding to these programs?
Hon Helen Johns (Minister of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation, minister responsible for seniors and women): I'd like to just talk for a few minutes about how important it is that we do things to ensure that women are safe in their homes and their communities. What the member opposite is asking me is how money should be spent within the mandate we have, which is $100 million being spent on violence initiatives. I know there's a divergent opinion about how that should be, but let me reinforce that we have funded heavily community-based counselling services for those in need.
Right now the government funds 27 sexual assault treatment centres and 33 rape crisis centres. It additionally funds 120 community-based programs which give counselling to women in need, especially in terms of domestic violence.
Ms Lankin: Minister, no, I'm not talking about how you cut up your $100-million pie and how you have women's organizations fight against each other to get those resources. If you can find $16 million for hockey, you can find $3 million for abused women and children. That's what we're asking. Agencies that support those programs in second-stage housing for abused women and children, and other agencies, have had their program funding cut. It has not been restored. How many more women are going to end up in the streets or in hostels? How many are going to return to their abusers because they have nowhere else to go?
Minister, year after year the Ontario Second Stage Housing Alliance has asked to meet with the minister responsible for women's issues, and year after year they've been turned down. You have a chance to be a leader, to make a difference in the lives of so many women and children if you would listen to their pleas, if you would listen to their need and if you would step up to the plate to meet that.
It's Wife Assault Prevention Month. Will you commit today to meeting with the Ontario Second Stage Housing Alliance this month?
Hon Mrs Johns: I think we've heard here that the government's not doing enough with respect to counselling services, not doing enough with Wife Assault Prevention Month. Let me just say that I have an
article in front of me as the result of an interview I did in the London Free Press yesterday, and it's from someone who's not a supporter of the Conservatives, a well-known person, Megan Walker. She says,
"In the 12 years I've been involved in women's abuse issues and violence against women, I really haven't seen the (public awareness) commitment I've seen over the last two years from all sorts of different providers."
As a result of Wife Assault Prevention Month, what we've done is set out to make people cognizant of the fact that it's against the law to be involved in wife assault. We're all going to work very hard with that. We're going to ensure that women's programs are the best they've ever been in the province.
OAK RIDGES MORAINE
Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): I have a question for the Minister of the Environment. Minister, the odour of scandal is hanging over the Oak Ridges moraine today with the resignation of your colleague municipal affairs minister Steve Gilchrist on allegations of influence-peddling and your own meddling on behalf of a developer in a decision related to the potential development of this environmentally sensitive area. There's simply a prevailing view in the public that the Harris government can't wait to pave over the moraine at the behest of your development supporters.
In view of the scandal surrounding your government on issues related to the development of the Oak Ridges moraine, will you now impose an immediate freeze on any further development and on activities that will aid and abet development of this natural treasure?
Hon Tony Clement (Minister of the Environment, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): I thank the honourable member for the question. Three responses to that. First of all, just to correct the record, I at no time solicited anything on behalf of any developer. Let's set the record straight on that.
Secondly, I can say with certainty that it is not the policy of this government to pave over the moraine. Indeed, we are looking for ways that are best suited to protect the ecological nature of the moraine and make sure it is not sacrificed at the expense of development or any other activity that goes on there.
In the third place, the honourable member has made a suggestion, and I take that suggestion under advisement and I thank him for his input.
Mr Bradley: Minister, while you've been writing this letter on behalf of a developer involved in the Oak Ridges moraine, and you have indeed, five leading conservation groups justifiably concerned about development in this area that contains the headwaters of 30 rivers and hundreds of important natural areas and dozens of rare species of plants and animals has produced an action plan to save the moraine.
They have called for tough new land-use planning controls, an immediate freeze on public spending on projects and planning processes that may damage the moraine environment, a dedication of 5% of the province's recently announced $20-billion SuperBuild Growth Fund to acquire land for new public park creation in southern Ontario and the imposition of development surcharges on moraine lands for parkland acquisition in the moraine.
Is it your intention to continue to go to bat for your developer supporters, or will you be implementing the thoughtful action plan proposed by this reputable conservation coalition?
Hon Mr Clement: I am not beating my wife, I can assure the honourable member of that. That is the type of question he's asking.
I can tell the honourable member that in fact-
Ms Frances Lankin (Beaches-East York): What a horrible thing to say at the beginning of Wife Assault Prevention Month. That's not funny.
Hon Mr Clement: That's right. I know it's not funny. It's quite serious, you're right.
Ms Marilyn Churley (Broadview-Greenwood): That was terrible.
Hon Mr Clement: To the honourable member, it is quite a serious thing, you're absolutely right. Before this becomes an issue, to the extent that I offended anyone by that comment, I do apologize, but the honourable member was asking the question in a way that elicited that response. I withdraw that comment.
To the question, the honourable member should know that I have already met with two environmental groups, including Earthroots and the Sierra legal defence fund, and the moraine came up. I wanted to be full and clear to him on that. I also wanted to say to this House that I'll be attending the 1999 Clean Waters Summit on the Oak Ridges moraine on Saturday, November 20, and I'm sure the moraine will be coming up there. So, this is an issue that is in the public eye. I can tell the honourable member that the Ontario Federation of Naturalists, which had a meeting at Queen's Park earlier today, had some new ideas.
AGRICULTURAL FUNDING
Mr David Tilson (Dufferin-Peel-Wellington-Grey): I have a question for the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs with respect to the question of the fair share federal dollars to Ontario farmers.
Last week the premiers of Saskatchewan and Manitoba went to Ottawa to ask Prime Minister Chrétien for $1.3 billion for emergency aid to assist western farmers. The answer was that the cupboard was bare, that there was no money. Today, the federal government has announced that it has set aside $190 million in new disaster assistance this year to help prairie farmers survive the current agricultural crisis and is considering spending $1 billion more in new aid over the next years.
My question is, what is Ontario's position with this latest federal position?
Hon Ernie Hardeman (Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs): I'd like to thank my colleague from Dufferin-Peel-Wellington-Grey for the question. As the member so aptly put it, it is a possibility that the issue is based on media reports. In fact, if the federal government is coming up with $190 million to help the depressed condition of commodities in our agricultural community, we wholeheartedly support that.
But I do want to point out that our position in the Blueprint was that we would get our fair share from Ottawa. Again, that was put to us by all the farmers in Ontario, that they wanted us to get our fair share from Ottawa. I want to assure my colleague that we will be pushing for a fair distribution of the money that Ottawa is talking about.
We wholeheartedly agree that the country could help Manitoba and Saskatchewan, but I want to point out that the provinces in Canada have all agreed on changing the way safety nets are funded and-
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Supplementary.
Mr Tilson: Last week the National Post made a statement that the World Bank is calling for the world to undertake a new green revolution, claiming that by the year 2025 there will be four billion people living on less than US$2 a day and two billion people in extreme poverty. So desperate will the world be for food by that date, that according to the World Bank the earth's production will need to increase by 50%. My question is, Minister, can you explain how the federal government is able to find all of a sudden this extra money, and how will our farmers find that cash in the near future?
Hon Mr Hardeman: Thank you again for the follow-up question. I want to assure the member that it's very important that the federal government, along with all the provincial governments, fund agriculture in an equitable way so that it's sustainable until such time as the prices of our commodities go up.
Referring back to the issue that the member brought up, it's important to note that on October 28 Mr Vanclief-
Interjections.
The Speaker: Member for Windsor-St Clair, come to order, please.
Mr Dwight Duncan (Windsor-St Clair): My apologies.
Hon Mr Hardeman: -was asking for $1 billion and I told him very clearly there is no $1 billion. Now it seems in the announcement there may be. Again, we don't object to that; we just think it should be fairly distributed. The Prime Minister himself said, "It's not very realistic to add much more money," and he even said the financial picture-
Interjections.
The Speaker: Would the minister take his seat. I warned the member for Windsor-St Clair. I want to be very clear; this will be the last warning for the member for Windsor-St Clair.
Hon Mr Hardeman: I just want to finish off by saying that the Prime Minister said, "It's not my money; it is the taxpayers' money." I couldn't agree with him more. It is the taxpayers' money, and it should be fairly distributed to the taxpayers of Canada, not just in the west.
RENT REGULATION
Mr David Caplan (Don Valley East): I have a question for the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. What information can you give this House on the closing of hearing locations for the Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal?
I have a letter dated August of this year from the chair which states, "We're looking into the redistribution of the tribunal's workload on a provincial basis." In York region alone, this has meant that all hearings previously held in Richmond Hill will now be at Yonge and Sheppard in North York. You'll also know that this follows the closure of the tribunal's only document filing office in Newmarket, forcing people to go to Toronto or Mississauga to file important documents in person. If you live in, say, Pefferlaw, and you don't have a car, then reasonable access to justice does not exist.
Minister, come clean with this House. Tell us how many hearing locations you've closed. How many filing centres have you closed? What do you say to tenants without cars who have to attempt to get to these hearings to stay in their homes, oftentimes an hour or two hours away?
Interjection.
Hon Tony Clement (Minister of the Environment, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): I'm going to refrain from commenting on that.
I thank the honourable member for the question. In fact, we are trying to find ways to balance off doing better with less with different means of access in our system. There are some ways of access that, through technology, are now available that were not available before. You can file things electronically now that you hitherto were not able to do. There are ways to communicate that information that is not in person, necessarily. If the honourable member has a suggestion on how to do things better for less, I welcome him. Certainly, we would take it under advisement.
Mr Caplan: That's an incredibly arrogant answer, Minister. You talk about backlog inefficiencies. You haven't answered the question about why tenants are having to make these unacceptable trips. Your government-
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Order. Stop the clock. Member for Don Valley East. Start the clock.
Mr Caplan: Apparently I've touched a nerve over there. The Harris government has removed almost all tenant protections in this province, so the minimal opportunities that do exist to access justice have been diminished by your closure of hearing locations and of filing sites.
Take a look at eastern Ontario for a minute. The tribunal used to hear cases in Napanee. They don't any more; they hear them in Belleville, over one hour away. The tribunal used to hear cases in Bancroft. They don't any more; they hear them in Belleville, two hours away.
Come clean with us, Minister. How does this process work for greater efficiency? It's actually less for less for tenants. If you don't have a car or access to transit, how are you supposed to defend yourself at a hearing? Why aren't you doing anything about this? Will you stop the assault on tenants and demand that the closures cease immediately? Will you ask the Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal to reconsider the closures that they've already made?
Hon Mr Clement: I thank the honourable member for his suggestions. I understand that the ORHT is in fact doing an operational review of some of its activities. They are trying to do more with less on behalf of the citizenry of Ontario. I would certainly undertake on his behalf, or he can do so himself, to bring that to the attention of the tribunal.
I can also say to this House, as I said before, that lots of departments of government, or tribunals, are working with new technologies that are available now. In fact, this tribunal is looking at teleconferencing, which is a way for citizens to gain access to government services without having to drive even beyond their city limits, which was not available to them before. I encourage the honourable member, if he thinks this is a good idea, to come on board and help us do better with less as well.
HAZARDOUS WASTE
Mr Brad Clark (Stoney Creek): My question is also for the Minister of the Environment. Before I became a member of this House, I worked closely with the member for Wentworth-Burlington looking into the importing of US EPA-designated untreatable hazardous waste for dumping at the Taro landfill in Stoney Creek. The results of our work, as well as that of concerned citizens in my community, prompted your ministry to launch a full investigation into this matter.
Last month, your ministry's investigations and enforcement branch released a report on their findings and immediately you moved to close the loophole that allowed the waste to be dumped in a landfill. What steps are you taking to ensure that a similar situation will not happen again in Stoney Creek or anywhere else in Ontario?
Hon Tony Clement (Minister of the Environment, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): I thank the honourable member for his question and welcome him to the House. I can tell the honourable member that when the report was released, this government moved quickly to strengthen Ontario's hazardous waste regulations and requirements for hazardous waste facilities across this province.
I want to share with the honourable members the six-point plan that we announced at that moment: First, we would give immediate legal force to the generator registration manual, which was not in force as a policy of this government; second, we are going to revise the hazardous waste regulations, effective immediately, to ensure that even if hazardous waste is mixed with other substances, it is considered the same type of hazardous waste-it comes under the same rules; third, we're looking at revising the current hazardous waste manifesting in regulation to be the toughest in Ontario history; fourth, amending certificates of approval across the province; fifth, revising the specific certificate of approval on the Hamilton site; and sixth, we're immediately establishing an independent expert panel to examine the potential for any long-term effects at Taro to ensure that the citizens in that particular community are safe.
Mr Clark: Last week, I attended a meeting of the Taro community liaison committee to discuss the terms of reference for the ministry's expert panel, which you just mentioned. Some pundits and opposition members have been questioning the level of our commitment to fulfilling the six-point plan. Moreover, the company has encouraged the local ministry office to merge the ministry's expert panel with a panel established by the company itself. Local residents have voiced their opposition to this merger. Minister, will you state your commitment to this plan by ensuring the ministry will not merge its expert panel with a panel created by the company?
Hon Mr Clement: Absolutely. That is not our plan. We are working with the community liaison committee. We are inviting those members-I think there's a member here today watching and I welcome him to this chamber. We want to work with them. We are committed to creating this expert panel. We want to make sure the terms of reference are satisfactory to the community, and they're in the process of being finalized. We want to get this plan up and running as soon as possible so that the citizens in that area have not only healthy circumstances but also peace of mind. I think that's very important for the people of Ontario.
PETITIONS
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Last week, we talked about petitions, and there were some points of order. I thought there had been a little bit more agreement on the petitions, so we will continue with the old way of doing things, and I thank all the members for their points of order last week. There were some valid points that were made.
HIGHWAY SAFETY
Mr Dwight Duncan (Windsor-St Clair): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:
"Whereas 13 people died during the first seven months of 1999 on Highway 401 between London and Windsor; and
"Whereas traffic levels on all sections of Highway 401 continue to increase; and
"Whereas Canada's number one trade and travel route was designed in the 1950s for fewer vehicles and lighter trucks; and
"Whereas road funding is almost completely paid through vehicle permit and driver licensing fees; and
"Whereas Ontario road users pay 28 cents per litre of tax on gasoline, adding up to over $2.7 billion in provincial gas taxes and over $2.3 billion in federal gas taxes;
"We, the undersigned members of the Canadian Automobile Association and other residents of Ontario, respectfully request the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to immediately upgrade Highway 401 to at least a six-lane highway with full paved shoulders and rumble strips; and
"We respectfully request that the Legislative Assembly of Ontario place firm pressure on the federal government to invest its gasoline tax revenue in road safety improvements in Ontario."
Mr Speaker, I'm proud to affix my signature to this petition.
COURT DECISION
Mr Marcel Beaubien (Lambton-Kent-Middlesex): I have a number of petitions dealing with the Supreme Court decision in M. v. H., which I would like to file with the clerk. I will not read them. They have been signed by, I would say, 400 to 500 people.
HIGHWAY SAFETY
Mr Bruce Crozier (Essex): I have petitions that have been sent to me by the Canadian Automobile Association, Ontario, signed by constituents in Essex, Belle River, Kingsville, Ruthven, Maidstone, Amherstburg and Cottam.
"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:
"Whereas 13 people died during the first seven months of 1999 on Highway 401 between London and Windsor; and
"Whereas traffic levels on all sections of Highway 401 continue to increase; and
"Whereas Canada's number one trade and travel route was designed in the 1950s for fewer vehicles and lighter trucks; and
"Whereas road funding is almost completely paid through vehicle permit and driver licensing fees; and
"Whereas Ontario road users pay 28 cents per litre of tax on gasoline, adding up to $2.7 billion in provincial gas taxes and over $2.3 billion in federal gas taxes;
"We, the undersigned members of the Canadian Automobile Association and other residents of Ontario, respectfully request the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to immediately upgrade Highway 401 to at least a six-lane highway with full paved shoulders and rumble strips; and
"We respectfully request that the Legislative Assembly of Ontario place firm pressure on the federal government to invest its gasoline tax revenue in road safety improvements in Ontario."
I have signed this petition.
Mr John O'Toole (Durham): I am pleased to present a petition to the Ontario Legislature on behalf of my constituents from the riding of Durham, and I might name a few of the lead petitioners: Ken Malley, K. Fice, H. Fice and Mary Fice, who all live in Bowmanville.
"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:
"Whereas 13 people died during the first seven months of 1999 on Highway 401 between London and Windsor; and
"Whereas traffic levels on all sections of Highway 401 continue to increase; and
"Whereas Canada's number one trade and travel route was designed in the late 1950s for fewer vehicles and lighter trucks; and
"Whereas road funding is almost completely paid through vehicle permit and driver licensing fees; and
"Whereas Ontario road users pay 28 cents per litre of tax on gasoline, adding up to over $2.7 billion in provincial gas taxes and over $2.3 billion in federal" Liberal "gas taxes;
"We, the undersigned members of the Canadian Automobile Association and other residents of Ontario, respectfully request the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to immediately upgrade Highway 401 to at least a six-lane highway with full paved shoulders and rumble strips; and
"We respectfully request that the Legislative Assembly of Ontario place firm pressure on the federal government to invest its gasoline tax revenue on road safety improvements in Ontario."
Mr Speaker, I'm pleased to support that pressure on the federal government.
Mr John Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands): I have a similar petition that CAA has been distributing, signed by a number of people in the Kingston area. It's addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:
"Whereas 13 people died during the first seven months of 1999 on Highway 401 between London and Windsor; and
"Whereas traffic levels on all sections of Highway 401 continue to increase; and
"Whereas Canada's number one trade and travel route was designed in the 1950s for fewer vehicles and lighter trucks; and
"Whereas road funding is almost completely paid through vehicle permit and driving licence fees; and
"Whereas Ontario road users pay 28 cents per litre of tax on gasoline, adding up to $2.7 billion in provincial gas taxes and over $2.3 billion in federal gas taxes;
"We, the undersigned members of the Canadian Automobile Association and other residents of Ontario, respectfully request the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to immediately upgrade Highway 401 to at least a six-lane highway with full paved shoulders and rumble strips; and
"We respectfully request that the Legislative Assembly of Ontario place firm pressure on the federal government to invest its gasoline tax revenue in road safety improvements in Ontario."
I'm pleased to hand this to our page.
PARAMEDICS
Mr David Christopherson (Hamilton West): A petition to the Honourable Lieutenant Governor and the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:
"Whereas the Ontario Ministry of Health this past spring amended O. Reg. 501/97 under the Ambulance Act so that paramedics are considered no longer qualified to do their job if they accumulate a minimum of six demerit points on their driving record; and
"Whereas this amended regulation has resulted in at least one paramedic being fired from employment"-that's now at six, two from my home town of Hamilton-"and
"Whereas the Ministry of Health's regulation is far more punitive and harsh than the Ministry of Transportation's, which monitors and enforces traffic safety through the Highway Traffic Act; and
"Whereas the Ministry of Transportation mails out a notice to drivers at six to nine demerit points, and suspends a person's driver's licence at 15 points for a 30-day period; and
"Whereas none of the other emergency services in Ontario, eg fire and police services, are held to the same standard or punished so harshly; and
"Whereas this amended regulation is not needed since other sections of the Ambulance Act protect the public against unsafe driving and/or criminal behaviour by paramedics, (specifically O. Reg. 501/97,
part III,
section 6, subsections 8, 9 and 10); and
"Whereas the Ministry of Health's actions are blatantly unjust and punitive, and they discriminate against paramedics;
"Therefore we, the undersigned citizens of Ontario, beg leave to petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:
"To immediately eliminate any references to the accumulation of demerit points during employment from O. Reg. 501/97 under the Ambulance Act (specifically,
part III,
section 6, subsection 7), thereby allowing the Highway Traffic Act to apply to paramedics; and
"To order the immediate reinstatement of paramedics who have been fired under the regulation."
I continue to add my support to Ontario's paramedics.
HENLEY ROWING COURSE
Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): This petition is to the government of Ontario.
"Whereas the Henley rowing course in St Catharines is an outstanding rowing facility which has for several decades been the site of hundreds of international rowing competitions; and
"Whereas the World Rowing Championship has been held in St Catharines in 1970 and 1999 and has been declared an outstanding success on both occasions; and
"Whereas the municipal, provincial and federal governments, along with generous private donors, invested several million dollars in the upgrading of the Henley rowing course to enable the 1999 World Rowing Championship to be held in St Catharines and that as a result the Henley is a first-class rowing facility; and
"Whereas the organizing committee of the World Rowing Championship, the annual Royal Canadian Henley Regatta and other prestigious regattas, has the proven expertise to operate major international rowing competitions; and
"Whereas all taxpayers in Ontario will be compelled to contribute to any financial assistance provided by the Ontario government for the Olympic bid for the city of Toronto; and
"Whereas the creation of a new rowing facility outside of St Catharines for the Toronto Olympic bid would result in the unnecessary expenditure of millions of dollars to duplicate the St Catharines rowing facility; and
"Whereas the rowing facility for several recent Olympic Games has been located outside the sponsoring and host city;
"We, the undersigned, urge the government of Ontario to persuade the Toronto Olympic bid committee to propose the Henley rowing course in St Catharines as a site of the rowing competition for the 2008 Olympic Games."
I affix my signature to this petition.
The Deputy Speaker (Mr Bert Johnson): I'm sorry; you put your signature on it before?
Mr Bartolucci: I did.
The Deputy Speaker: Thank you.
TAXATION
Mr John O'Toole (Durham): I'm pleased to present a petition on behalf of a number of my constituents who are concerned about the rate of taxation in Ontario and indeed Canada.
"Whereas the personal income tax rate in Canada is one of the highest in the G7 nations; and
"Whereas the federal unemployment insurance fund currently has a surplus of some $21.8 billion;
"Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario and the Minister of Finance, the Honourable Ernie Eves, to urge his federal counterpart, Paul Martin, to immediately reduce the rate of taxation; and
"Further, we do support Premier Harris's endeavours to eliminate the deficit and the debt."
HIGHWAY SAFETY
Mr Steve Peters (Elgin-Middlesex-London): This petition is to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.
"Whereas the carnage continues on Highway 401 between London and Windsor; and
"Whereas traffic levels on all sections of Highway 401 continue to increase; and
"Whereas Canada's number one trade and travel route was designed in the 1950s for fewer vehicles and lighter trucks; and
"Whereas road funding is almost completely paid through vehicle permit and driving licence fees; and
"Whereas road users in Ontario pay 28 cents per litre of tax on gasoline, adding up to over $2.7 billion in provincial gas taxes;
"We, the undersigned members of the Canadian Automobile Association and other residents of Ontario, respectfully request the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to immediately upgrade Highway 401 to at least a six-lane highway; and
"We request that the Legislative Assembly of Ontario place firm pressure on the federal government to reinvest gas tax revenues for road safety improvements in the province of Ontario."
I respectfully submit this and affix my signature.
Mr Pat Hoy (Chatham-Kent Essex): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:
"Whereas 13 people died during the first seven months of 1999 on Highway 401 between London and Windsor; and
"Whereas traffic levels on all sections of Highway 401 continue to increase; and
"Whereas Canada's number one trade and travel route was designed in the 1950s for fewer vehicles and lighter trucks; and
"Whereas road funding is almost completely paid through vehicle permit and driving licence fees; and
"Whereas Ontario road users pay 28 cents per litre of tax on gasoline, adding up to over $2.7 billion in provincial gas taxes and over $2.3 billion in federal gas taxes;
"We, the undersigned members of the Canadian Automobile Association and other residents of Ontario, respectfully request that the Legislative Assembly of Ontario immediately upgrade Highway 401 to at least a six-lane highway with fully paved shoulders and rumble strips; and
"We respectfully request that the Legislative Assembly of Ontario place firm pressure on the federal government to invest its gasoline tax revenue in road safety improvements in Ontario."
This petition is signed by a number of residents from Tilbury, Chatham and Blenheim, and I affix my name to it.
ORDERS OF THE DAY
THRONE SPEECH DEBATE
Resuming the debate adjourned on October 28, 1999, on the amendment to the amendment to the motion for an address in reply to the speech of Her Honour the Lieutenant Governor at the opening of the session.
Mr Steve Peters (Elgin-Middlesex-London): Mr Speaker, I rise today to speak to the throne speech. I would ask for unanimous consent to split my time with the member for Sarnia-Lambton.
The Deputy Speaker (Mr Bert Johnson): Agreed? It is agreed.
Mr Peters: Before I talk about the future of our province, I should address the past. Hubris can fill newly elected members of the Legislature. The maiden speech is a good time to reflect on the road that brought us all to Queen's Park and to remember that it takes the efforts of many people for each one of us to stand here today.
First and foremost, my most humble gratitude to the people of Elgin-Middlesex-London who entrusted me the guardianship of many of their hopes and dreams. I hope to be worthy of representing them in this Legislature and thank them for their faith in me.
I also want to pay tribute to the candidates who ran in the election in Elgin-Middlesex-London. By definition, the weight of democracy must be carried by many hands. I want to thank John Fisher, Dave La Pointe, Bruce Smith, Corey Janzen and Ray Monteith for taking up that weight and running so well.
On behalf of my constituents, I would like to applaud and thank two gentlemen who recently were members of this Legislature.
Peter North represented Elgin ably from 1990 until this year, both as a member of the New Democratic Party and as the first independent representative in this House in more than six decades. Peter always worked hard for his constituents and remains a popular figure in the riding. I've also had the benefit of knowing Peter for over 20 years and can report that he is now very happy in his new position. Bruce Smith represented the riding of Middlesex from 1995 until 1999. A Progressive Conservative, Bruce was well liked by members of all parties. My best wishes to both Peter and Bruce.
I am proud and honoured to be the first representative of the new riding of Elgin-Middlesex-London, fashioned from the old riding of Elgin and a portion of the ridings of Middlesex and London South. This diverse constituency, a blend of both urban and rural, stretches from the banks of the Thames River in the north to the shores of Lake Erie in the south. Her boundaries encompass the White Oaks and Lambeth neighbourhoods of London and the rich farmland of Elgin and Middlesex.
In this riding you will meet fine people from Aylmer, Port Stanley, North Dorchester, Delaware and Bayham, and the famous life-sized monument to Jumbo the elephant can be found among the many industry and manufacturing businesses of St Thomas. More than 80 kilometres of Highway 401 bisect Elgin-Middlesex-London, and parks dot the terrain and provide moments of quiet serenity.
It is an area rich in Liberal history, having sent forth Mitch Hepburn to battle the ravages of the Depression. Mitch was a strong believer in health care. He fought tooth and nail for the health needs of all Ontarians when he introduced the mandatory pasteurization of milk against staunch opposition. Mitch also helped to improve the living conditions of the mentally ill in hospitals across this province. It was Mitch's interest in mental health that produced the St Thomas Psychiatric Hospital, a hospital that is now slated to be closed by this government.
I invite the current Premier to visit the land of his predecessor, where hopefully he will learn something about fighting for health care rather than against it.
Before the voters granted me this opportunity at Queen's Park, I served for seven and a half years as mayor of St Thomas and three as alderman. Over more than a decade of municipal service, I learned a great deal. I want to take time to mention a couple of those lessons, lessons that I think are good for all of us.
First, there is only one taxpayer. If the province downloads services on to municipalities to pay for their tax cuts, the benefits of those tax cuts are going to be eradicated by a myriad of user fees and municipal taxes that cities and regions across this province will have to raise to pay for those services. Rather than confronting fiscal problems with courage and vision, this government has passed the problem on to municipalities, and that is wrong.
Second, politics is about people. During the election, the slogan of the Liberal Party was "putting people first," and that is a motto I firmly believe in and support. We should not serve in this House with an eye towards personal prosperity or blinded by ideological dogma. Rather, the role of the politician is to listen to the needs and desires of individuals, to draw people together, to facilitate the changes necessary to improve our society. It is my hope that this government will undertake more listening in the coming years.
Finally, legislators must consider both the past and the future. George Santayana wrote, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." Very few of the issues that we debate in this House are new, and we should look at what has worked in the past before pronouncing on what will work in the future.
I would like to take this opportunity to express my heartfelt thanks to the people of St Thomas for the confidence and trust you invested by thrice electing me as your mayor. I will use the same skills, qualities and dedication to serve the much broader constituency of Elgin-Middlesex-London. To the people of our riding I make the most important promise any elected representative can: I pledge to work hard in your interests.
As a legislator, I have a number of personal priorities that I will be discussing over the coming years.
One of the closest issues to my heart is the problems facing archives in this province. Archives are depositories of our memories, a place where the past can be held until the future requires its wisdom. As this government restructuring process slashes the number of municipalities and downloads increasing financial strain, there is a real danger in this province that our archives will be damaged. I hope to bring this issue to your attention and to ensure that all Ontario's archives have the resources they require to continue their fine work.
More than 80 kilometres of Lake Erie shoreline form the southern boundary of my riding. The impressive cliffs that line the shore provide a home for exotic wildlife and protect nearby farmland. Unfortunately, that shoreline is seriously threatened by erosion. As a legislator, I hope to work to provide protection needed to preserve the shoreline and preserve this living treasure.
Another goal of mine is to see the re-establishment of passenger and freight ferry service between Port Stanley and Cleveland, Ohio. In a time of globalization and increased trade with the United States, the development of an alternative route to access the rich markets of the Ohio Valley will help to ensure the prosperity of the people of southwestern Ontario.
I also hope to be part of working towards assisting the province's transportation network. Our railways, local roads, 400-series highways, air and water networks are the ribbons that tie us together. Investing in transportation is one of the wisest things that we all can do to promote business and investment in Ontario.
The shortage of licensed physicians in my riding is a major problem that requires immediate attention. According to the Ministry of Health's own figures, released recently, in St Thomas there are only 20 doctors where the ministry says there should be 31. Aylmer has five doctors where there should be nine.
Improving access to health services is a key priority to me and my services to the constituents of Elgin-Middlesex-London. This government needs to address the problem of doctor shortages. Just last week, we had another doctor leave a family practice to move to a specialist position. That doctor has over 4,000 patients who are now desperately searching for someone to treat them.
I was deeply disappointed that the speech from the throne provided so little vision to combat the critical doctor shortage in underserviced parts of the province. In fact, the most promising development coming from the throne speech was the government's promise to copy the Liberal plan to offer free tuition to medical students promising to work in underserviced areas. Unfortunately, we still haven't seen any indication that they intend to make an immediate commitment to funding residency placements for foreign-trained family doctors.
As a former municipal politician, I understand the tensions that exist between three levels of government. As a legislator, I look forward to building a strong working relationship and partnerships with the federal government, but more importantly, with our municipal representatives. The municipal level is responsible for delivering most of the health care and education services, and I believe we must listen to our colleagues at that level.
I will work towards mental health reform. The St Thomas Psychiatric Hospital in my riding is closing, pushing dozens of people suffering from mental disorders out into the streets of our community. The province has a responsibility and a moral obligation to provide adequate services to ensure that people receive the assistance they require.
Finally, my leader, Dalton McGuinty, has provided me with an opportunity to criticize the government and their treatment of one and a half million persons with disabilities, and I want to thank him for that. The government record on this issue is embarrassing, and it would be easy to make a name for myself by exploiting the victims of these misdeeds. However, my goal as a critic for people with disabilities is not to exploit but to improve. Persons with disabilities have waited far too long for justice in this province, and I am not abou