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

April 7, 2004

38th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2004-Apr-07 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Wednesday 7 April 2004 Mercredi 7 avril 2004

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

PROVINCIAL ELECTIONS

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

MOTORCYCLE INSURANCE

ORGAN TRANSPLANTS

ONTARIO NORTHLAND RAILWAY

HYDRO GENERATION

HIGHWAY TOLLS

CANADIAN WOMEN'S HOCKEY TEAM

GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE

ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

FIXED DATES FOR ELECTIONS

(OCTOBER 4, 2007

COMMENCEMENT) ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004

SUR UNE DATE D'ÉLECTION FIXE

(À COMPTER DU 4 OCTOBRE 2007)

VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS

EMPLOYMENT PROTECTION ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004

SUR LA PROTECTION DE L'EMPLOI

DES POMPIERS VOLONTAIRES

PROTECTION OF MINORS

FROM SEXUALLY EXPLICIT GOODS

AND SERVICES ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004 SUR LA PROTECTION

DES MINEURS CONTRE LES BIENS

ET SERVICES

SEXUELLEMENT EXPLICITES

FIXED DATES FOR ELECTIONS

(JUNE 7, 2007

COMMENCEMENT) ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004

SUR UNE DATE D'ÉLECTION FIXE

(À COMPTER DU 7 JUIN 2007)

ANNIVERSARY OF RWANDAN GENOCIDE

ORAL QUESTIONS

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

WASTE DISPOSAL

LONG-TERM CARE

WASTE DISPOSAL

HOME CARE

CHILDREN'S SERVICES

CHILDREN'S MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES

MEDICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE

NURSES

POVERTY

AGRICULTURAL POLICY FRAMEWORK

GREENBELT STRATEGY

HOSPITAL FUNDING

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

ENERGY CONSERVATION

FIREARMS CONTROL

PETITIONS

TILLSONBURG DISTRICT

MEMORIAL HOSPITAL

ALEXANDER GRAHAM BELL PARKWAY

WATER SERVICES

HOSPITAL FUNDING

ONTARIO DISABILITY

SUPPORT PROGRAM

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

NATUROPATHIC MEDICINE

SEWAGE SLUDGE

TUITION

OAK RIDGES MORAINE

CORMORANTS

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

ORDERS OF THE DAY

THRONE SPEECH DEBATE /

DÉBAT SUR LE DISCOURS DU TRÔNE

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

PROVINCIAL ELECTIONS

Mr Norman W. Sterling (Lanark-Carleton): Today I will be introducing two bills that would fix the dates of future provincial elections in

Ontario. Government sources have told the media that the Premier is considering legislation that would extend its current mandate beyond the promised four-year term by an extra seven months, into

2008. The two bills I will introduce are identical except for one thing: They offer different dates for the next provincial elections. Those dates are October 4, 2007, and June 7, 2007. The October

4 date is the true four-year mark from the last provincial election. The June 7, 2007, date is earlier, addressing any concern regarding conflicts with elections at other levels of government.

In either case, subsequent elections would follow every four years. I am giving the members of the Legislature a choice, and I can support either bill. What I

cannot support is any effort of this government to break yet another election pledge by stretching out the time in office well beyond their promised four-year term. I don't think the people of

Ontario can afford this government for that long.

The legislation I will introduce would also allow for early elections as a result of non-confidence votes. However, I am incorporating one essential safeguard

against any government that might be tempted to engineer a vote on a confidence matter. My legislation would require a majority of the Legislature and a majority of the opposition to support a

non-confidence motion in order for an election to be triggered. My biggest concern is that the Premier is essentially saying, "Sure, we want elections every four years, but just not for us." I

cannot accept this double standard.

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

Ms Kathleen O. Wynne (Don Valley West): The Don Valley West One-Tonne Challenge is a local response to a national challenge. Every year, each

Canadian produces an average of five tonnes of greenhouse gases. The emissions by individual Canadians account for approximately 28% of Canada's total. The One-Tonne Challenge asks and pushes

Canadians to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions by 20% or one tonne.

On March 27 of this year, interested residents of Don Valley West and field experts convened at York University's Glendon College campus for a strategy session

to plot out how we can meet that target in Don Valley West. Specific suggestions were taken from the participants' discussions and were submitted to a coordinator of the Don Valley West One-Tonne

Challenge, Andy Horsnell, to be incorporated into a formal proposal.

As a member of this government's conservation action team, I'm pleased to say that many of the suggestions we talked about in that meeting echo the

recommendations of our conservation action team. I want to acknowledge John Godfrey, the federal member of Parliament for Don Valley West, for his efforts in spearheading the initiative in the

riding and his understanding that all levels of government must be involved co-operatively. In 1999, John co-wrote a book entitled The Canada We Want, in which he argues for the need for Canada to

have new national projects. The One-Tonne Challenge can be one such national project. However, local responses to the challenge are necessary for the initiative to move forward. I'm proud to

represent a community that has embraced this challenge and has already taken concrete steps to ensure that we do our part. We're ready to take the next step, and we hope that our example will

encourage other ridings to do the same.

MOTORCYCLE INSURANCE

Mr Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): I rise to express the concern of motorcyclists all over this province with rapidly rising insurance costs.

Over the past two years alone, the premiums for mandatory insurance coverage for motorcyclists have increased an average of over 40%.

A constituent's letter I recently received exemplifies the seriousness of the situation. Between last December and March of this year, the quote he received from

his insurance company had increased from $1,300 to $2,325, due to a rate increase on February 1, 2004. Meanwhile, he, like many other motorcyclists in Ontario, was under the impression that the

Liberal government had frozen insurance rates for motor vehicles, which by definition includes motorcycles.

This constituent is not alone. Over 250,000 people drive a motorcycle in Ontario. It is a $1.25-billion industry that, through the manufacturers, distributors,

dealers and related services, employs over 8,000 people. Yet due to skyrocketing insurance rates, this industry has suffered significantly in past years.

In my own beautiful riding of Parry Sound-Muskoka, rising insurance rates are a particular concern. Each year in early July -- July 9 to July 11 this year -- the

town of Parry Sound is host to Canada's largest sport bike rally, attracting over 2,000 motorcyclists from all over the continent. This is an event that has become increasingly well-recognized in

the sport bike community, has been a consistent source of revenue to the local economy and has become one of the summer's most important community events.

Unless these insurance rates change soon, the numbers will dwindle, and Parry Sound's local economy, like the motorcycle industry throughout this province, will

suffer unnecessarily.

ORGAN TRANSPLANTS

Mr Khalil Ramal (London-Fanshawe): As a result of a relaxation in the health environment under the government of Dalton McGuinty, recently at

the London Health Sciences Centre, Dr Patrick Luke and Dr Vivian McAlister performed London's first kidney-pancreas transplant on Tossa Vollrath, who suffered from type 1 diabetes for 20 years.

The results of this groundbreaking surgery have been amazing. Every night, Ms Vollrath had to hook up to a home kidney dialysis machine to cleanse her blood. Now

she no longer requires such action to remain active and healthy. Her new pancreas provides regulated insulin and her new kidneys eliminate the need for dialysis. Basically, her diabetes has been

cured because of this transplant. She can now enjoy her life and be happy with her family.

This is a perfect example of the London Health Sciences Centre and its physicians showcasing their expertise in the area of transplantation. I congratulate the

two doctors for their performance in that surgery. Hopefully, we'll see more action in the future under this government.

ONTARIO NORTHLAND RAILWAY

Mr Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): I rise in this House today to remind the government of the commitment they made in the last election, and

that was the plight of the Ontario northland with regard to the Ontario Northland rail services. I said at the time, when the government announced that they weren't going to privatize the rail

service, that was a step in the right direction. However, we have yet to hear from this government what its plan is when it comes to the necessary investments that are desperately needed at the ONR

to increase services, so passengers from both northern and southern Ontario are able to take the train either to or from northern Ontario.

We recognize -- I think all of us in this Legislature and certainly all people in northern Ontario recognize -- that the Ontario Northland can and should play an

important role when it comes to not only basic transportation needs, but also when it comes to the issue of being able to develop northern Ontario, vis-à-vis the tourism industry.

So I say to the government, it's a step in the right direction. You announced that you weren't going to privatize; for that, we give you credit. But we are still

waiting today for any move on the part of this government to make announcements about what kind of investments they're prepared to make when it comes to the Ontario Northland.

I noticed about a week ago that there were some significant announcements made when it came to the transit services of the city of Toronto. I also note that in

previous governments there were announcements about investments with GO Transit. I just say that we in northeastern Ontario are still waiting to hear from this government in order to find the

investments necessary to make sure that the Ontario Northland is able to build itself into the strong viable presence that it should be in northeastern Ontario.

HYDRO GENERATION

Mr Jean-Marc Lalonde (Glengarry-Prescott-Russell): Citizens are concerned by the recent changes surrounding electricity in Ontario. They are

outraged by the gross mismanagement of the previous government. Allow me to name but a few examples of Tory mismanagement in the past few years:

As stated in this morning's Toronto Sun, one in every three employees of OPG earned more than $100,000 last year. What about the Tories' close friends -- Tom

Long, Leslie Noble and Paul Rhodes -- who were paid more than $5.6 million by Hydro One? What about the top brass at OPG, getting $31 million in bonuses while OPG reported losses of nearly half a

billion dollars in 2003? Who is footing the bill now for this Conservative mismanagement? Ontario consumers.

Our government is working hard to fix the hydro problem, whether it's by our government's initiative to conserve energy in the public workforce or whether it's

by our government's plan to generate new electricity in Ontario for the first time in nine years.

The McGuinty government did not create this hydro mess, but I can tell you that we sure are cleaning it up.

HIGHWAY TOLLS

Mr Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): I hope the Hansard clerks will entitle this statement "Tolls Confusion." The reason I want to speak to the issue of

the highway tolls policy today is that the Minister of Transportation and his cabinet colleagues apparently are too confused to know what a tolls policy is. The fact of the matter is that over the

last few days the minister and the Premier have talked about tolls with no clarity, no indication of how or where. We're getting phone calls and e-mails from across the province from people who are

in the dark about what this government's intentions really are. People don't know if they're going to be paying tolls tomorrow morning going to work or shipping their goods or going to their

cottage. This is what happens when a minister simply throws out trial balloons without having regard to a clear policy statement.

Over the past few days, this minister has suggested that there may or may not be tolls on Highway 69. Yesterday, within minutes, he changed his mind on this

issue. How much confidence can the people of Ontario really have in this government when from one day to the next -- even within question period -- they change their position on something as

important as an issue like this?

Does the Minister of Transportation not understand that with each irresponsible statement, such as the ones he has been making, he is confirming further that

this government has a serious leadership deficit? Does this government have a policy on tolls or not? If they do, let them be clear about what it is, and if they don't, let's work together to make

sure that they do have a policy that the people of Ontario can rely on.

CANADIAN WOMEN'S HOCKEY TEAM

Mr Brad Duguid (Scarborough Centre): Team Canada struck gold again last night in the World Women's Hockey Championship. Congratulations to all

the players, especially the eight team members from Ontario: Becky Kellar from Hagersville, Gillian Ferrari from Thornhill, Cheryl Pounder from Mississauga, Gillian Apps from Unionville, Jayna

Hefford from Kingston, Cassie Campbell from Brampton, and Cherie Piper and Vicky Sunohara from my hometown of Scarborough. You make us all proud.

But special congratulations to their coach. Karen Hughes, another Scarboroughite, head coach of the women's national hockey team for the 2003-04 season, took her

team to a smashing 2-0 finish against the US in the World Women's Hockey Championship at the Halifax Metro Centre last night. This is the eighth time in a row this team has won the world title.

Ms Hughes has been a member of Canada's international women's coaching pool since 1996. As you may remember, Ms Hughes was an assistant coach with Canada's

women's Olympic team which won the gold medal at the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City. She also coaches the University of Toronto Varsity Blues women's team.

But here is the kicker: She is also a member of our family here at Queen's Park. Ms Hughes is a full-time employee here. She is a member of the Ontario public

service and has been for 14 years now.

We're very proud of her accomplishments. We'd like to congratulate Ms Hughes and Team Canada for the great job they did last night.

GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY

Mr John R. Baird (Nepean-Carleton): The Liberal cloud of secrecy continues to grow. Dalton McGuinty promised open and accountable government and

Dalton McGuinty has broken that promise. On March 1, Dalton McGuinty shut down an inquiry being considered for the review of the vice-chair of the Ontario Securities Commission. On March 24, Dalton

McGuinty once again stepped in to ensure that there was no sunlight and no light of day on the Ontario Securities Commission. Last week, again Dalton McGuinty intervened to put a cloud of secrecy

over the Sorbara affair. Apparently George Bush will let Condoleezza Rice testify, but Dalton McGuinty won't let his own finance minister testify at the general government committee. It's an

absolute disgrace.

We in the opposition are forced to ask for information through access-to-information requests and we still don't get the information. We have to appeal. We have

to seek mediation. We have to call upon a legislative officer of this House to step in to help this government comply with the law and release documents and information.

The latest example comes from the Premier's office, where they say they will only respond to the access-to-information request on July 8, a full week and a half

after this chamber closes down for the summer.

We'll continue to expose this secretive, manipulative government for what it is.

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE

ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): I beg to inform the House that today the Clerk received the report on intended appointments dated April 7,

2004, of the standing committee on government agencies. Pursuant to standing order 106(e)9, the report is deemed to be adopted by the House.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

FIXED DATES FOR ELECTIONS

(OCTOBER 4, 2007

COMMENCEMENT) ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004

SUR UNE DATE D'ÉLECTION FIXE

(À COMPTER DU 4 OCTOBRE 2007)

Mr Sterling moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 51,

An Act to amend the Election Act to provide for elections on fixed dates commencing October 4, 2007 / Projet de loi 51, Loi modifiant la Loi

électorale pour prévoir la tenue d'élections à une date fixe à compter du 4 octobre 2007.

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

Mr Norman W. Sterling (Lanark-Carleton): As I indicated before in my statement, this bill calls for the next election to be on October 4, 2007,

and every other election thereafter, every four years, on the first Thursday in October, each and every year.

This bill also calls for the fact that a non-confidence motion would only be valid in terms of dissolving the Legislature if it was supported by a majority of

the Legislature and a majority of the opposition, in order to prevent the governing party from engineering a non-confidence motion that they would lose.

VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS

EMPLOYMENT PROTECTION ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004

SUR LA PROTECTION DE L'EMPLOI

DES POMPIERS VOLONTAIRES

Mr Arnott moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 52,

An Act to amend the Fire Protection and Prevention Act, 1997 in order to protect the employment of volunteer firefighters / Projet de loi 52, Loi

modifiant la Loi de 1997 sur la prévention et la protection contre l'incendie afin de protéger l'emploi des pompiers volontaires.

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

All those in favour of the motion, say "aye."

All those against, say "nay."

The ayes have it.

Mr Ted Arnott (Waterloo-Wellington): Members may recall that I introduced a bill similar to this in the previous Parliament. It was Bill 130. It

had more debate than any private member's bill, I think, in the history of this province, going back to 1950, but the problem persists and I'm continuing to raise this issue.

The bill amends the Fire Protection and Prevention Act, 1997, with respect to salaried firefighters who also work as volunteer firefighters. If a person is

denied membership in an association of firefighters, is expelled or disciplined by the association or engages in reasonable dissent within the association in connection with this kind of dual

employment, the association is not permitted to require the employer to refuse to employ the person as a salaried firefighter, terminate his or her employment as a salaried firefighter or refuse to

assign the person to fire protection services. The person is also entitled to fair representation by the association. The person who believes that any of the rights has been contravened may file a

complaint with the Ontario Labour Relations Board.

PROTECTION OF MINORS

FROM SEXUALLY EXPLICIT GOODS

AND SERVICES ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004 SUR LA PROTECTION

DES MINEURS CONTRE LES BIENS

ET SERVICES

SEXUELLEMENT EXPLICITES

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

Bill 53,

An Act to protect minors from exposure to sexually explicit goods and services / Projet de loi 53, Loi visant à protéger les mineurs

contre les biens et services sexuellement explicites.

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

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): In respect to former member Bob Wood from London, who introduced this bill in June 2000, I was supportive of the bill.

The bill prohibits a person from knowingly selling, offering to distribute or display sexually explicit goods or services to a minor in any premise or place. The prohibition does not affect

activities in a private residence. The real intent here is to take appropriate action to protect minors from exposure to sexually explicit material.

FIXED DATES FOR ELECTIONS

(JUNE 7, 2007

COMMENCEMENT) ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004

SUR UNE DATE D'ÉLECTION FIXE

(À COMPTER DU 7 JUIN 2007)

Mr Sterling moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 54,

An Act to amend the Election Act to provide for elections on fixed dates commencing June 7, 2007 / Projet de loi 54, Loi modifiant la Loi

électorale pour prévoir la tenue d'élections à une date fixe à compter du 7 juin 2007.

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

Mr Norman W. Sterling (Lanark-Carleton): This bill is identical to the other bill, except that the date is different. There would be an

election on June 7, and every four years thereafter, on the first Thursday in June. This is to avoid the conflict with municipal elections that might occur in the fall. We don't want to give this

government the excuse that they're going to go to a four-and-a-half-year term rather than a four-year term. This province can't afford this government that long.

Mr Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I would like to seek unanimous consent to move a motion with regard to the Keele

landfill site.

The Speaker: The member for Oak Ridges has asked for unanimous consent. I heard a no.

ANNIVERSARY OF RWANDAN GENOCIDE

Hon Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: Being the 10th anniversary of the Rwandan

genocide, I believe we have unanimous consent for all three parties to make a five-minute statement to commemorate the victims.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): The government House leader has asked for unanimous consent. Agreed.

Hon Marie Bountrogianni (Minister of Children and Youth Services, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration): Today, April 7, is the day that

the United Nations, Canada and many countries around the world have chosen to mark the 10th anniversary of one of the most heinous crimes of the 20th century, the genocide of more than 800,000

people, members of the Tutsi tribe in Rwanda.

I invite my fellow Ontarians to reflect on this unspeakable crime and to express once again our horror and revulsion at this deliberate human slaughter.

The commemoration of this tragedy reminds us of the need to remain ever vigilant in protecting human life everywhere. We must promote the basic values of

decency, justice and due process, which are the most effective guarantees of freedom from fear and freedom from tyranny.

Ontario is the adopted homeland of people who come from diverse parts of the world to create a better life for themselves and their families. We are a proud

collection of many ancestries, histories, languages, cultures and beliefs. It is that diversity that imbues us with a particularly keen sensitivity to the fortunes of people everywhere in the

world. In a very real sense, as Ontarians, our sisters and brothers live all over the globe. Together we celebrate their joys and successes. In times of sorrow, we also share their suffering and

mourn their loss.

We are proud of the democratic traditions of our province. We are proud of the diversity of our heritage that contributes immensely to the vitality and

prosperity of our society. We are proud that we live in one of the most culturally diverse and most successful societies in the world.

Accordingly, we are particularly appalled at the inhumanity that planned and perpetrated the massacre of 800,000 people. We are also ashamed of the inability

of the world community to prevent it or even to intervene. As we reflect on this tremendous loss, we are also reminded through recent events in our own country that unchecked hate and intolerance

sow the seeds of violence. They must not be allowed to take root, whether abroad or at home. We must commit ourselves to be ever vigilant against such atrocities in the future. To do otherwise

would jeopardize the very values we hold dear, the very values that make us all human: truth, justice, peace.

Mr Ted Arnott (Waterloo-Wellington): Last Saturday morning, as is my normal routine, I was reading through a stack of my weekly newspapers. I

eventually got around to reading the Globe and Mail. In the Globe and Mail, there was an

article that seared into the core of my being, a vision of unspeakable horror. I would expect that some

members of the House would have read the same article. But if you haven't, I'd like to relate briefly some of its contents.

The

article told the story of Athanasie Mukarwego, a young mother who was a high school teacher in Kigali in 1994. On April 6, just 10 years ago yesterday, she

heard the news that the president of Rwanda had been killed in a plane crash. There was an ominous sense that immediately went through her community, a sense that something terrible was about to

happen. Over the next 100 days the world was to witness again the atrocity of genocide, in stark contrast to the beautiful and scenic African land of Rwanda.

Within days, Athanasie's husband, along with the other men in her community, was brutally tortured and killed because he was a Tutsi and for no other reason.

His national identity card became his death warrant because it indicated he was a Tutsi. The bloodthirsty Hutu killers were not satisfied with killing the Tutsi men. In fact, later it became

apparent that Hutu men who refused to participate in the killings were themselves hacked to death with machetes, as barbaric and revolting as that sounds.

After her husband was killed, Athanasie was subjected to the most dehumanizing torture that a woman could face. The rampaging Hutu mobs used her as a sex slave

for 89 days, repeatedly assaulting her in her own bedroom while her children were crying in the next room. Athanasie was a Christian and is today. Understandably, while trying to endure through

this ordeal, she questioned her faith. She asked herself, "Does God exist? We were always taught that God loves us. He would not have let me live through this. Clearly, he does not love me."

In the end, it was her love of her children that helped her to want to live to see the end. When the mob was finished with her, after 89 days, they took her

outside intending to shoot her. One of the soldiers said to her, "Speak for the last time." She did, and she remembers every word she said: "When I see you, your youth, your strength, I pity you.

You could use it to protect those who need protection, but instead you use it to kill. We are innocents. There is not even a stick in my house. No one has ever received so much as a nasty look in

my house, and yet you will kill me. The others who died were innocent, and we will all go to another life, one you won't have."

They said to each other, "Why isn't this woman afraid?" She answered, "All who live must die." Her courage and humanity in the face of death stunned the

killers, and they couldn't do what they had set out to do. Perhaps they finally felt revulsion at the blood on their hands. They let her go, and 10 years later she has been able to tell her story.

In the end, as the

article says, this is a hopeful story. Athanasie feared contracting HIV and was certain she would because of the prevalence of that horrible disease in Africa, but she didn't and

her health was eventually restored.

This former high school teacher now serves as a coordinator in a village called Hope, counselling women like her who were raped during the genocide. In Rwanda,

there is peace between the Hutus and Tutsis. The national identity cards no longer identify people as Hutu or Tutsi but simply as Rwandan. First steps which represent national reconciliation are

occurring, even as those responsible for inciting this act of genocide are being held accountable for their crimes.

As we reflect on the events of 10 years ago, I am reminded of an old adage, and perhaps I'm paraphrasing it: The only way evil can triumph is if good people

are indifferent and do nothing. The Western world, the United Nations, the European Community, the Canadian government, the Canadian people, we in this House, what did we do during these infamous

100 days when evil reigned supreme in central Africa and 800,000 people were being slaughtered? Where was our expression of outrage? Where was our moral indignation? Where was our support for

General Dallaire, who requested reinforcements and a revised mandate to come to the aid of the victims? What did we do? Thinking of the history of mankind, what will we do the next time this

happens?

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): This commemoration today is about reminding ourselves about the genocide of over 800,000 people in

Rwanda in 1994. It's hard for most of us to imagine horror and, yes, evil on such a scale, but it is very clear, historically clear, that this happened.

As the courageous Canadian General Roméo Dallaire reminds us, it happened on our watch. General Dallaire and others warned the world and, in particular,

they warned the Western world about what was happening. Yet nothing was done. General Dallaire wrote that the UN Security Council members "procrastinated, bickered and cynically pursued their own

selfish foreign policies."

The United Nations 1948 genocide convention obligated governments to intervene to stop this kind of killing, but still, nothing was done. It was a shocking and

shameful failure, and we are marking that failure here today. The message has to be, "Never again," but this message has to mean action, not just words.

In the years after Rwanda, there have been some signs that the world is taking its responsibilities to prevent genocide more seriously. The Canadian-backed

report The Responsibility to Protect lays out a framework for when military intervention, always a last resort, must happen. It argues that there is an international responsibility to protect

civilians where the people face large-scale murder and where the state involved is unable or unwilling to prevent it.

Today there are United Nations-mandated troops in Ituri province in northeastern Congo as well as in Liberia, both of which have stopped much bloodshed. The

setting up of the International Criminal Court, unfortunately rejected by the United States, is another positive step. But as United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan has put it, the Security

Council is still "tardy and hesitant" when it comes to actually doing something about mass murder. We still have a long way to go.

Here in Ontario, while we are very far from Rwanda, we need to redouble our efforts to stop racism and discrimination. If people are unwilling to believe the

worst about their neighbour, they are less susceptible to propaganda of the most hateful kind.

We have built a generally tolerant, peaceful society here in Canada, but recent events show that we are not immune to hate and hate crimes. We must also ensure

that Canada's role in the world, our main role in the world, is to assist the international community through peacekeeping as well as building and strengthening the institutions, such as the

International Criminal Court and the United Nations, that will help to prevent another Rwanda.

Many of us ignored what was going on in 1994. Perhaps there were more glamorous things happening in the world, or things which captured the headlines more

easily. But the genocide of over 800,000 people is something that we cannot allow to happen again. It's clear now that we have the possibility, that we have the institutions to prevent it. We must

all dedicate ourselves to that now.

The Speaker: Thank you for the statements. I'm going to ask all members to rise for one minute of respectful silence, and I'd also ask those

in the gallery to do so.

The House observed one minute's silence.

The Speaker: Thank you.

ORAL QUESTIONS

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Mr John R. Baird (Nepean-Carleton): If I could at the outset, I just want to congratulate the three members for three excellent presentations

on what is a true human tragedy.

I want to return to the Minister of Finance once again, to talk about the ethical scandal surrounding his involvement with Royal Group Technologies, a company

that he directed for almost a decade and a company under three serious investigations, including a criminal probe.

In his letter dated February 27, Mr Justice Coulter Osborne ordered you to "ensure that you are in no way involved in any matters having to do with Royal Group

Technologies and CCRA," the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency. I want to ask you specifically, what have you done to comply with Mr Justice Coulter Osborne's request?

Hon Greg Sorbara (Minister of Finance): I will just advise the member that I've taken every step necessary to ensure that I don't have any

involvement with the Canadian revenue agency in respect of anything dealing with Royal Group Technologies.

Mr Baird: It's a simple question and I don't think we got a clear answer. I think we want to know what specifically you have done to "ensure"

that you are not involved with this scandal. You are the minister of revenue. The Ministry of Finance and the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency talk daily and conduct investigations, often jointly,

and the Ontario Ministry of Finance can conduct investigations specifically themselves.

I would like you to stand in your place and inform the House of specifically what you have done to date to ensure that you, your political staff and the

officials who report to you are no longer involved and at no time will involve themselves in this investigation. Will you do that, Minister?

Hon Mr Sorbara: I'm not sure whether the acoustics are not working in this room or the member from Nepean-Carleton can't hear. I've said in

response to his first question, and I'll say it again, I have taken every single step to make sure that I have no involvement in anything that might transpire with the Canadian revenue agency in

any investigation relating to Royal Group Technologies.

Hon James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism and Recreation): What was happening when you were in the Mulroney government?

Mr Baird: I say to the member from St Catharines, he can talk to one of his cabinet colleagues if he wants to know what was going on in the

Mulroney government.

Minister, you are accountable to the people of Ontario through their elected representatives in this House. You've said you have taken every measure necessary.

I want to know, the people of Ontario want to know and, when there is a serious investigation by three bodies into the conduct of a company which you personally directed for 10 years, they are

entitled to know what specific measures and the details of the specific measures you've taken to ensure that you're not involved in this investigation. You are the chief tax man in Ontario. We want

to know what your involvement is with the chief tax collector. Would you enumerate specifically to the House the specific measures that you've taken to distance yourself, your officials and your

political staff from this investigation? Will you do that, Minister?

Hon Mr Sorbara: I will reiterate: During the some nine years that I acted as a director of Royal Group Technologies, I acted in every single

instance with the highest degree of integrity, if I might say so myself. I invite my friend from Nepean-Carleton to visit that level of integrity now and again. It will be an entirely new

experience for him. I simply repeat my answer, that I have taken every step necessary to ensure that I do not put myself in a position of conflict of interest. That is my duty as a minister of the

crown. That was my duty when I swore the oath as Minister of Finance and I will honour that duty every single day that I'm in this job, I tell my friend from Nepean-Carleton.

WASTE DISPOSAL

Mr Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): My question is to the Minister of the Environment. Yesterday you introduced a bill in the House that demonstrates

one more time that your government is much more interested in spin than in demonstrating leadership. The spin begins with your reference to the Adams mine lake. One of these days we will have your

Minister of Natural Resources tell you what a lake really is. What is more offensive, though, than the spin that this minister has put on this piece of legislation is the absolute, draconian

provisions in this bill that rob Ontario citizens of this province of their fundamental right of action in sections 4 and 5. This minister has absolutely put the government above the law and robbed

individuals, property owners in this province, of fundamental property rights and rights of action.

I want to know how the minister can justify such a draconian measure in this act that robs individuals in this province of their fundamental rights. What

signal does that send to the business community, not only in Ontario but across the world?

Hon Leona Dombrowsky (Minister of the Environment): I recommend that the member opposite read completely the bill that was introduced two days

ago in this Legislature. You would learn, honourable member, that there is also a provision in the legislation that will compensate the proponent for any out-of-pocket expenses that the proponent

can demonstrate to this government. This government wants to be open and fair and transparent. That is exactly what this legislation will achieve.

Mr Klees: I strongly urge the minister to read her own legislation. The kind of reimbursement that the minister speaks to is pocket change

compared to the kind of investment that has been made in these properties and it's a signal. More important than the effects on this particular bill is the signal that this minister is sending as

to how credible this government is with regard to property rights, with regard to fundamentally respecting contract law in the province. They've done it in other pieces of legislation as well. This

is one more step: an assault and affront on business in this province. How can the minister justify placing herself above the law through this legislation?

Hon Mrs Dombrowsky: The purpose of this legislation is to protect a very important source of water in the Temiskaming area. That is the goal

of the legislation. This government recognizes that there have been out-of-pocket expenses provided by the proponent and the legislation also has a very detailed list on how the proponent will be

compensated when the proponent is able to demonstrate the cost. I would say that is number one -- recognizing the interest of business. Most importantly, this bill is about protecting water sources

and water resources in the province. It's something that your government neglected; it's something that this government wants to make our hallmark.

Mr Klees: Let me tell the minister what our government did. One of the things that our government did was to permanently close the Keele

landfill site. The motion that I wanted to put earlier was exactly this: that this House reaffirm the former government's commitment to keep the Keele landfill site permanently closed.

Members opposite, the House leader for the Liberals refused to give unanimous consent for that. I want to put it to the minister now. In light of the fact that

your government refused to give us an opportunity to confirm this motion, will you stand in your place now -- in light of the fact that you are willing to turn over and overturn every other piece

of contract law in the province of Ontario, I don't trust your government to keep this commitment -- will you stand in your place now and, for the people of York region and Ontario, confirm that

you will not reopen the Keele landfill site? Will you do that today?

Hon Mrs Dombrowsky: First of all, I want to remind the member opposite that unlike the previous government, which tended to micro-manage and

get involved in individual instances and issues, this government intends to address the issue around municipal solid waste with a comprehensive diversion plan. That is our commitment. We will

assist municipalities in that regard. The member opposite knows very well that this government has committed that it will not reopen Keele, and I will do that in the House yet again today.

LONG-TERM CARE

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Minister of Health. Before the election, you promised a better life for seniors

living in nursing homes and homes for the aged. You promised an additional $6,000 a year for each and every resident.

Seven months later, nothing has happened, except the situation has gotten worse. Seniors in Ontario nursing homes are eating sandwiches for supper because the

daily food allowance of $5.24 doesn't allow for anything more. They get a maximum of one bath or one shower a week.

These are our parents and our grandparents. They deserve to spend their last years in comfort and in dignity. So we must ask the question: Will you honour your

election pledge to increase long-term-care funding, or is this going to be another of your broken promises?

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I'm pleased and honoured to have the opportunity to tell the honourable member

that his assertion about the quality of care in Ontario's long-term-care facilities is just plain wrong. This government has taken steps early on in our mandate to ensure the protection of the

individuals who are staying there.

He does not own the issue of compassion for those people whom we view as our parents and our grandparents and the like. Furthermore, my colleague the member

from Nipissing has been involved in a comprehensive review of the long-term-care facilities in this province. Very shortly, we'll be moving forward with a comprehensive plan to improve the quality

of long-term-care facilities for today and for tomorrow.

Mr Hampton: It was a simple question. This government, during the election, promised to increase funding for seniors who live in

long-term-care facilities by $6,000 a person. I didn't hear an answer. Now, maybe you think that's acceptable, but I think this is a basic question of human dignity for people who have already made

their contribution to the province.

They deserve to have more than one shower or bath a week; you get more than that if you're in jail. They deserve more than $5.24 a day for meal allowance; you

get more than that if you're in jail. So I ask the minister again, are you going to increase funding for long-term care in this province? You promised $6,000 more a year. Are you going to do it,

yes or no?

Hon Mr Smitherman: In answer to the honourable member, I'm pleased to give him the answer that I've given to him in this House and in scrums

repeatedly, which is that our plans for comprehensive reform to Ontario's long-term-care sector certainly include additional resources.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): New question.

Mr Hampton: To the Minister of Health, again: If we do the math, it's $6,000 per person. There are 70,000 seniors now living in our homes for

the aged and our nursing homes. That works out to $420 million a year. So I want to ask the minister -- you've got a budget coming up -- are we going to see an increase of $420 million a year for

long-term care so that our seniors can live in dignity, so they can get more than one shower a week, so they can have a food allowance of more than $5.24 a day? Is that going to happen in this

budget, or will it be another broken promise by your government?

Hon Mr Smitherman: What I'm pleased to tell the honourable member is that the budget our government will bring down will reflect the realities

of Ontario and the needs of protecting those who are most vulnerable. Our government will continue to ensure that our health care system deals with them appropriately and in a compassionate

way.

With respect to the work that we're going to do in our long-term-care facilities, it will be comprehensive. It will be focused on resources, standards and

transparency. At the end of the day, it will deliver the necessary reforms to ensure the quality of these centres, because our most vulnerable residents are located there.

Mr Hampton: Minister, the answer you just gave sounds like the kind of answer the Conservatives used to give. They used to talk about "the

realities of the province." Well, the reality seven months ago in the election campaign was that you said this was all doable. You said this was your commitment. You said to people, "Choose

change." We read every day of seniors being abused. We read every day of seniors who are suffering from Alzheimer's; 50% of the residents in long-term-care facilities suffer from Alzheimer's and

only 6% get any kind of mental health resources.

A very specific question, Minister: Before the election you had no problem making this promise. Tell us that in the budget we are going to see there will be

$420 million in additional dollars to look after our seniors in dignity. Will we see that, yes or no?

Hon Mr Smitherman: What I'm proud to say is that the party I'm a representative of is a party that will, over the course of our term, ensure a

higher quality in standards in our long-term-care facilities, and in short order we will move forward on that across the 67,500 beds in our long-term-care facilities. We will improve the standards.

We will improve nutrition. We will improve the care that people receive there.

What we will also do, which is long overdue -- it wasn't done by them when they were in government nor by them -- is shine a bright light of transparency and

accountability on the operations of these facilities so that Ontarians have the opportunity across indicators that very clearly tell us how we are doing in relation to those standards -- we will

make that information available and public so that people are no longer left in any doubt about the quality of care that is provided in these long-term-care settings.

WASTE DISPOSAL

Mr Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): To the Minister of the Environment: Every year Ontario trucks a million tonnes of garbage to

Michigan. That's 125 tractor trailers a day. Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm is concerned. She is concerned about Toronto's poor record on recycling. We're all concerned about border security

post 9/11. Minister, what will you do if Michigan closes the border to Toronto's trash?

Hon Leona Dombrowsky (Minister of the Environment): I'm very happy to advise the member opposite. Obviously he doesn't read the papers; it's

been well covered. We do have a plan to assist municipalities in Ontario, and that is to assist them to meet a 60% diversion goal. As recently as yesterday I had a conversation with the mayor of

the city of Toronto. Mayor Miller is confident the city will be able to meet the new standard set by Michigan. Also, the mayor of Toronto is very willing to assist this government to work toward a

60% diversion goal.

Mr Barrett: Minister, obviously you don't have a plan. You're shutting down the Adams mine option. We just heard that garbage is not going

back to Keele, and now the Premier is musing about opening new landfills in Ontario. You've introduced the No Landfill in a Liberal Riding Act, succumbing to not in my backyard, the NIMBY pressure,

and hence you've set back environmental disposable management by 30 years. Does this mean that garbage will never be sent to your backyard, that it will never be sent to David Ramsay's backyard?

Exactly whose backyard are you looking at for these new landfills in Ontario?

Hon Mrs Dombrowsky: This government is actually going to fix the problem that was created by the previous government. They tinkered with the

Environmental Assessment Act, and as a result of that tinkering, it takes between eight and 12 years to site a landfill in this province.

Our government recognizes that landfills are a reality of municipal solid waste management. I just want to read a few comments I have received from groups that

actually have the responsibility of dealing with municipal solid waste. The Recycling Council of Ontario has indicated that they are delighted this government is looking outside the blue box to

find opportunities to divert waste away from landfills.

The city of Toronto has indicated that it welcomes the provincial government's waste action plan. This announcement demonstrates that the government has

listened and is responding by providing municipalities with the necessary tools to manage and divert their waste responsibly. So, obviously, we have some very good support from the people who

actually have the responsibility of managing municipal solid waste. We are going to improve the environmental assessment and approvals process so we can actually site the facilities in a more

timely way to meet the needs of the municipalities in our province, as well as assist them in building diversion capacity, green bin capacity, which the city of Toronto is already an example for in

the province of Ontario.

HOME CARE

Mr Vic Dhillon (Brampton West-Mississauga): My question is directed to the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. Peel Senior Link is a

not-for-profit neighbourhood organization which has been helping seniors remain independent and in their homes with dignity for as long as possible. They serve over 1,000 seniors who would

otherwise need to enter long-term-care facilities. Eight years of Tory government has seen support for important services such as these badly eroded. The shift from institutions to the community

has deeply affected the seniors in my riding. Groups like Peel Senior Link have had to pick up the slack for this off-loading of services without any proportional increase in funding.

In the recent election campaign, we maintained that if Ontarians required care and wanted it in their home, and if care costs less than receiving it in the

hospital or a nursing home, they should get it. This privilege was very welcome news for seniors and signalled our commitment to a government that worked with seniors and care providers for the

first time in a decade. Minister, could you please tell us the status of our home care initiatives which are so badly needed by seniors across Ontario?

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): In response to the excellent question by the member for Brampton, I'm pleased

to say that our government believes that the best kind of health care is the health care that's available closest to home. Ideally, if that health care can be delivered in the home in a fashion

that allows the person to stay there, then that's ideal. The challenge for our government is to make those investments in the necessary, complementary, community-based care and take some of the

pressure off the hospitals that have, for too long now, been asked to do too much.

I'm pleased to tell the member and all members that our government sees home care as an enormously important priority, and to expect that we will be able to

expand programs with a view toward enhancing the independence of our seniors and taking pressure off the institutions which have been asked to carry too much of the burden for too long.

Mr Dhillon: As Peel Senior Link points out, support for community care groups as required goes above and beyond home care initiatives. Could

you please provide the Legislature with some details concerning our commitment to working with the community support sector to ensure that seniors have the access and the assistance they need to

remain healthy and independent?

Hon Mr Smitherman: The nature of the programming that is provided works both with respect to homemaking, assisting people with things that

they need and can't take care of in their home, and also, being able to use our home care services to focus on things like post-acute stays -- in other words, people who are being sent home from

hospitals. In the case of the Ottawa Hospital, we've seen a study where too many people are being readmitted because of an inadequacy of post-acute care. That will be a priority area for us, as

will mental health-related home care and palliative and end-of-life care. These are all important areas for priority reinvestment. I'd like to thank the honourable member and all members for the

work that they do in supporting the community-based organizations that play such an incredibly important role in the delivery of health care services across Ontario.

CHILDREN'S SERVICES

Mr Ted Arnott (Waterloo-Wellington): My question is for the Minister of Children and Youth Services and it concerns the Healthy Babies,

Healthy Children program. This program is intended to help all children reach their full potential by ensuring that they get the best possible start in life. The House may recall that I brought

forward a private member's resolution highlighting the Healthy Babies, Healthy Children program in the spring of 1998. My resolution passed with the unanimous support of the House and was embraced

by the health minister of the day, the member for Kitchener-Waterloo. Later that spring, the provincial government responded in its 1998 budget, making a commitment to raise funding for this

program fivefold for a period of years.

Recently, Waterloo regional council approached me with the news that the Healthy Babies, Healthy Children program may be scaled back. The region may be

compelled to cut six full-time employees because of the way resources are being allocated by the Ministry of Health. This means families in my riding will receive less service. I ask the minister:

Is she concerned about this funding issue and the resulting loss of service that my constituents will suffer, and what is she prepared to do about it?

Hon Marie Bountrogianni (Minister of Children and Youth Services, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration): I'd like to thank the honourable

member for the question. Indeed, the Healthy Babies, Healthy Children program has been transferred to the Ministry of Children and Youth Services as of last Thursday, and we are very supportive of

this program.

For the year 2003-04, we spent $72.9 million for this program. I will look into your question more closely, but I am telling you that we are committed to this

program. The initial evaluations have shown that babies and children, having gone through this program, do better on measures of gross motor, fine motor and language development, and we are

undergoing another evaluation now to see the long-term effects in junior kindergarten and senior kindergarten.

Mr Arnott: I appreciate the minister's willingness to respond and her expression of support for the program, but she needs to know that, even

though the ministry's attempts to crunch dollars and shift resources away from Healthy Babies, Healthy Children may seem acceptable to her government, the social and economic costs down the road

would far outweigh any short-term savings today. Second, it would be a disgrace to learn that the first major reduction in this service for children happened because the Liberals have taken a

political approach and have started to starve it of resources simply because it was introduced by the previous government.

I suspect that the minister knows that with fewer service providers, fewer children will receive the service they need and, in turn, achieve success. The

children not assisted by the government run the risk of needing more intensive and expensive programs and services later in life. So I ask the minister, will she take action not only to prevent the

elimination of these staff positions, but will she agree to Waterloo region's request for full funding to deliver the Healthy Babies, Healthy Children program at the required level of service for

Waterloo region and across the province?

Hon Mrs Bountrogianni: I'd like to thank the member for the supplementary. I will look into that particular situation. I can tell you that we

have no plans of cutting back on this service, because it's exactly the kind of programming that we believe in on this side of the House: preventive measures which, in the long run, not only save

money but are the right things to do for children and families.

CHILDREN'S MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES

Ms Caroline Di Cocco (Sarnia-Lambton): My question is to the Minister of Children and Youth Services. Children's mental health services have

suffered greatly because of years of inadequate funding coupled with increasing demand. St Clair Child and Youth Services in my riding is one such agency that has to reduce crucial children's

services in order to deal with continuous underfunding. Minister, what are we doing to help out these agencies who are on the front lines in terms of children's mental health services in this

province?

Hon Marie Bountrogianni (Minister of Children and Youth Services, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration): I'd like to thank my colleague

from Sarnia for the question. Indeed, this is an area that is badly in need of repair. It has been neglected for the last 12 years. It's one of my personal priorities to improve children's mental

health in this province. What the experts are telling us is, yes, money is one issue, but another, just as important, issue is a reconfiguration of the system. My ministry is working very hard and

we are in the planning process of fixing this mess.

Ms Di Cocco: Thank you, Minister, for your commitment. St Clair Child and Youth Services is the only agency of its kind in my riding that

deals with preventive care for high-risk children. As I said in the previous question, it's being forced to cut back on those services. Minister, what can we say to those working on the front lines

in agencies like St Clair Child and Youth Services who have told me that they're hanging on by their fingernails, and to the families of these children who continue to need these services?

Hon Mrs Bountrogianni: Again, I'd like to thank my colleague and I would like to tell the people working at St Clair Child and Youth Services

and the families that the member from Sarnia-Lambton has been relentless in talking to me about this issue. I understand it is a huge issue.

There are all sorts of complexities to this one. The lack of coordination and integration is one reason why we created the children and youth ministry, in

order to better integrate and better coordinate the services out there, across ministries, across the education system. We are busily doing that. I can assure the member that we're working as fast

as we can.

MEDICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): To the Minister of Health: Earlier today you said that the government does intend to review the medical

review committee audit process. This is a Canadian Press story I just obtained. You further said, "The commitments that we've made" -- you made -- "with respect to the MRC are commitments that we

intend to fulfill."

Let me remind you of what those commitments are. The Premier said, when he met with doctors in Niagara a year ago, "that all audits must be frozen until that

review" of the MRC audit process "is complete." In fact, your seatmate, the member for Windsor West, reinforcing that by way of her own commitment, said that "until the review is complete, we

believe that all audits should be frozen."

It has been six months now. There has been neither a review commenced nor audits frozen. Doctors continue to be persecuted. Why are you breaking that

promise?

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): The member will well know where we're at on this, because I've taken the

opportunity over the past several hours to keep him well-informed.

What I'm pleased to tell the House is that today our government is announcing that the distinguished retired Supreme Court justice, Peter Cory, an

international jurist of some extraordinary reputation, has agreed to conduct a review of the MRC process and get on with that almost immediately.

Mr Kormos: Well, you see, the problem is that the promise was to freeze, to suspend, to put a moratorium on all audits. It was a very clear

promise made by the Premier --

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): By the former health critic.

Mr Kormos: -- made by the former health critic, made by every Liberal candidate across this province in the course of the election campaign,

when the matter was put to them.

Doctors continue to be persecuted, to come under attack by an audit process that is arbitrary, that is fundamentally unfair, that took the life of Dr Anthony

Hsu a year ago and continues to condemn doctors in this province. You made a promise to freeze, to suspend, to place a moratorium on the audits until the review was completed. You're going to

commence a review; why aren't you going to keep your promise to suspend, freeze, put a moratorium on audits until that review is completed?

Hon Mr Smitherman: I would like to inform the member, indeed all members, that earlier today I had the opportunity to speak with that

gentleman's widow. I explained to her that our government's priority was to get on with the review and that upon review of the challenge of trying to bring in a freeze or a moratorium, it was found

that legislation would be required to do that.

Interjections.

Hon Mr Smitherman: Instead, we have committed to engage Mr Justice Cory, a distinguished jurist, to ask him to do his work on an expedited

basis.

I agree, based on the heckling that I'm hearing, that there would be the opportunity, I would hope, for speedy passage of any legislative changes that are

necessary as a result of the work of Mr Justice Cory.

NURSES

Mrs Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener-Waterloo): My question is also for the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. With each passing day, we

discover that your words about increasing access to services and health care providers in this province are simply that: They are words. There are no actions.

We've just heard from my colleague that the Healthy Babies, Healthy Children program is losing some of its funding. Yesterday, when I asked you to commit

$6,000 to residents in long-term-care facilities, you refused to do so. In fact, we learned yesterday that you actually were clawing back $15 million in property taxes. So the level of service for

our seniors, our frail, our elderly, is decreasing, as is the level of care.

Well, today I have a copy of a letter from the Lake of the Woods District Hospital in Kenora, a hospital that you know is facing a pending crisis in nursing

human resources. Despite your promise to hire 8,000 more nurses, and $50 million, you have not done so. Why is this hospital and 127 other hospitals not getting money for more nurses?

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I find it rather remarkable that that woman, who was for a very lengthy period

Interjections.

Hon Mr Smitherman: I'm sorry. I meant no offence. If there was any, I apologize -- that member who for 30 months served as the Minister of

Health in this province, who during her day had $400 million targeted toward an initiative to improve the percentages of full-time nursing and achieved little or next to no improvement whatsoever,

could stand and lecture me about the nursing agenda in this province.

We targeted resources to hospitals at the end of the fiscal year, to the 33 largest hospitals, because it was the expert advice of nursing officials that that

was the best opportunity to get immediate results. The immediate results are being proven in those 33 hospitals, where nurses every single day are being given full-time opportunities that they did

not have before. This government is committed to restoring the foundations of nursing in this province. We will rebuild nursing.

That member's leader, when he was Premier, looked across at nurses and said that they're Hula Hoops, that they're redundant. For you to stand in this place and

try to take --

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Thank you.

Mrs Witmer: I would have to say I am very disappointed in the rhetoric. The member knows full well that I set up a nursing task force. We

implemented every recommendation. We put forward $385 million and created 12,000 nursing positions. Methinks that the minister doth protest too much. Roy Romanow said that in Canada there are too

many people living in remote areas who suffer because they don't have access to nurses or doctors, just like the people up in the Lake of the Woods, in Kenora. He said that incentives should be

offered to attract nurses to communities.

I ask you, why will you not restore the nursing incentive program which we put in place and which would go a long way to help underserviced communities recruit

much-needed nurses? Why aren't you taking the steps that we started?

Hon Mr Smitherman: The honourable member believes that talk is something that started. When I arrived at the Ministry of Health to see the

program that she is referencing in her question, what did I find? I found a program that was highlighted on a Web site but had never been enacted. The commitment that I make to that member and the

commitment that I make to nurses in this province, who would be willing to go and work in remote places, is that our government's plans, as we move forward very shortly, will clearly demonstrate

that we believe incentives are one part of a package of rebuilding the foundations of nursing in this province.

I really would encourage the honourable member to remember the days when she was the Minister of Health. Look back on your $385 million, and then look at the

state of nursing when your government left office on October 2. Here is what I'm pleased to offer as the challenge --

The Speaker: Thank you.

Hon Mr Smitherman: When I've been in the job 30 months I'll be very happy to compare it to your 30 months in the job, because nurses in this

province understand today that they have an advocate, and that they have a Premier who will never refer to them as redundant and will never suggest that they are as out of fashion as a Hula

Hoop.

POVERTY

Mr Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): I think this minister should ask the next question. I have a question for the Minister of Community and Social

Services. The recent report on poverty by the United Way shows a dramatic increase of poverty in Toronto.

Interjections.

Mr Ruprecht: Mr Speaker, if I can get my question in, it would be great. I was referring to the most recent report on poverty by the United

Way. The research they indicate is indeed very disturbing. The number of neighbourhoods where more than one quarter of the families live in poverty has doubled since 1981.

The United Way makes some specific recommendations that include investing in affordable housing, raising the minimum wage, helping new immigrants with

retraining and investing in programs for youth. What action is our government going to take on this most pressing issue of poverty?

Hon Sandra Pupatello (Minister of Community and Social Services, minister responsible for women's issues): Thank you so much to our member for

that question. We realize that Toronto is struggling on a number of fronts in confronting poverty issues in the city of Toronto. In fact, three ministers from the McGuinty government, along with

the mayor of Toronto, appeared at a summit not long ago. That summit was on homelessness, but many of these same issues arose. On that day our minister for infrastructure announced the first in a

long series of announcements around creating affordable housing in Ontario. That was the first for many years in this province, where we're actually moving toward sustainable growth in affordable

housing, a $56-million announcement on that day.

In addition, our minister responsible for universities and colleges has moved forward with a $4-million plan over the next couple of years to integrate our new

Canadians and allow them to continue working in the work and in the career they brought with them to this country. On a number of fronts, we experience difficulties. Our government is prepared to

address them.

Mr Ruprecht: Let me point out another very disturbing fact. That is the dramatic increase in the number of visible minorities who are poor. In

1981, visible minority families accounted for just 37.4% of the total of poor families. By 2001, their numbers had risen to 77.5%. We must not lose our caring, multicultural society where

opportunities are open to all. What specific steps are you prepared to take in order to preserve our city as a place where everyone has a chance to break out of this cycle of extreme poverty?

Hon Ms Pupatello: The members probably realize that this government understands a multi-prong approach across several ministries. Our

government is committed to raise rates of social assistance and ODSP. We will be delivering on that promise. For many of those who live at or below the poverty line, this will be a significant step

forward.

Let me mention too our Minister of Labour, who announced for the first time in years a raise to the minimum wage, which will significantly assist those people

who are living at or below the poverty line. Let's go further than that. The last government enacted policies to education that stopped the use of schools as community hubs and community centres.

This government will be reversing that. Our Minister of Education will take schools and put them back in the centre of communities, in particular in those areas of Toronto that are of most

concern.

We appreciate that all our ministers have to come together for solutions. We will be pleased in April to be working with the mayor of Toronto again on a summit

he is bringing together on affordable housing.

AGRICULTURAL POLICY FRAMEWORK

Mr Ernie Hardeman (Oxford): My question is to the Minister of Agriculture and Food. Myself and the farmers of Ontario were very pleased to

hear you've extended the deadline for farmers to make their contributions to the Canadian agricultural income stabilization program from the end of April to the end of June. Obviously both you and

I have attended the information meetings on the CAIS program.

We all know that farmers are very concerned about some of the aspects of the program, beyond the fact that it's very difficult to understand some of the

program or the information, such as I went to. I came out thinking I knew less leaving the meeting than I knew when I was going in. So it's a very difficult program to understand.

While I'm sure farmers are somewhat relieved to have a meagre deadline extension, can you explain why we were the last province to extend the deadline and why

we didn't see fit to extend it to the federal deadline of December 31?

Hon Steve Peters (Minister of Agriculture and Food): When this government moved forward with the signing of the Agricultural Policy Framework

in December 2003, we moved forward in consultation with the agricultural community, unlike many steps the previous government had taken of just acting unilaterally, without consultation. We worked

very closely with the Ontario Agricultural Commodity Council to make sure that before Ontario signed on with the federal government, this was a program that was going to work for Ontario. The green

light was given from the agricultural commodity council.

One of the issues the member raises was that we were able to negotiate an annual review of the program. We know this is a new program and we want to find out

how this program works. The annual review is going to give us that opportunity. The deadline: We wanted to encourage as many people to sign up as early as possible, because this is a program that

is going to help farmers for many years into the future. The deadline extension was granted as a request of the Ontario Federation of Agriculture.

Mr Hardeman: Now that safety net funds flow through the CAIS program, can you ensure farmers that it's a good deal?

I just want to correct the record, Mr Speaker. The minister suggested that the previous government wasn't working with the agricultural community to sign the

agricultural policy framework implementation agreement that the minister signed one day before the federal minister left office. I want to point out that the reason Helen Johns, the minister of the

day, did not sign the agreement was because the total farm community said, "Don't sign the agreement, because it's not a good deal for Ontario's farmers." We saw no changes, or very minimal

changes, made in the agreement when this minister decided to sign it on behalf of the farmers, against the wishes of the farm community. I think it's inappropriate for the minister to suggest that

we did not consult with the farmers and that he did.

Many farmers are concerned that the new program is designed to reduce the government's investment in agriculture. Can you assure this House and the farmers of

Ontario that in the upcoming provincial budget, investment into the safety net program for Ontario farmers will not be less than the money paid out this year to Ontario's farm community?

Hon Mr Peters: I would really encourage the member to stand up and speak to John Gillespie, the chairman of the Ontario Agricultural Commodity

Council, and challenge John Gillespie that they didn't give the green light for this to move forward. We did consult with the agricultural community and we're going to continue to consult with the

agricultural community --

Mr Hardeman: They didn't want it.

Hon Mr Peters: I'd like to know who didn't want it. Mr Speaker, my apologies.

Starting this evening and throughout tomorrow, the federal-provincial-territorial ministers are meeting, and one of the items on the agenda is the agricultural

policy framework. We want to make sure there's a program that works and is in the best interests of the farmers of Ontario.

This government has made the commitment to the wedge funding, to make sure that the three-year transition takes place in support of the agricultural community.

We've also offered those assurances to the agricultural community that those companion programs that are in place, such as the self-directed risk management program for the horticultural industry

or the market revenue insurance program, are programs in transition. We're going to work with the agricultural community to transition those programs to new programs that work in the best interests

of Ontario farmers.

GREENBELT STRATEGY

Mr Wayne Arthurs (Pickering-Ajax-Uxbridge): My question is for the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Since being elected to this

assembly, I have been approached by numerous recreational facility operators and landowners with applications and interest in recreational facilities that have been impacted under the Oak Ridges

moraine legislation and/or the current zoning freeze, which is part of the proposed greenbelt strategy. The greenbelt strategy will be part of the urban shadow for millions of Ontarians.

Minister, I can give you a very specific example of a ski hill operator who wants to enhance their facilities to make the property usable year-round, of new

applications for golf driving ranges, and interest by community organizations in establishing sports fields. Will there be significant opportunities for active recreational pursuits as part of the

greenbelt strategy? If so, how will this be encouraged?

Hon John Gerretsen (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, minister responsible for seniors): I know the member has a great interest in

this matter. The greenbelt legislation is all about responsible economic growth. The sprawl we currently have is about bad economic growth and bad economic policy. Clear limits on development will

protect the greenbelt for the long term and ensure that development is directed into those areas where services are actually planned.

The Greenbelt Task Force that was appointed approximately six weeks ago has been meeting on a weekly basis in order to set out and determine the criteria and

make recommendations in that regard. They are looking at the kinds of issues the member has raised here today. I'm sure when they're ready to report some time in the middle of June of this year,

there will be policies recommended by them that will not only be good for the overall greenbelt but will also be good for the individual operators in the area.

Mr Arthurs: Minister, my supplementary question: At the end of the day, with the establishment of a greenbelt commission or similar body, will

it have independent authority? In other words, will it be empowered not only to manage but to take specific action on the broad range of interests of the millions of Ontarians who will use that

greenbelt?

Hon Mr Gerretsen: That, of course, is a major area of concern as well. The task force will also be making recommendations with respect to the

kind of governance model that we want for the future. There are different models possible. We could be looking at the Niagara Escarpment model, we could be looking at the Oak Ridges moraine model,

or other models that will have, as a main purpose, the protection of the greenbelt area. The development industry wants to know where it can develop and the environmental community wants to know

what's going to be environmentally protected. That's the main criteria of the task force currently, and that's the main criteria of the greenbelt legislation in general. People want to know where

development can take place and what will be protected for generations to come.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I have a question for the Minister of Health. Is your government going to pay 85% of the capital costs of

reconstruction at the Sudbury Regional Hospital? Yes or no?

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): What I've indicated to the people of Sudbury -- we had a terrific summit a week

ago, last Monday night. I think that has been widely reported in the member's media. I made the comment that I felt very strongly that, as it relates to the Sudbury hospital and the Thunder Bay

Regional Hospital as well, a strong case has been made to take a look at the contribution level of the provincial government. I further told the member's community, the representatives from the

hospital and the voluntary board leadership that we would be back in the Sudbury community in a period of four to eight weeks from then to very specifically announce what funding arrangements we

were able to come to. I would tell the member that I look forward to seeing her at that event.

Ms Martel: Minister, it wasn't a trick question. It's not a difficult question, but it's a question that's very important for our community

because, you see, your colleague the Minister of Northern Development and Mines was very clear before and during the election. He insisted that the provincial government should pay for 85% of the

capital costs of reconstruction at the Sudbury Regional Hospital. You're the government now. This important decision, this election promise, is in your hands now. I ask you again: Is your

government going to pay 85% of the costs of capital reconstruction at the Sudbury Regional Hospital? Yes or no?

Hon Mr Smitherman: I'm pleased to join with the honourable member in recognizing the championing efforts of the now Minister of Northern

Development. The results of the summit clearly indicated to the people of Sudbury that the Sudbury Regional Hospital does reflect on the function of the health care system in northeastern Ontario

-- a very significant element. What I'm pleased to tell the honourable member is that the hospital in Sudbury and the hospital in Thunder Bay, as a result of the interventions of this government,

and in particular of that minister, enjoy a much brighter future than they ever have.

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

Ms Laurie Scott (Haliburton-Victoria-Brock): My question today is to the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities. I've risen in the

House because many times the minister, when we've drawn her attention to the tuition freeze and the impact it would have on the colleges and universities, has stated in her responses that it's

going to be good news for colleges and universities. Can you share that good news with us today?

Hon Mary Anne V. Chambers (Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities): I'm really pleased to have the interest of the member for

Haliburton-Victoria-Brock. This is new interest from this previous government, given what they have done to undermine the post-secondary education system. You only have to wait another day.

Ms Scott: I'd like to draw attention to the over 135,000 spaces that were created in colleges and universities by this government. There is

speculation running rampant that you're going to short-change the colleges and universities. Can you assure the colleges and universities today that they will receive full compensation for the

money they have lost because of the tuition freeze?

Hon Mrs Chambers: This is a very interesting situation. I'm being questioned by a member of a party that added 137% to the tuition fees that

students were paying in colleges and universities, a government that cut student funding by half, and a government that removed $400 million in operating funding in --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Order. Could I have the minister respond without the noise that's coming from the opposition?

Hon Mrs Chambers: Let me repeat what I said before. This is a very interesting situation. The member opposite is speaking to a post-secondary

education sector that was cut by her government by $400 million in 1997 alone. Student aid was cut by half. Tuition fees over the last 10 years were increased by 137%. I cannot imagine why they're

suddenly so interested, but do you know what? They'll find out the answer to the question tomorrow.

ENERGY CONSERVATION

Mr Phil McNeely (Ottawa-Orléans): My question is for the Chair of Management Board. Last week you announced your ministry's plan for

energy conservation within the Ontario public service. Last week in the House members of the opposition accused your ministry of making a reannouncement on the government energy conservation plan.

Can you assure all members that last week's announcement was the announcement of a new and aggressive energy conservation plan brought forth by this government to further reduce our energy

consumption?

Hon Gerry Phillips (Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet): Indeed, it is a new program. The previous government may have talked about

things, but we actually are going to do them. The target of the 10% reduction is a new target starting from now. It will mean that the province of Ontario will use about 62 million kilowatt hours

less per year.

It will require some capital investment in lighting refits, in automatic programs to shut off our lights, in fixing our heating systems. All these things were

not invested in over the last few years. It does require an investment, but it will result in substantial savings of electricity and electricity expenditures.

So I can assure the member from Ottawa-Orléans that it is a new target of 10% and we have a new program to make certain that we in fact deliver on this

commitment once again.

Mr McNeely: Can you tell me about any projects that are taking place in the Ottawa area?

Hon Mr Phillips: We are investing in several projects in the Ottawa area. I might say again to the public that these are challenging economic

times in terms of dealing with our fiscal situation. We are allocating a high priority on the budget that we have for what's called the Ontario Realty Corp for the maintenance in our buildings. We

are putting a first priority on energy saving. Several of the major projects will indeed be in the Ottawa area -- several million dollars of investment there -- all designed to cut our energy use

by 10%, to save well over $5 million a year in energy costs for the province of Ontario and to help lead by example.

Our Premier and the Minister of Energy have said that we are going to create a conservation culture in the province of Ontario. I think the people of Ontario

will expect that their government would lead by example, and indeed we are, right across the province.

FIREARMS CONTROL

Mr Robert W. Runciman (Leeds-Grenville): I have a question to the Attorney General. I'm sure the Attorney General is aware of the

$1-billion-plus boondoggle at the federal level called the long gun registry. We know that seven provincial governments in this country, and the territories as well, have indicated they will not

prosecute charges laid under the long gun registry. This government, through the Attorney General, has yet to indicate its position with respect to prosecutions. Will the minister stand in his

place today and indicate that he will join with the six other provinces and the territories across this country and ensure law-abiding Ontarians that this new government will not prosecute under

the long gun registry?

Hon Michael Bryant (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs, minister responsible for democratic renewal): I thank the

member for his question. In fact, it turns out that when you were a government minister, police and prosecutors would use violations of the gun registry laws, not against farmers and hunters, but

in the context of organized crime, in the context of biker gangs. That's what your government did. At the same time, as I think the member knows, the federal government, the Martin government, has

indicated they are going to be reviewing the gun registry and they will be coming forward with recommendations on that. We look forward to that.

But we will continue to prosecute offences to the full extent of the law, in the same way the previous government used that law to do so. We also look forward

to whatever recommendations or changes might be made to the gun registry and, when we see them, we'll come forward with announcements on whatever changes we might make on the prosecution side.

PETITIONS

TILLSONBURG DISTRICT

MEMORIAL HOSPITAL

Mr Ernie Hardeman (Oxford): I have a petition signed by some 1,600 people in my community. It is to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Tillsonburg District Memorial Hospital has asked for ministerial consent to make capital changes to its facility to accommodate the placement of a

satellite dialysis unit; and

"Whereas the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care has already given approval for the unit and committed operational dollars to it; and

"Whereas the community has already raised the funds for the equipment needed;

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

"That the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care give his final approval of the capital request change from the Tillsonburg District Memorial Hospital

immediately, so those who are in need of these life-sustaining dialysis services can receive them locally, thereby enjoying a better quality of life without further delay."

I add my signature to this petition, as I totally agree with it.

ALEXANDER GRAHAM BELL PARKWAY

Mr Dave Levac (Brant): This is a petition that's written to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas Alexander Graham Bell, renowned inventor of society-altering technological inventions, such as the telephone, greatly revolutionized the daily lives

of people in Ontario, Canada and" indeed "the world; and

"Whereas Alexander Graham Bell's contribution to science, technology and society as a whole, were in part developed and tested while he lived in Brantford,

Ontario; and

"Whereas Brantford lies at the heart of the

section of Highway 403 which runs from Woodstock to Burlington;

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

"To adopt and pass into law Dave Levac's private member's bill, Bill 44, the Alexander Graham Bell Parkway Act, renaming Highway 403 between Woodstock and

Burlington as a tribute to this great inventor" and Canadian.

I give my petition to Sarah and I sign my name to it.

WATER SERVICES

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): I'm pleased to present a petition on behalf of the constituents of the riding of Durham:

"Whereas the riding of Durham is made up of many small communities such as Hampton, Tyrone, Blackstock, Newtonville, Kendal, Greenbank, Prince Albert, Epsom

and" many "others; and

"Whereas not all citizens live in larger cities such as Toronto, where access to municipal water service is taken for granted; and

"Whereas smaller communities have little, if any, access to municipal water services; and

"Whereas Ontario's smaller villages and hamlets are home to many community buildings such as churches, community halls and arenas; and

"Whereas those responsible for halls, churches, arenas and other community facilities take pride in ensuring these buildings have access to the highest quality

potable water; and

"Whereas churches, community halls and arenas are at the heart of rural communities and it is important that they remain open to the public" and to the

community, "with full services available;

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

"That the implementation of regulation 170/03 as it relates to community halls and similar facilities be delayed; and

"That fair and open reviews of the regulation be conducted with respect to its impact on" rural community hall facilities; and

"That the province of Ontario ensure halls, churches, arenas and other public facilities on private wells comply with water safety standards that are

reasonable and appropriate."

I am pleased to support this and my constituents of the riding of Durham.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

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

"Whereas the Sudbury Regional Hospital is a regional referral centre, serving patients from across northeastern Ontario;

"Whereas the burden of raising money to pay the local share of the hospital reconstruction ... has fallen primarily onto local residents;

"Whereas city council and local residents have already committed more money to the project than we were required to;

"Whereas imposing a private mortgage scheme on the hospital to pay more costs at the local level would be disastrous for patients, hospital programs and

staff;

"Therefore

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

"We call on the Liberal government to fund 85% of the capital costs of reconstruction at the Sudbury Regional Hospital."

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

ONTARIO DISABILITY

SUPPORT PROGRAM

Mr Lorenzo Berardinetti (Scarborough Southwest): I have a petition to present. It's addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the most vulnerable individuals in our society deserve to be treated with respect and dignity;

"Whereas the previous government ignored the poor in order to pay for irresponsible tax cuts for the wealthy; and

"Whereas barriers need to be removed in order to ensure full participation from Ontarians;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to introduce a cost-of-living increase to the ODSP program as soon as possible, and to

legislate changes that will ensure Ontarians with disabilities can participate fully in a stronger Ontario."

I agree with the petition and affix my signature to it.

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

Mr Norman W. Sterling (Lanark-Carleton): This is a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario from Fitzroy Harbour, Lanark Highlands

township and Mississippi Mills township in Lanark county:

"Whereas Premier Dalton McGuinty stated clearly in his election platform that he is committed to improving the Ontario drug benefit program for seniors and has

more recently said he is considering breaking this pledge by reducing coverage for seniors;

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

"That the provincial government fulfill its promise and start standing up for seniors by protecting the Ontario drug benefit program and the vital assistance

it provides to those who require prescription medications."

I have signed that.

NATUROPATHIC MEDICINE

Mr Ted McMeekin (Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Aldershot): A petition to the Legislative Assembly of the province of Ontario:

"We, the undersigned residents of Canada, are eager to see our health care system strengthened and the health care choice made available to all who live in

Ontario ... implore the Legislative Assembly for the province of Ontario, its ministers and its members, to use their offices to immediately amend the Regulated Health Professions Act ... to permit

registered nurses to take" direction "from naturopathic doctors in order to act effectively as a medical team and provide the care and treatments those health professionals and their patients feel

are appropriate and necessary.

"At present, our rights to choose our own medical services delivered by a trained, competent and professional nursing staff is threatened by the outdated and

narrow

interpretation of" what constitutes "a `health professional.' At this point in time, the Regulated Health Professions Act excludes regulated, well-trained and licensed naturopathic doctors,

and in turn limits a naturopathic doctor's ability to order treatments that should be administered by well-trained" personnel, including "licensed registered nurses.

"The Ontario College of Nurses is at present adjudicating against two registered nurses for their participation in the delivery of health care needs and is

using the Regulated Health Professions Act as a basis in their allegations. We find these actions to be abhorrent and draconian, and we therefore petition this honourable body to act with speed and

clarity to amend all legislation to represent the right of choice for the patient in their selection of medical treatment, and the right of patients to expect their treatment be administered by

trained, competent and appropriately regulated health care professionals. This situation has come about due to 13 years of neglect on behalf of the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, and in

particular, the ministers of health, in addressing the incorporation of naturopathic doctors into the Regulated Health Professions Act;

"We, your constituents, would like naturopathic medicine to be regulated under the RHPA without delay." That is the basis of this petition today.

"Please don't abandon us in our time of need."

I present that on behalf of some 60 or so constituents who have affixed their signature.

SEWAGE SLUDGE

Mr Jim Wilson (Simcoe-Grey): I have a petition that was sent to me by the town of Wasaga Beach.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas we, the residents Wasaga Beach, wish to bring forth our concerns regarding the transfer of approximately 5,700 tonnes of 14-year-old sludge, which

contains metals from the North Simcoe transfer station, to our recently closed landfill site. To date, there are no EBR requirements for hauled sewage.

"Due to this and the geography of the Wasaga Beach site being so close to the longest freshwater beach in the world and other sensitive areas, there exists a

threat to the environment and the public's health. The questionable product should be moved to a desolate location. Once damaged, the environment and people cannot be replaced;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows: To stop the sludge from being transferred to Wasaga Beach."

I thank the town and the clerk, Eric Collingwood, for sending me that petition. It's several dozens of pages long, signed by hundreds of people. As a resident

of Wasaga Beach myself, I'm very happy to sign this.

TUITION

Mr Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): I have a petition from the Canadian Federation of Students. This one comes from the student association,

Fédération Canadienne des Étudiantes et Étudiants, from George Brown College and it reads as follows:

"Whereas average tuition fees in Ontario are the second-highest in Canada; and

"Whereas average undergraduate tuition fees in Ontario have more than doubled in the past 10 years; and

"Whereas tuition fees for deregulated programs have, in certain cases, doubled and tripled; and

"Whereas Statistics Canada has documented a link between increasing tuition fees and diminishing access to post-secondary education; and

"Whereas four other provincial governments have taken a leadership role by freezing and reducing tuition fees;

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

"Freeze tuition fees for all programs at their current levels; and

"Take steps to reduce the tuition fees of all graduate programs, post-diploma programs and professional programs for which tuition fees have been deregulated

since 1998."

Since I agree --

Mr Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): Sign it, Tony.

Mr Ruprecht: Yes, the member is correct. I will sign it and I will pass it on to the page to give to you, Mr Speaker.

OAK RIDGES MORAINE

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): It's a pleasure to present a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, on behalf of the people of the riding

of Durham.

"Whereas the Oak Ridges moraine is an ecological treasure that warrants protection and careful stewardship now and in future generations;

"Whereas the province of Ontario has recognized the importance of the moraine with the passage of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act, 2001, to protect

natural and water resources, preserve agricultural lands and provide clarity on where development can and cannot occur;

"Whereas the act has resulted in certain limitations on citizens' use of their property within the moraine;

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

"That the Parliament of Ontario take action to ensure there are no undue restrictions on Oak Ridges moraine residents making minor improvements to their homes

and property; and

"That the province of Ontario work together with municipalities and land owners to ensure the

interpretation and enforcement of the act continues to fully

protect the moraine while also giving residents the right to fair and reasonable enjoyment of their property."

I am pleased to endorse and sign this petition on their behalf.

CORMORANTS

Mr Michael A. Brown (Algoma-Manitoulin): I have a great number of petitions.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Ministry of Natural Resources continues to study the impact of cormorants and possible management strategies without examining a managed cull;

and

"Whereas the Ministry of Natural Resources has committed to experimental control of cormorants at specific sites; and

"Whereas cormorant populations in the Great Lakes basin have increased to 450,000 over the past several years, are continuing to grow, and are significantly

depleting fish stocks; and

"Whereas numerous scientific studies have clearly documented the serious negative impact on fish populations and habitats in the Great Lakes basin; and

"Whereas cormorant populations are no longer in need of special protection;

"Therefore

be it resolved that we petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to:

"(1) immediately begin to significantly reduce cormorant populations in areas where they are having a demonstrably negative impact on local fisheries through

managed culls;

"(2) make public the results of all Ministry of Natural Resources science assessing the impact of cormorants;

"(3) remove the special protected status on cormorants and treat them the same as crows, as identified in the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act."

I'll present these. I have signed the petition, and I give them to Mason to present to the table.

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

Mr Gerry Martiniuk (Cambridge): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas the Liberal government has said in their election platform that they're committed to improving the Ontario drug benefit program for seniors and are

now considering de-listing drugs and imposing user fees on seniors;

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

"To halt the consideration of imposing an income test, de-listing drugs for coverage under the Ontario drug benefit plan or putting in place user fees for

seniors, and to maintain the present Ontario drug benefit plan for seniors to cover medications."

I am pleased to sign this petition.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

THRONE SPEECH DEBATE /

DÉBAT SUR LE DISCOURS DU TRÔNE

Resuming the debate adjourned on March 22, 2004, on the motion for an address in reply to the speech of His Honour the Lieutenant Governor at the opening of

the session.

Mrs Linda Jeffrey (Brampton Centre): I rise today to speak on the motion in support of the adoption of the speech from the throne, this being

my maiden speech in the House.

Applause.

Mrs Jeffrey: Thank you. Isaac Asimov wrote, "It is change, continuing change, inevitable change that is the dominant factor in society today.

No sensible decision can be made any longer without taking into account not only the world as it is, but the world as it will be."

Mr Speaker, I failed to remember to tell you that I'm sharing my time with the member for Thornhill.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr Bruce Crozier): You can tell me at any time, but that's fine.

Mrs Jeffrey: Bramptonians, like all Ontarians, understand the need for change. They understand why, after eight years, it was time for change.

This throne speech sets the stage for real, positive change. The constituents of Brampton Centre understand this, and they have sent me here with a mandate to fix our schools, protect medicare, and

ensure clean air, safe water and properly inspected food. They also want me to make certain their money is spent wisely.

In the short time I have been here, I am proud to be part of a government that has acted decisively on the need for a new hospital in Brampton. A hospital is

more than bricks and mortar. It is one of the most important institutions a community can build. When fully operational, the new hospital will add 65% more hospital beds, double the number of

operating rooms and add 1,500 staff, including 200 physicians.

The Premier and the Minister of Health are to be congratulated for their swift action on this issue. It is no coincidence that the honourable Bill Davis, in

his maiden speech in 1960, talked about the need for a new hospital in Peel, and then called on the Minister of Health for assistance. Within a week of being sworn in, I was able to meet with

Minister Smitherman, Brampton Mayor Susan Fennell, the member for Brampton West-Mississauga and the member for Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale.

The minister recognized the need for immediate action and stated his intention at that meeting for a quick resolution. One month less a day after cabinet was

sworn in, this government announced its intention to not only build a hospital, but to restructure the deal so that it is, and will always be, a publicly owned, publicly controlled and publicly

accountable hospital.

Yet there is a small group, friends of the third party, who will stop at nothing to derail this vital project. They would rather we paid millions of taxpayers'

dollars in penalties to cancel this hospital and turn back the clock. This is an irresponsible action that I will never support.

They cannot accept the results of the election, where they made the hospital in Brampton their key issue. The people in Brampton Centre understand clearly the

options available. They understood our position. They understood the third party's position, and they chose to have a publicly owned, publicly controlled and publicly accountable hospital.

The minister and his team restructured the previous government's contract to ensure that the hospital remains in public hands. The minister has done it in a

way that ensures the project goes through and stays on schedule. For some, though, there is a refusal to accept the people's decision. They would rather we spend hundreds of thousands of dollars,

actually millions of dollars, on costly and time-consuming court challenges -- money that could hire more nurses, buy desperately needed medical equipment or reduce wait times in emergency rooms,

not to mention the additional costs associated with delaying this project.

Our government will commit over a quarter of a billion dollars to this new hospital over the life of the project. It is a real and tangible commitment to the

growing community of Brampton and Peel, and my community is doing its

part in raising money for the new hospital. Over $150 million needs to be raised before the doors open, and it will be.

A new hospital makes good economic sense. The economic development from such a project will have a significant impact throughout our community. From new jobs

to new businesses to new housing, the hospital project will have an economic multiplier effect on Brampton and the surrounding communities. The new William Osler Health Centre will make an

important contribution to Brampton, but also to our region and to the province as a whole. I look forward to inviting members to the opening of this new facility.

Our second greatest challenge facing us is providing excellence for all in education. Our education system must serve its most important end, that being

education and the preparation of our children, so that one day they will take our place as the heads of families, heads of businesses and heads of government. Our schools must stand as castles,

strong, proud and majestic. Yet, in order to build a school that is to be a castle, it must be built on a strong foundation. That foundation is the unwavering commitment of our government and our

commitment contained in our platform: Excellence for all.

In the recognition that education does not end in high school, we are committed to improving post-secondary education. Such steps have already been taken in my

riding. In 2002, Sheridan's board of governors approved a new Davis campus plan that focuses on advanced manufacturing, allied health and justice, which fit well with the current economic and

manufacturing priorities in the automotive, aerospace and food services, as well as telecommunication industries. Ensuring the success of students is one of my priorities and one of this

government's. I look forward to working with the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities as well as the Minister of Finance to see how we can ensure a world-class system while responsibly

managing our finances.

Like many of my colleagues here, I am a former municipal politician. Municipal politics is a great love of mine, and as the late US Speaker Tip O'Neill once

said, "All politics is local." I share in that belief. I most definitely enjoyed serving the people of ward 2 in Brampton for the last 12 years as their city councillor. It never occurred to me to

seek provincial office until the member for Vaughan-King-Aurora approached me and asked me to consider running for the position of MPP for Brampton Centre. I told him I wasn't interested and to

please go away, "Please find someone else more suitable." Yet he was extremely persistent, and despite my refusal, returned many times over the next few months, just as enthusiastic as he was that

very first time. I hate to admit it, but the member for Vaughan-King-Aurora was right, and I thank him for his persistence.

After 12 years of advocating on behalf of my constituents, I came to realize that nearly all the problems that affected my municipality were of a provincial

nature. It has often been noted that municipalities are children of the province. Now, as the new member for Brampton Centre, I intend to help my constituents by getting things done here at Queen's

Park. So I would like to thank the people of Brampton Centre for their confidence in me. I would like to thank my family and my supporters for their unwavering encouragement, and I would like to

thank the Premier and the member for Vaughan-King-Aurora for their belief in me.

Brampton is a growing and vibrant community that continues to attract people from all over the world. From our roots in England 150 years ago, we now welcome

people from Southeast Asia, the Caribbean, Europe and the Middle East. Between the period of 1991 to 2001, the population of the city of Brampton increased by 91,000 people, or 39%. The rate of

growth of Brampton consistently doubles, sometimes triples, the rate of growth in the GTA.

Brampton is at the crossroads of almost every major highway in the GTA. Highways 401, 403, 410, 407 and 10 either pass through my borders or border the

community, bringing goods, services and people into and out of the city of Brampton. Because Highway 410 is vital to the economies of Brampton and surrounding areas, I am committed to seeing the

expansion that has been promised by previous governments for so many years. In this respect, I am encouraged by the Minister of Transportation's recent remarks in the Legislature on this matter. I

believe that the Highway 410 expansion is long overdue and its completion will significantly contribute to the economic growth of Brampton, Peel and this province.

Mr Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity to speak today. I take great pride in being part of this Legislature. As Margaret Campbell, the trail-blazing

Liberal member for St George-St David, noted, a woman's place is in this House. I am honoured to be the first woman to represent Brampton Centre. Our job is to help our children realize their

potential. It is our job to provide assistance for those who face sickness and disease. It is our job to bring justice to those who have been wronged or harmed, and it is our job to help create

opportunity for all. In short, it is our job to leave Ontario a better place than we found it. That is our task as legislators. This throne speech sets out to deal with these issues, and that is

why I support it.

Mr Mario G. Racco (Thornhill): I'm honoured to share the time with the member for Brampton Centre in making our maiden speech.

I am deeply honoured to be here in the Legislative Assembly of Ontario among my fellow members of the provincial Parliament. We have been given a duty by the

people of this great province: to make the decisions which will affect their lives now and into the future. We are here, as individuals, to represent the views and opinions of our constituent

ridings, and we are, as a body, to represent the hopes and needs of the province as a whole. May we never forget that responsibility.

I represent the riding of Thornhill and Concord, which was newly created in 1999. The riding includes parts of the town of Markham and the city of Vaughan but

takes its name from the old village of Thornhill, which is located on both sides of Yonge Street immediately north of Steeles Avenue. Parts of the new riding of Thornhill have received very

distinguished representation in the past: His Honour Alf Stong, currently a federal justice; the Honourable Don Cousens, now the mayor of the town of Markham; and the Honourable Greg Sorbara, now

the Liberal finance minister of Ontario. I am honoured to have been chosen as the newest representative for the area and I promise to continue the high level of service to its residents that was

delivered by its distinguished predecessors.

The riding takes its name from the village of Thornhill, which is named after Benjamin Thorne and was founded in 1794. It and surrounding communities grew

slowly and steadily until the mid-1970s. Since then, the area has boomed, in terms of business and industry as well as population. Its population is now just under 140,000 people living in 40,000

houses, each with an average income of over $85,000 per house per year. It is among the highest-educated ridings in the province, with 33% of the population having received a university education.

There are over 100,000 jobs available in the riding, including high-tech jobs, skilled manufacturing positions, thousands of small and medium corporations, as well as many large national and

multinational corporation headquarters. The riding can be described as one of new Canadians living side by side together with long-established residents, new cultures living next door to old

settler families, and a wide range of religious and cultural beliefs co-existing in peace.

Like many of my neighbours, I'm also an immigrant to Canada in search of a better life. Proud to have been accepted to this great country of Canada in Ontario,

I and my fellow residents have taken on the responsibility of helping to build a community we all want to live in. We wish for safe, clean neighbourhoods. We wish for a proper education for our

children. We wish for dependable health care, efficient infrastructure, and a good transportation system. We wish for good government.

I believe that Dalton McGuinty will deliver on all the issues that are important for Thornhill. For that, he needs all MPPs supporting him, instead of

bickering, accusations and the noise-making we hear quite often. We must provide leadership, and that is why I'm here. That is why all 103 of us should be here: to provide the people of our

individual ridings and the province of Ontario with good government. We were elected to do so, and nothing else.

I renew my promise now that I shall, as a member of this House, represent the people of Thornhill and Concord, and always represent the views of the residents

to the best of my ability. I am here on their behalf. That is why the people of Thornhill have elected me all six times I ran as a local councillor for the city of Vaughan. I will always be

thankful for that, and the fact that the same people who chose me also chose my wife in the last municipal election to represent them and replace me once I was elected here.

With that, let me say again how pleased I am to be here and trying to make a difference in this House, in this province and, hopefully, in this country. After

all, Ontario is the largest province, and what takes place in this House certainly provides leadership to the entire country.

When I came here, and still today, I was amazed how some members acted in this House. I felt that by coming here I was going to enter a House where decisions

were made, where serious discussions would take place, where philosophy was going to be discussed, instead of hearing bickering all over the place. Quite often, I have difficulty listening to what

people are saying because there is discussion going on all over the House which has nothing to do with the topic of discussion. I hope and trust that the minister responsible to make changes in

this House will be able to do so quickly so that we will spend more efficient time in making the decisions that are important to the people who have sent us here, instead of trying to argue

partisan discussion, which, at the end of the day, doesn't do anything for this province. Sometimes when I listen to what people have to say in this House, I wonder if my kids are watching me on

TV, because if they are, chances are I will not be able to feel as excited at being here. I believe that when the kids or anybody who watches this House on TV sees what does take place, I wonder

what they think of us.

Therefore, I guess I'm trying to stress a point that is so important to me. Please, let's make sure that we remember why we are here. We are here to make

changes. We are here to make a better system. We are here to make efficiency. Efficiency comes when everybody co-operates. When there is an issue that makes sense we should encourage it, whomever

is speaking. It doesn't matter which party it is. After all, at the end of the day, we will be judged individually by our ridings.

I have been in politics for 27 years and have participated in so many elections. It reminds me of how interesting it is that when we go door to door, people

really remember us based on what we do. Sure the political affiliation has some value, but people look at what we did in the House, how we represented the people and what kind of leadership we

provided in the community we represent. If all of us would see value in what I'm saying, surely we would be able to act much more professionally in this House.

Again, there are a number of issues that we know must be addressed. My party, the Liberal Party of Ontario, has made clear the commitments we want to deal

with. The other two parties in the House, it seems to me, are not that far away when it's time to identify the issues. What I would ask this House is that we try to co-operate in a way that we will

be able to achieve those issues sooner, quicker, so that not only will we do the right thing for the people of Ontario and Canada and the world, but we will also be able to spend more time in our

constituencies, with our families and with our children at home, instead of sitting here listening to bickering and nonsense.

With that, Mr Speaker, let me tell you again how honoured I am to be here. It took me 25 years to come here. Twenty-three years ago I tried to come to this

House, and unfortunately it took me this long to reach this location. I am so pleased and excited, and I hope the House will keep me at that level. With that in mind, let me thank you, Mr Speaker,

and everybody for listening to my speech.

The Deputy Speaker: Questions and comments?

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): It's a pleasure today to be here to witness the maiden speeches by the member from Brampton Centre and the member

from Thornhill. It is important. I would hope the member from Thornhill, with his most recent remarks, won't be disappointed by the process of democracy and full debate. I felt, and do feel, very

much the same as he does in my opening remarks, nervously made in 1995 after being elected here.

I admire and respect the experience the member from Thornhill brings to this place, serving on other levels of government, which is important. I can say it

reminded me much of my own background, in terms of how important our community, our province and our country are. In that regard, when raising my family, I found myself drawn, very much like

yourself, to try to make a change, to try to make a contribution, all in the context of the ideology of politics.

That's where this actually becomes rather unproductive at times, because our role in opposition is to point out those parts of legislation that we have a

problem with. I've always said that, from my experience, if you have three people in a room it's difficult to get them to agree on what time it is. Here the issues are far more complex, and the

solutions or suggestions are a series of options. Those options, over time, may not work, and all governments, I believe, try to move it forward.

But out of respect for your remarks and the 20-some years you spent in public office prior to getting here, I hop