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

October 25, 2004

38th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2004-Oct-25 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Monday 25 October 2004 Lundi 25 octobre 2004

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

AGRICULTURE INDUSTRY

TRANSIT FUNDING

NORTH YORK SENIORS CENTRE

CHILDREN'S TREATMENT CENTRE

VETERANS

LANDFILL

WILLIAM OSLER HEALTH CENTRE

TRANSIT FUNDING

SCHOOL BUS SAFETY

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

ACTIVE 2010

GREEN POWER GENERATION

MOOSE TAGS

GREEN POWER GENERATION

MOOSE TAGS

ACTIVE 2010

GREEN POWER GENERATION

MOOSE TAGS

VISITORS

ORAL QUESTIONS

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

HOSPITAL FUNDING

C DIFFICILE

TRANSIT FUNDING

FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL

FISCAL POLICIES

AUTISM SERVICES

ACTIVE 2010

ENERGY CONSERVATION

DETOX CENTRES

TRANSIT FUNDING

OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR GENERAL

HOSPITAL FUNDING

PETITIONS

CHILDREN'S HEALTH SERVICES

HEALTH CARE SERVICES

PHYSICAL EDUCATION

CHILDREN'S HEALTH SERVICES

HEALTH CARE SERVICES

CHIROPRACTIC SERVICES

LESLIE M. FROST CENTRE

GO TRANSIT SERVICE

CHILDREN'S HEALTH SERVICES

OPTOMETRISTS

CHIROPRACTIC SERVICES

HEALTH CARE

IMMIGRANTS' SKILLS

ORDERS OF THE DAY

LIQUOR LICENCE

AMENDMENT ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LES PERMIS D'ALCOOL

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

AGRICULTURE INDUSTRY

Mr Ernie Hardeman (Oxford): Today, the Ontario Federation of Agriculture issued a statement calling on the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and

Food to get the BSE money out to Ontario producers immediately. Geri Kamenz, vice-president of the OFA, stated, "We're at a point where we need to ask that the minister direct his staff to develop

and deliver the federal/provincial funding immediately.... The time for talk is long past. It is time to put the details and programs in front of people. It is time to pay those people who are due

a CAIS payment in short order."

Well, Mr Speaker, I agree it's high time Ontario farmers get the money they deserve. That's why BSE funding was the focus of our opposition motion last week, and

that's why many of our members spoke to it. We pointed out that the Alberta government had applications and administrative processes available as soon as the federal money was announced, while the

Ontario government was not ready.

The Ontario Farmer reported on October 19 that the first cattle set-aside auction had already been held and that most of the participants were from Alberta,

whose program was already up and running. It continued to say that no one in Ontario was able to take part because this province has yet to put in place any application system.

I ask, is this all our farmers are worth to this government? Our farmers are suffering because this government isn't competent with agricultural and rural

issues. I stand today to demand that the McGuinty government start treating safety net programs with the importance they deserve and make CAIS money available to the farmers of this province

immediately.

TRANSIT FUNDING

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): It appears as though we don't just have one bully left in the Liberal benches; a mini-bully was sent out

last Friday to attack Mayor David Miller and all of city council by suggesting that they are misleading the public when it comes to transportation/TTC funding.

The fact remains, and let's get the facts clear, that Mayor David Miller is standing up for the city of Toronto, which is his job, and is making it very clear to

the people of Toronto that the TTC is less well off than it was three years ago under the Tories. Can you believe that? That is a fact. The facts are that even though Toronto has only 21% of the

province's population, the TTC carries 61% of all Ontario's public transit riders. The mayor has made it very clear that his position is that it wants ridership to be 90% of the criteria.

The fact remains that this year the TTC is worse off under the Liberals than previously under the Tory government. We can't go on like this in this province.

They ran on "Choose change." Well, the change, when it comes to the TTC, is that they're actually less funded than they were under the previous Tories. Shame on them.

NORTH YORK SENIORS CENTRE

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): The member for Willowdale.

Applause.

Mr David Zimmer (Willowdale): Thank you, colleagues.

It's my pleasure today to congratulate the North York Seniors Centre, located in Willowdale, on its 30th anniversary. This organization, one of the first in

Ontario, has been bringing important services to the people of Willowdale since 1974. They started with just a small storefront operation in Cummer Plaza. Now their programs run out of several

sites in the riding and more than 7,000 seniors a year participate in the programs.

These people go the extra mile for my constituents. They have a van that will transport seniors to their medical appointments and grocery shopping when they

don't have any other way to get there. They run a lunch program that gives seniors who are frail or isolated the chance to get out and talk, visit and communicate with their friends. They'll even

set you up with a community volunteer who will call on you every day, just to make sure that you're safe, healthy and not in need.

When you're living alone in circumstances like this and concerned about the risk of a sudden health problem or even about a crime, that extra support network can

mean the difference between remaining independent and having to move out of your home.

Many of these programs would not be possible without the centre's 250 volunteers. I think it speaks to the excellence of the organization and the compassion of

the people in Willowdale that they support this.

I wish to congratulate the North York Seniors Centre on its 30th anniversary.

CHILDREN'S TREATMENT CENTRE

Mr Joseph N. Tascona (Barrie-Simcoe-Bradford): Simcoe county and York region remain the only areas in Ontario that do not have a children's

treatment centre. There are approximately 23,000 children and youth in Simcoe county and York region who have special needs. Approximately 6,000 of these children have multiple special needs that

require a range of core rehabilitation services, and currently the closest services are in Toronto.

Cindy DeCarlo, as a parent, knows first-hand how critical these services are for children to reach their full potential and fears that many of the existing

programs are in jeopardy due to the lack of funding. She says, and I agree, "Why should our children not have the same services as others living anywhere else in Ontario?"

In 2003, the Ministry of Health approved the implementation plan for the children's treatment centre. On September 17, the Minister of Children and Youth

Services, Dr Marie Bountrogianni, stated in a letter to me, "I understand the increasing pressures created by local growth in your region, and my ministry is working with the Simcoe York District

Health Council to find solutions.... I am impressed with the direction taken in the proposal with respect to coordination and integration. I assure you that we are taking a very serious look at

this issue for Simcoe county and York region."

It has already been approved. It's time to act, Minister, and release the funding for the children's treatment centre in Simcoe county and York region so that

core rehabilitation services can be delivered to the children and youth in these areas.

VETERANS

Mr Mario Sergio (York West): I would like to take this opportunity to draw the assembly's attention to what I and members of the

Italian-Canadian community regard as a very special occasion today. Today, nearing the close of the month-long ItalCanadaFest, we participated in a Queen's Park memorial service honouring those

valiant Canadians who sacrificed their young lives fighting in Italy during the Second World War. This selfless act serves as a unique testament to the irreplaceable bond that still exists between

Canada and Italy today

It is morally imperative that we pay tribute to those soldiers who gave their lives fighting for the liberation of Italy. They pursued their duty with the

highest commitment to peace and freedom. We can all be proud of the Canadian contingent and the fact that they earned the respect of all Italians.

Therefore, it is with great honour that I offer my eternal thanks to these brave souls whom we honour today. They have bestowed upon us a powerful message that

what is good for everyone is to be shared by everyone. Thanks to them, the freedom and peace that we cherish today will be enjoyed by our sons and daughters of tomorrow. We will not forget them. We

should all remember them always.

LANDFILL

Mr Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): In February 2004, the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario received an application under the Environmental

Bill of Rights requesting that the Minister of the Environment review the certificate of approval -- the operating permit -- for a proposed landfill site in Simcoe county. The planned landfill,

also known as site 41, is located near the town of Midland. The proposal involves landfilling on 21 hectares of land within a total site area of 60 hectares.

The applicants have questioned the appropriateness of developing site 41 for main two reasons. First, the applicants noted numerous technical issues raised in

2003 by the Minister of the Environment and several independent technical experts relating to the county's proposed detailed design and operational parameters of the landfill. Second, because of

impending changes to Ontario's law and policy related to source water protection, the applicants question whether it is prudent to consider the landfill's development. MOE declined to undertake the

review. The ECO disagrees with that decision.

In denying the application, the MOE told the applicants that a review of the C of A was already underway and that undertaking the review would create a duplicate

exercise. MOE's narrow view is unfortunate. The ministry's consideration of the landfill design and operation focuses on specific technical factors. As well, MOE's intention to review the C of A in

light of existing policies, acts and regulations does not address the applicants' request that the MOE broadly consider the merit of developing site 41 in light of the impending changes to

Ontario's regulatory framework on source protection. The approach to source protection being considered by the MOE was not part of the ministry's approach to watershed management in the mid-1990s,

when the hearing board issued its approval for site 41, or in 1998, when the C of A was issued. Thus, the broader review requested by the applicants would not constitute a duplicate exercise.

The ECO believes that a broad review of site 41 was warranted to increase government accountability for environmental decision-making on this highly contentious

proposal. It would have been appropriate for the Ministry of the Environment to evaluate the C of A in light of the province's intention to strengthen source water protection requirements.

WILLIAM OSLER HEALTH CENTRE

Mrs Linda Jeffrey (Brampton Centre): I rise in the House today the proudest I've ever been since being elected the member for Brampton Centre.

My constituents sent me here with an important mission: to ensure the construction of a desperately needed hospital in Brampton and to ensure that the hospital is publicly owned, publicly operated

and publicly accountable. I'm proud to say that the day has finally come when I can finally announce to the people of Brampton: Mission accomplished.

Premier McGuinty made a commitment to me that he would move heaven and earth to build this hospital. This past Friday, one year less a day since our government

was sworn into office, construction began on the site of the new William Osler Health Centre.

On the day that Minister George Smitherman was sworn into office, he and I spoke about the need for a new hospital. On that day, the minister's words gave me

hope that our hospital would finally move forward. Over the past year, the minister has worked tirelessly to ensure that my community received its hospital.

A project of this magnitude presents many challenges, but the hospital board, especially the chair, Bryan Held, and CEO Bob Bell, focused on negotiating an

agreement that was in the best interests of the Brampton community. When this hospital opens in 2007, it will be a true testament to what can happen when we all work together toward a common

goal.

TRANSIT FUNDING

Mr Phil McNeely (Ottawa-Orléans): Friday, October 22, was a great day for the city of Ottawa. Ottawa Mayor Bob Chiarelli and Councillor

Janet Stavinga, chair of the city's transportation committee, joined Premier McGuinty and eastern Ontario MPPs in Ottawa to announce the gas tax allocation. This funding will assist Ottawa in

further developing its world-class transit system with more buses to serve an increasingly growing city and the possibility of moving forward with plans for an expanded light rail system.

I want to recognize Mayor Chiarelli's contribution to this important initiative. As a former member of Ottawa's city council and transportation committee, I

recall the work put into convincing the senior levels of government of the need to put dedicated funds toward improving and extending public transit in our city.

Before and during the consultation process, Mayor Chiarelli led the larger cities in making strong arguments for dedicated transit funding. With strong

co-operation from the mayors, the McGuinty government is coming through with that funding -- sustainable, long-term funding for municipal transit. Mayor Chiarelli was extremely pleased with the

$18.9 million allocated to Ottawa for the first year of the gas tax implementation. The gas tax is going to mean great things for Ottawa and municipalities across Ontario: better transit, better

air quality, better communities.

SCHOOL BUS SAFETY

Mr Pat Hoy (Chatham-Kent Essex): I stand here today disgusted with the action of the third party last Thursday. It was inexcusable. The NDP

blocked debate on Bill 73, thus preventing the bill to protect children and youth on Ontario's roads from passing second reading. This same party stood in this House for the last eight years in

support of my school bus bill and is now playing politics with children's lives.

This weekend, Colleen Marcuzzi wrote to the leaders of all three parties to express her outrage, frustration and disappointment with the behaviour of the NDP.

Her letter is dated October 23, and she begins with, "Today if she had lived ... it would be my daughter Ryan's 25th birthday. She was killed eight years ago when a man drove past a school bus that

was stopped with the sign out ... the arm on the bus extended ... and the lights flashing. She was running for her bus to go to school and the man hit her."

In her letter, Colleen asks for all members of this House to do the right thing: Allow the passage of Bill 73 for the safety of our children.

On behalf of the Marcuzzi and Loxton families, who both lost daughters to reckless drivers passing a stopped school bus, I'm urging all members of this House to

allow the passage of Bill 73 so no other parent will have to live with the nightmare of losing a child because an irresponsible driver refused to obey the law.

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

Hon David Caplan (Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal): I move that, pursuant to standing order 9(c)(ii), the House shall meet from 6:45

pm to 12 midnight on Monday, October 25, 2004, Tuesday, October 26, 2004, and Wednesday, October 27, 2004, for the purpose of considering government business.

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

All those in favour, say "aye."

All those against, say "nay."

I think the ayes have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1348 to 1353.

The Speaker: All those in favour, please rise one at a time to be counted.

Ayes

Arthurs, Wayne

Baird, John R.

Bartolucci, Rick

Bentley, Christopher

Berardinetti, Lorenzo

Bountrogianni, Marie

Bradley, James J.

Broten, Laurel C.

Brown, Michael A.

Brownell, Jim

Cansfield, Donna H.

Caplan, David

Chambers, Mary Anne V.

Colle, Mike

Crozier, Bruce

Delaney, Bob

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duguid, Brad

Duncan, Dwight

Dunlop, Garfield

Flynn, Kevin Daniel

Gerretsen, John

Gravelle, Michael

Hardeman, Ernie

Hoy, Pat

Hudak, Tim

Jackson, Cameron

Jeffrey, Linda

Klees, Frank

Kwinter, Monte

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Levac, Dave

Marsales, Judy

Martiniuk, Gerry

McMeekin, Ted

McNeely, Phil

Meilleur, Madeleine

Miller, Norm

O'Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Parsons, Ernie

Peters, Steve

Phillips, Gerry

Pupatello, Sandra

Ramal, Khalil

Ramsay, David

Sandals, Liz

Sergio, Mario

Smith, Monique

Smitherman, George

Sorbara, Greg

Takhar, Harinder S.

Tascona, Joseph N.

Van Bommel, Maria

Watson, Jim

Wilkinson, John

Witmer, Elizabeth

Wong, Tony C.

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Yakabuski, John

Zimmer, David

The Speaker: All those against, please rise.

Nays

Churley, Marilyn

Hampton, Howard

Kormos, Peter

Martel, Shelley

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 62; the nays are 4.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

Hon Mr Caplan: I move that, pursuant to standing order 9(c)(ii), the House shall meet from 9:45 pm to 12 midnight on Thursday, October 28,

2004, for the purpose of considering government business.

Mr John R. Baird (Nepean-Carleton): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: There's no motion on the order paper, as the member has suggested.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. I'd ask Mr Caplan to read the motion again.

Hon Mr Caplan: I move that, pursuant to standing order 9(c)(ii), the House shall meet from 6:45 pm to 12 midnight on Thursday, October 28,

2004, for the purpose of considering government business.

The Speaker: Mr Caplan has moved government notice of motion 189.

Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry?

All those in favour, please say "aye."

All those against, say "nay."

I think the ayes have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1357 to 1402.

The Speaker: All those in favour, please rise one at a time.

Ayes

Arthurs, Wayne

Baird, John R.

Bartolucci, Rick

Bentley, Christopher

Berardinetti, Lorenzo

Bountrogianni, Marie

Bradley, James J.

Broten, Laurel C.

Brown, Michael A.

Brownell, Jim

Cansfield, Donna H.

Caplan, David

Chambers, Mary Anne V.

Colle, Mike

Crozier, Bruce

Delaney, Bob

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duguid, Brad

Duncan, Dwight

Dunlop, Garfield

Flynn, Kevin Daniel

Gerretsen, John

Gravelle, Michael

Hardeman, Ernie

Hoy, Pat

Hudak, Tim

Jackson, Cameron

Jeffrey, Linda

Klees, Frank

Kwinter, Monte

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Levac, Dave

Marsales, Judy

Martiniuk, Gerry

McMeekin, Ted

McNeely, Phil

Meilleur, Madeleine

Miller, Norm

O'Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Parsons, Ernie

Peters, Steve

Phillips, Gerry

Pupatello, Sandra

Ramal, Khalil

Ramsay, David

Sandals, Liz

Sergio, Mario

Smith, Monique

Smitherman, George

Sorbara, Greg

Takhar, Harinder S.

Tascona, Joseph N.

Van Bommel, Maria

Watson, Jim

Wilkinson, John

Witmer, Elizabeth

Wong, Tony C.

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Yakabuski, John

Zimmer, David

The Speaker: All those against, please rise.

Nays

Churley, Marilyn

Hampton, Howard

Kormos, Peter

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

The Clerk of the Assembly: The ayes are 62; the nays are 5.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

ACTIVE 2010

Hon James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism and Recreation): I rise today to inform members about Active 2010, a new initiative designed to get

more Ontarians physically active and healthy.

Right now, less than half of all Ontarians are physically active on a regular basis. That is not a healthy situation.

The goal of Active 2010 is to increase Ontario's sport participation and physical activity so that by the year 2010 at least 55% of Ontarians are physically

active.

Ontario's sport and recreation system has suffered from years of neglect and underfunding. This government recognizes the importance of investing in sport and

recreation, which is why we are committing an additional $5 million a year to amateur sport and physical activity through the Active 2010 strategy.

Nearly six million Ontarians over the age of 12 are not active enough to maintain good health. Active 2010 starts with youth. To appeal to kids 10 to 14 years

old, we are launching a campaign in November called Pause to Play. Pause to Play's transit ads, school posters and Web site will encourage kids to put their video games on pause and instead have

fun playing and being active.

It's not just the youth of our province who need to get more active; 57% of Canadian adults do not do the suggested daily minimum amount of activity -- just 30

minutes a day. In the spring, we will be launching an adult walking campaign to encourage older adults to get off the sofa, turn off the TV and go out for a brisk walk instead.

In addition to encouraging individual Ontarians to become more active, we will make it easier for them to follow this advice. The second prong of the Active

2010 initiative is to increase the amount of direct funding to provincial sport organizations by $1.5 million, for a total of $7.2 million a year.

This, I remind members of the House, is the first funding boost for these sport organizations in eight years. This money will help train new and existing sport

leadership at the community level and increase participation levels. It will allow sport and recreation groups to better serve the needs of their communities.

All Ontarians should have equal access to sport and recreation activities, regardless of their age, ability or income level. Through Active 2010, we will work

to remove the barriers that prevent people from participating.

The third thrust of Active 2010 will create supportive environments for sport participation that address the needs of low-income children, people with

disabilities and underserved populations such as ethnic communities, women, aboriginals and older adults.

Finally, a new multi-year $5.2-million communities in action fund will provide increased support for community physical activity planning and local sport

projects. This will increase opportunities for disadvantaged groups.

This morning, the Premier announced the first communities in action grant: $125,000 to help Variety Village provide special gym classes to 600 disabled

students attending schools in the GTA.

Our $5-million Active 2010 commitment today boosts total funding to the sport and recreation sector to $20 million a year. Active 2010 will be a catalyst for

real, positive change in the way we live.

Not everyone makes it to the podium for a medal, but everyone deserves the chance to play, and every Ontarian who plays is a winner.

GREEN POWER GENERATION

Hon Steve Peters (Minister of Agriculture and Food): I'm very pleased to inform the House that I have just returned from Clandeboye, just

north of Lucan, which is north of London, where my colleague Energy Minister Dwight Duncan and myself launched an exciting project that will help to advance green power, support our agri-food

industry and build strong rural communities.

We are investing more than $1.6 million in the creation of an anaerobic digestion facility that converts biogas from manure into heat and electricity. This is

innovation at last. With this facility, the Lynn Cattle Co will be able to generate enough electricity to supply its own needs and sell the surplus to the market.

The municipality of North Middlesex has agreed to purchase 2,500 megawatt hours of electricity each year, making it the first green-powered municipality in all

of Canada.

Our government is committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions and providing cleaner energy options. The technology developed for this project will be useful

for producing heat and electricity in an environmentally sound manner for generations to come. This is good news for all of us.

This project is about more than just electricity and heat. The by-products from the process will be sold as organic fertilizers, manure odours on the farm will

be reduced by 80% and the facility will create three full-time jobs.

This is truly a win-win situation for everyone. We are looking to repeat this across Ontario. It demonstrates how the province, along with the federal

government, municipal governments, the agriculture industry, the private sector and community partners can work together to create real, positive opportunities and create direct community

benefits.

This provincial initiative is being made through the Ontario small town and rural fund -- the RED program -- which helps fund projects that support sustainable

rural communities and community partnerships. To achieve meaningful and lasting benefits, we all must work together, invest together and share risks together.

Rural areas in particular depend on the efforts of a range of players to improve their local communities. The McGuinty government understands the importance of

the RED program to rural Ontario. It's just one way that our government is delivering real, positive change to our communities to ensure they are strong, healthy and prosperous -- and more

importantly, how agriculture can be part of the solution to the many challenges our society faces today.

MOOSE TAGS

Hon David Ramsay (Minister of Natural Resources): It's my pleasure to rise in the House today to advise the members that this government is

acting on its commitment to provide northern Ontario residents with increased access to moose-hunting opportunities.

Today I am announcing a proposal to add a second adult moose tag draw for hunters who live in northern Ontario. I'm pleased that this proposal would expand

hunting opportunities for northerners while ensuring a sustainable moose population.

We know that most moose hunting in the province occurs in the north. We are proposing a second draw because we feel it is only appropriate to provide northern

residents with additional access to those northern hunting opportunities.

Every year, about 100,000 resident hunters from across the province apply for approximately 16,000 adult moose tags. To make sure that Ontario's moose

populations are managed sustainably, the ministry adjusts tag numbers annually to reflect estimated changes in herd size and hunter harvest.

Under the proposal I'm putting forward today, the Ministry of Natural Resources would hold back 5% of the adult moose tags available in the wildlife management

units north of the French and Mattawa rivers. These tags will be used as a quota for the second draw.

Only northern residents who were unsuccessful in the adult moose tag draws in the previous two years would be eligible for the second draw. This proposal will

be posted today on the Environmental Bill of Rights registry for 30 days for public comment. The proposed changes would apply to the 2005 moose-hunting season.

I'm pleased to take this step today toward meeting the government's commitment to support additional adult moose-hunting opportunities for northern Ontario

residents.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Responses.

GREEN POWER GENERATION

Mr Ernie Hardeman (Oxford): I have a quick response to the Minister of Agriculture and Food. I thank him for the announcement. Indeed, it is

good news for the agricultural community and the farmers of Ontario.

I was a little surprised when the minister, in his statement, had this as "innovation at last." I just want to point out to the minister that that may not be

quite accurate and he may want to change that.

I just want to point out, first of all, that he also was very complimentary about the RED program, and indeed I agree with him. I had the pleasure of being the

minister when that program was put in place, and I want to commend the minister opposite for being able to convince his cabinet that that was one of the programs that definitely should be left in

place, because it does indeed help rural Ontario.

I have here a news release. It says, "Eves Government Invests in Innovative Biogas Cogeneration Initiative in Cambridge." This is dated February 28, 2003. If

one wants to read through that, he will find that the announcement is quite similar and the process is identical to what the minister announced today. So I don't think this is innovation at last;

it's another innovative project.

I want to thank the farmers who were involved with the program last year, the Law family and the Culham family. I want to congratulate them on what they've

done.

Last but not least, I want to talk about accuracy. The minister has put out a news release today that says that the Canada-Ontario set-aside program is now

available. That is, again, good news for Ontario's farmers. But then it says, "Application forms will be available in OMAF resources centres across the province and on the ministry's Web site the

week of November 1." So they are not available now. I think the people of Ontario should know that this is a news announcement that he will be able to make again two weeks from now, because it is

not ready, as he suggests it is.

MOOSE TAGS

Mr Jerry J. Ouellette (Oshawa): It's truly a sad day for Ontario's moose hunters. You see, although the minister states that there are about

100,000 moose hunters in the province, what he fails to state is that a majority of them are in southern Ontario. As a matter of fact, there are probably more moose tags allocated or more moose

hunters in the GTA alone than there are in all of the north. What about those people from Cornwall? What about those people from St Catharines or Ottawa? Southern Ontario moose hunters were

punished earlier on through the year with a calf tag draw when there were clearly other options available that would have achieved the same results. What about the Powley case, which removed

hundreds of tags from Ontario's non-Metis residents? Now an additional 5% are being removed from southern Ontario residents.

The tourism industry alone had strong concerns about this, as those groups from southern Ontario normally stayed in tourist camps in the north. How is that

going to be affected, and are they going to be compensated?

What's next: southern Ontario resident deer tags, southern Ontario turkey tags only, southern Ontario pheasant or quail tags? And what about those cottage

owners who want controls on their lakes? Shouldn't we be giving them special rights as well?

No, this is a bad day for Ontario's moose hunters. What we are creating is an "us against them" -- north against south -- not only in the moose industry but

also in the tourism industry.

ACTIVE 2010

Mr Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): I'm pleased to respond to the Minister of Tourism and Recreation's announcement about Active 2010, which

has to do with promoting physical activity. Certainly I would not argue with the goal of increasing physical activity. In fact, I know I am in the target group for the 45- to 65-year-old age

group.

I would question the priorities of this government. I would also wonder whether this $5 million a year is the health tax at work. We know that the health tax

is going to fix sewers in downtown Toronto, so I assume this is probably some more work of the health tax, or is this just a Liberal slush fund? In the press release, Active 2010 is to improve

awareness of the benefits of physical activity, to motivate people to get active. So if they're watching TV, they're going to see a TV ad telling them they really should get off the couch and do

something. It does look a little bit like this is a $5-million slush fund to go to Liberal-friendly companies and spend some more on advertising. Ontario's version of Adscam is perhaps what we have

here.

What about other parties? You could have spent $1.3 million and kept the Leslie M. Frost Centre open. That would have been a really good use for the money. Or

there are some excellent soccer clubs around that you could invest money in, which would be money very well spent, like the Bracebridge minor soccer club.

Mr Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): It's really good to see that the Minister of Tourism is always exuberant and very excited with the

announcements that he makes. I can understand why he tries to beef it up by making it appear like these sums are extraordinary sums that we have never, ever seen before. I understand. I hope you

won't be too, too surprised to find that this opposition member won't be jumping for joy with this announcement.

There are a couple of issues. First of all, I remind people that Dalton McGuinty says, "I am Dalton McGuinty, and I want you to know that every penny of

Ontario's new health premium will go to health care." Every penny. Page 44: We find that the Minister of Tourism and Recreation has a program called Active 2010, which promotes "increased

participation in sports and physical activity, particularly for children, youth and low-income individuals." While I understand the Premier and his ministers want to stretch it out and make health

connect to everything imaginable, this money should be coming from a different pot, not from unfairly taxing a whole lot of Ontarians who can't afford to pay that premium.

Second, while you're at it, Minister, you should just nudge Gerard Kennedy over there and say, "Gerard, we've got to do something about gym classes, because a

lot of kids are not running. They don't have any gym in those classes, and you and I have got to work together to make sure those kids are going to get physically active." So with a little nudge to

Gerard Kennedy, get him to think about it a little bit.

I want to say this to you: There are a whole lot of people working at two or three jobs at a time, working at minimum wage, and that paltry sum, the cents that

you guys gave to increase the minimum wage, isn't going to help very much. A whole lot of people are depending on a whole lot more money not only to buy healthy foods but to find the time to walk.

They do not have the money or the time to walk, because what you're giving them by way of your paltry minimum wage does not allow them to go out there and walk. They've got to work two or three

jobs at a time. So think in terms of increasing the minimum wage and a little nudge to Gerard Kennedy to get him to look at the curriculum and make sure the kids are actually physically active. If

you can deal with some of these things then maybe I'll jump with joy at your announcement.

GREEN POWER GENERATION

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): I want to respond to the Minister of Agriculture today. I want to say: My, my, this is another very

modest announcement. We heard a few weeks ago from a member of Parliament from Germany, an expert in alternative energy, who came here to Ontario and said he was embarrassed by the low level of

commitment of this provincial government to alternative energy sources. What do we have here? A mere $1.6 million is the commitment of this government. Yes, you try to dress it up by saying that

the municipality of North Middlesex has agreed to purchase 2,500 megawatt hours of electricity each year, trying to make that sound as if it's some huge amount. I doubt that we'll even see anything

near that amount produced, but we'll wait and see.

I would just say to the Minister of Energy and the Minister of Agriculture: This is yet again evidence of your very weak, incredibly weak dedication to

alternative energy sources.

MOOSE TAGS

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): I want to deal with the Minister of Natural Resources and his scheme to create two tiers of hunters in

Ontario. I just say to the minister: I look forward to the details. I invite you to go to Hamilton, Oshawa, Peterborough, Windsor and Cornwall and conduct public consultations on this issue

because, let me tell you, creating two tiers of hunters in Ontario is going to create controversy that you don't want to see.

In fact, I'll make a prediction: Within seven or eight months we'll see the Minister of Natural Resources scurrying around Ontario to find his own digester so

that he can somehow modify or back away from this proposal, because this will create problems for the tourism industry, it'll create problems with the Federation of Anglers and Hunters and it will

create untold problems with the moose draw. I look forward to the public consultations on this issue.

VISITORS

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): In the west gallery we have a former parliamentarian, our colleague Al Leach of the 36th Parliament, the

former Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Welcome.

Hon Gerard Kennedy (Minister of Education): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: On your slight indulgence, I have a surprise visitor, a former

councillor from the city of Edmonton, my uncle, Father Edward Kennedy. He is in the government gallery here.

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: Simply falling in line with the tone that's been set, I want to introduce

Zuzana Jurova, visiting from Kosice, Slovakia.

Mr Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): On a point of order, Mr Speaker.

The Speaker: Is this again a point of order that is not a point of order?

Mr Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): Yes. I'd like to introduce to you, from the government of Cuba's Department of International Relations, Georgina

Chabau Montalvo. She's on the right-hand side here.

The Speaker: Is there any other point of order that is not a point of order? Today will be the last day we do that.

ORAL QUESTIONS

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

Mr Robert W. Runciman (Leader of the Opposition): I have a question for the Acting Premier, who I believe is the Minister of Finance today,

related to the furor and concern with respect to the health care premium, as he has described it himself, and who indeed is going to pay for it. Apparently, these guys can't even raise taxes

without creating a mess. That seems to be what's happening in this situation.

We have an arbitrator's ruling, in terms of a long-term-care facility, which indicates that despite the assurances of the Minister of Finance to a number of my

colleagues earlier this year that this tax would not be applied to employers, the arbitrator's decision is quite the opposite. We would like an explanation from the Minister of Finance today with

respect to the conclusion of the arbitrator and what the impact might be across the province.

Hon Greg Sorbara (Minister of Finance): I'm sure my friend is referring to an arbitrator's decision that was made public, I think, three or

four weeks ago. I've read the decision. I don't agree with its approach. My friend may also be aware of another decision involving the employees of Air Canada Jazz, which took a completely opposite

point of view on the premium. So arbitrators will, for a while, have their views discussed publicly.

My views have been made very clear and very direct: The Ontario health premium is an individual tax levied under the income tax system of the province and the

country, and it remains a personal obligation of individuals who fall within the taxable categories.

Mr Runciman: The minister gets up and repeats the same mantra that we heard in the spring, despite the ruling. And he refers to Air Canada

Jazz. We don't know the rationale with respect to that -- the wording. As mentioned, it's a federal carrier.

The minister indicated, in his earlier comments this spring with respect to the variety of clauses within a number of collective agreements, that there may be

differences. We don't know, with respect to this particular collective agreement, the similarity, the comparability, in terms of other public service unions across the province. We know that

community college teachers -- approximately 15,000 covered -- would have enormous implications; a third of the school boards in this province; the hospital sector, which we are very, very much

concerned about, given the cuts being imposed by your government with respect to funding increases this year.

We want to know from the minister, rather than the company line, if you will, that we've heard for months now: Based on this arbitrator's decision, have you

truly looked at the impact with respect to this ruling being upheld by the courts? What are the impacts going to be to taxpayers in this province?

Hon Mr Sorbara: I will once again try to make it perfectly clear to my friend opposite that the Ontario health premium represents a tax levied

under the province's income tax system. He picked up my reference to the Air Canada Jazz case and there was an interjection from one of his friends that that's a federal case. It was not a federal

case; it was looking at the very same question. I just invite my friend to relax, to take it easy. There will be in each of these cases a judicial review of the arbitrator's decision, which is

natural.

I want to once again tell my friend that the Ontario health premium is a tax under the Income Tax Act, and it is an obligation of individuals who fall within

the taxable categories.

Mr Runciman: We would like to know who is going to conduct that review. In some respects, it looks like this is a train they didn't see

coming, which happens in so many instances with this government in terms of preparation and raises serious questions regarding competence.

We have to look at the university sector, at the community college sector, at a whole range of public service sectors that could be impacted by this. We are

especially concerned with respect to the hospital sector. We know the Minister of Health is bullying the hospital sector with respect to the agreements they have to bring forward in terms of

controlling their costs and the impact that is projected to have now on important services to all Ontarians.

Are you guaranteeing us in the House today that not one red cent of this health care tax, health care premium -- however you wish to describe it -- will be

paid for by the hospitals, that it will not impact on health care services in our hospitals? Are you guaranteeing us that today?

Hon Mr Sorbara: My friend raises a hue and cry based on an arbitrator's decision that was made almost a month ago, after another arbitrator's

decision came to exactly the opposite conclusion. What would he like us to do? Would he like us to put in our legislation that a trade union can't possibly raise this argument?

I say to him that I've read the decision. I'm disappointed with the decision. I disagree with the decision. But I think we might just let a court of competent

jurisdiction have a look at these decisions to clear the air in this regard.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Mr John R. Baird (Nepean-Carleton): My question is to the Minister of Health. Your hospital underfunding is starting to have devastating

consequences in hospitals, big and small, right across Ontario.

I want to bring up the example of the University of Ottawa Heart Institute. Their director, Dr Bob Roberts, says that if they don't get the full budget, then

waiting lists will have to be extended.

On page 6 of your election platform, you promised shorter waiting times for cardiac care. Can you guarantee people in my community and around Ontario who use

this valued provincial institution that waiting lists will not go up by one single case?

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I'm very happy to report to the honourable member and to remind him that his

party campaigned on having an allocation to Ontario's hospitals, for this year, some $700 million less than what we've already allocated. I remind the member that in a year in office we've

contributed $385 million, a further $469.5 million and we've acknowledged $721 million in working capital debts that are the left-behind operating bills from that party while in government.

With all of that having been said, we are committed to a wait-time strategy that will see 36,000 additional cardiac procedures by the fiscal year 2007-08.

We're building those currently, and I can confirm for the honourable member that this government will ensure that Ontario has increasingly good performance related to cardiac initiatives.

Mr Baird: That is cold comfort to the families struggling on a waiting list at the Ottawa Heart Institute and not an answer from this

minister.

I will bring up two other examples. The Campbellford Memorial Hospital will have to close 19 beds and cut the equivalent of 19 jobs. The Northumberland Hills

Hospital will have to close 12 of its 25 complex care beds.

On page 8, you said, "We will bring stability to our hospitals by providing adequate [multi-year] funding."

Minister, can you guarantee me that not a single nurse at the Campbellford Memorial Hospital or the Northumberland Hills Hospital will lose their job? Can you

guarantee me that?

Hon Mr Smitherman: What I can guarantee to the honourable member and to all Ontarians is that our party in government is putting $700 million

more into Ontario hospitals than you campaigned on in your Magna budget.

Further, what I can confirm for the honourable member is that the process we've established with the Ontario Hospital Association is one that in some cases, in

some hospitals, could take us 18 months to get hospitals in balance. This is what hospitals asked for, and we acceded to those wishes. We are at the beginning stages. There is a seven-step process

that has been established. The earliest of those steps very clearly asks Ontario hospitals to focus on those issues that are non-clinical, on those areas which don't affect patient care. That's the

stage of this discussion that we're at.

While I know that the honourable member seeks to fast-forward to an end point that he sees as delicious, what we're focused on very clearly is working with

hospitals to make sure that every precious penny -- every precious penny -- available can be focused on patient care.

Mr Baird: Minister, that non-answer is cold comfort to the people concerned about 31 bed losses at Campbellford Memorial and at Northumberland

Hills Hospital.

I want to bring up another example. The constituents of my colleague from Burlington are shocked, worried and concerned about the 90 bed closures that you want

to ram through at Joseph Brant Memorial Hospital. That would involve the laying off of 100 people, all of them providing quality patient care to people in Burlington and Halton region.

On page 8 of your election platform, you promised to open 1,600 net new beds in Ontario. Not only are 90 beds being closed at Joseph Brant hospital, but you've

already cancelled some 60 new hospital beds. Minister, would you stand up in your place and commit to providing the necessary funding to Joseph Brant Memorial Hospital so that they will not have to

reduce one single nurse or one single bed? Would you do that?

Hon Mr Smitherman: What I'm very pleased to do is operate in a fashion that's different from the honourable member's -- the honourable member

seeks to turn a press release into reality.

We recognize that Joseph Brant is one of those hospitals in the province, particularly as one that has recently had new construction, around which I'll have

additional information shortly. Joseph Brant, like all other hospitals in the province that are not in balance -- and some 50 or 60 are in balance -- is asked to work through a process that has

been established with the Ontario Hospital Association. These are the steps we're at, the earliest stages of a seven-step process.

With respect to the honourable member, I think it's important that he be reminded that for two years while his party was the government in Ontario, they

actually cut the budgets of hospitals by -- get this -- $565 million.

C DIFFICILE

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Minister of Health. Last Thursday, the Public Health Agency of Canada said it

will begin tracking the deadly C difficile bacterium in 25 major hospitals across Canada. This extraordinary measure follows the deaths of at least 109 hospital patients from C difficile in

Quebec over the past six months.

Studies from the US, the UK and elsewhere here in Canada show that a reduction in the quality of hospital cleaning is directly related to the spread of deadly

superbugs such as C difficile. And what are you planning to do? You want to cut the jobs and the wages of our hospital cleaners. Minister, why are you trying to cut the wages, benefits and jobs of

the very hospital workers who can best protect our patients from the deadly C difficile bacterium?

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I do think it's important for the honourable member to recognize that across

the province of Ontario there's already a series of different circumstances related to who's involved in cleaning hospitals.

I would say, on the very sensitive and important matter of C difficile, that I believe Ontario has acted very appropriately in the context. As a result of our

Operation Health Protection, we've established a provincial infectious disease advisory committee. This is a group of experts who work together, including the OMA and the OHA. We're working very

hard to make sure that all that can be learned is applied.

I acknowledge to the honourable member that this is a serious issue in Ontario's hospitals and institutions. We're working with a committee that we've

established in the last year, representative of all the groups that you would want to have input from, to make sure the Ontario plan is the best-established plan in the land.

Mr Hampton: Minister, you don't even require the reporting of the incidence of C difficile in Ontario. That's where you're at. You're so wound

up about beating up on the lowest-paid hospital workers, and meanwhile you don't even require the reporting.

I just want to read some of the information from Britain: "Britain's National Audit Office revealed that infections in hospitals affect 100,000 people each

year, costing the National Health Service approximately £1 billion to treat. More importantly, hospital-acquired infections are primarily responsible for killing 5,000 patients per year

and are a substantial factor in 3% or 15,000 deaths per year." And what are you talking about? You're talking about going after the first line of protection our patients have from C difficile.

Minister, instead of going after the lowest-paid hospital workers, will you pledge today that you will not attack their collective agreements, you will not try

to cut their wages and you will not try to contract out their jobs? Will you put the priority where it deserves to be: protecting our patients by keeping our hospital cleaning staff in place?

Hon Mr Smitherman: I'm always pleased to get advice on the sanctity of labour agreements from one of the architects of the social

contract.

On the issue that the honourable member raises with respect to the reportable nature of C difficile, PIDAC, the very committee I referred to in my earlier

answer, has this issue currently under consideration. I think it's important for them to come back with advice. In these matters, where the issue is highly scientific, it's prudent on our part to

make sure we're involving those people who have expertise in this to provide us with advice. I've established such a committee. They are in the process of providing that advice.

Further, I would say that we're very mindful of the fact, and thankful too, that the federal government's new public health agency has a medical officer of

health who is assisting all Canadian jurisdictions in deliberations on this important point.

Mr Hampton: Minister, the question was, will you commit to not going after the jobs and wages of the first line of defence in our hospitals in

terms of protecting patients from the C difficile bacterium?

Let me give you some other advice. This comes from the United States, where "a Chicago Tribune investigative report alleges that in 2000, an estimated 103,000

patients' deaths were linked to hospital infections and that the causes of 75% of these deadly infections (unsanitary facilities, unwashed hands, and unsanitary instruments) were preventable." They

also point out that "hospital cleaning staff," in many cases, "were inadequately trained and that cleaning budgets had been steadily cut -- 15%-20% each year."

Now what do we hear from you? You want to cut hospital cleaning budgets. You think that the first line of defence our patients have from these kinds of deadly

superbugs is to cut the jobs, the wages and the benefits of hospital cleaning staff. How much evidence do you need to show you that you're wrong? You shouldn't be attacking these workers. Will you

pledge that you will not try to cut the wages and jobs, or contract out the jobs, of these workers?

Hon Mr Smitherman: I think the honourable member needs to be reminded of the point that in Ontario there is a series of different

arrangements, as I said in my first answer, with respect to who cleans those hospitals. In the city of Toronto, some of our largest academic teaching centres are not cleaned by the unionized staff

the member speaks about.

I would say to the honourable member that the decision point for us, the distinction point, is not whether someone works in Sid Ryan's union or not. That's not

where we draw the line. It is that we want to work with people who are competent, to make sure that they are appropriately trained and that we are dedicating the appropriate commitment to the issue

of cleaning. In our view, how they are organized is less an issue than the honourable member would make it. Of course, what we depend upon across the breadth of Ontario's health care system is

hard-working people who are dedicated to the challenge of their particular employment. I think it's important to note that some of those are unionized and some are not.

TRANSIT FUNDING

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Minister of Transportation. Your government's reaction to Toronto's TTC

problems this weekend shows that the health minister isn't the only bully in your government. Last Friday, the mayor of Toronto stood up for the people of his city and pointed out that your

recently announced transit scheme will leave the city of Toronto with less money than before; in fact, less money than they had under the Conservatives. Instead of sitting down and discussing this,

you unleashed your mini pit bull, member Brad Duguid, to call the mayor of Toronto a liar.

Minister, here's the reality: Toronto will get less money now than it got before this announcement was made. Will you call off your pit bull? Will you sit down

with the mayor of Toronto and work out an agreement so that Toronto doesn't lose money on this deal but is able to operate its transit system in the proper way?

Hon Harinder S. Takhar (Minister of Transportation): I am very proud of the announcement we made about the gas tax. This is the first time

ever in Ontario that we are providing stable new funding for transit in Ontario. This funding will help the municipalities to plan ahead, and they can do it without coming to the province every

time they need the money. This is new money, this is stable money, it's growing money, and of the $680 million we will put out, Toronto will get $355 million, which is 52% of the total money. So we

are very, very proud of our announcement.

Mr Hampton: I want to remind the minister of what someone named Dalton McGuinty said. Before the election, Dalton McGuinty promised to stop

the fighting between Queen's Park and the municipalities. One year ago, Dalton McGuinty said, "For eight years, instead of leadership from Queen's Park," we've had buck-passing. "Instead of

partnership, there has been a patronizing attitude....

"It's time to start working together. The politics of division ... must stop."

But then I hear the mayor of Toronto pointing out that after this much-ballyhooed transit announcement, Toronto will actually have less money to operate the

TTC than it had before. Minister, I don't know what you call it, but I call that a broken promise. The people who operate Toronto transit need help. Will you ensure there is no TTC fare hike this

year by guaranteeing that Toronto receives the money that you tried to take away from them with your announcement?

Hon Mr Takhar: Let me tell you what I call it. I call it keeping the commitment that we made. I say this is stable funding that we are

providing to the municipalities so they can meet their transit needs.

If you don't want to take my word for it, let me read this. Roger Anderson, the chair of the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, said it is the first

time in the history of the province of Ontario that there is a permanent source of revenue from gas tax and they are very pleased to see it. He went on to say that it's a huge step forward for the

municipalities. It is the first time ever that the province of Ontario has been part of a revenue-sharing formula with municipalities.

We are very proud of this announcement. Let me tell you, the funding that the city of Toronto will get is more than they have ever seen for transit purposes in

this province.

Mr Hampton: Well, Minister, calling the mayor of Toronto a liar is not a good first step, but it's not just the mayor of Toronto.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Order

Mr Hampton: The mayor of Kingston says your transit scheme "negates the" McGuinty "election promise to make Ontario municipalities more of an

equal partner with Queen's Park." He says, "We're being told exactly how to spend our money ... We have no freedom whatsoever."

The mayor of Brantford is worried that his city will end up with less too. He said, "I'm hoping this money doesn't supersede another program the government has

to help us buy buses, because then there'd be no gain."

Minister, instead of trying to conduct war on the mayor of Toronto and the Toronto transit authority, will you meet with the city of Toronto and other

municipalities to ensure they can meet their transit needs and avoid fare hikes and cuts to services?

Hon Mr Takhar: I am on the record as saying that we are always prepared to work with the municipalities. I also said that they are great

people to work with.

I want to tell you more. Let me tell you what the mayor of London said, because I was there. Said, "That's the kind of sustainable funding we've been waiting

for.... Now we can start planning for the future. In the past, we haven't always known who to count on for the revenue and how much we'd get."

So this is sustainable funding, this is long-term funding and it is joint funding. We are very, very proud of this announcement, and we will be prepared and

delighted to work with any municipality that chooses to do so.

FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL

FISCAL POLICIES

Mr Robert W. Runciman (Leader of the Opposition): I have another question for the Acting Premier. This is not a politically sexy issue, but it

is important. It's a question related to the meetings tomorrow regarding equalization.

We know that if Ontarians are asked, they will always say they're Canadians first and Ontarians second, but there are some limitations to that patriotism if

our provincial government is seen to be fast and loose with the interests of the province. Some of you will know that from Mr Peterson's experience with respect to the Charlottetown accord.

Our party leader, Mr Tory, has called for a broad review of federal-provincial fiscal arrangements. Minister, can you advise us what your government's approach

will be? How do you plan to balance the interests of Ontario taxpayers, their loyalty to Canada and the bargaining position of other provinces?

Hon Greg Sorbara (Minister of Finance): I will begin by telling my friend that I very much appreciate the question, because it's a timely

topic and an important issue, both for the province of Ontario and for Canadians from coast to coast.

Let me say at the beginning that, as we speak, the Premiers are meeting in Ottawa to prepare for the meeting with the Prime Minister tomorrow. I expect that

our Premier, Premier McGuinty, will exercise the same sort of energy, dynamism and commitment that he brought to the first ministers' conference on health care.

In answer directly to his question, our position is simple and straightforward: We believe in equalization in this country. That is part of our Constitution.

At the same time, we have to be careful in Ontario that fiscal federalism does not get out of whack such that the taxpayers in the province of Ontario are bearing too large a burden as we try to

equate services across the country.

Mr Runciman: I guess what you consider to be too much of a burden is subjective. I'm told that Ontario taxpayers today contribute

approximately $4 billion in equalization payments to other provinces. Some of the receiving provinces compete with us for investment, using business subsidies; some support their agricultural

sector to a degree we can't compete with; some limit access of out-of-province companies and workers to business and employment opportunities.

Minister, is part of your approach to the equalization meeting to ensure that conditions are put in place so that the transfers to so-called have-not provinces

are not utilized to unfairly compete with Ontario?

Hon Mr Sorbara: My friend's question seems to hearken back to the bad old Tory days of Mike Harris, when he had absolutely no interest in this

country. His view was simply, "If it's not good for Ontario, I don't want to talk about it." He never went to Ottawa with the interest of the nation at heart. That has changed, and Ontario is back

in Confederation with the election of this government.

That being said, I want to tell my friend that we will not support increases in equalization payments beyond what was proposed by the federal government at the

first ministers' meeting back in September. They are generous, they are fair, they were the subject of agreement among Premiers at the meeting of the council of the federation in August, and we

think they're worthy of support. That's the extent of our support.

AUTISM SERVICES

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I have a question to the Minister of Children and Youth Services. I have a copy of a letter dated October 15

from Toronto Preschool Autism Service, one of the regional providers of IBI. The letter advises that Toronto Preschool Autism Service is changing two of its criteria to accept children into the IBI

program. Firstly, as of January 1, 2005, only children with a confirmed diagnosis of autism at the severe end of the spectrum will be accepted. Secondly, effective October 15, only children under

five will be accepted into the treatment program.

Minister, at a time when Toronto Preschool Autism Service is apparently receiving more money to provide IBI services, why is it that the agency is actually

restricting the number of autistic children who can get IBI?

Hon Marie Bountrogianni (Minister of Children and Youth Services, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration): I really do appreciate the

question. I was unaware of that, and if that correspondence is somewhere in my ministry and I haven't received it yet, I'd like a copy from the honourable member.

In fact, we have increased funding for the under-six program. We are reaching 20% more children now. We've actually broadened the definition of children who

get help under the age of six.

This comes as a surprise to me. I'd like a copy of that letter, and I will look into it immediately.

Ms Martel: This is a really important issue for families with autistic children, because they thought, as a result of your announcement, more

children were going to get more services.

I'm advised that your ministry has told IBI providers that they have to get rid of their waiting lists by mid-December. It appears that Toronto Preschool

Autism Service is doing that by denying services to autistic children between the ages of five and six, because your program allows them to have services up to age six. Parents thought that more

money meant more services for more kids, not restrictions on those children who are waiting for treatment.

Minister, what are you going to do to guarantee that IBI providers are not cutting services for autistic children just to meet your wait-list deadline?

Hon Mrs Bountrogianni: I thank the honourable member for bringing this to my attention. It is my direction that kids will have more services.

We are reaching 20% more, right up until the age of six. The analogy I like to give with IBI is learning to read up to the age of six and then reading to learn. That's how we approach IBI. The

experts told us to approach it in that way so that we teach children through IBI, up until the age of six, and then they use that learning after the age of six, where we put $30 million in the

school system for children with autism.

I thank the member for the question. I'd like a copy of that letter, and I'll look right into it.

ACTIVE 2010

Ms Monique M. Smith (Nipissing): My question is for the Minister of Tourism and Recreation. Just last week, my colleague from Markham stated

that childhood obesity is on the rise in Canada. Our government has already taken positive steps by banning junk food in primary schools and reopening our schools for community use.

Today, you announced, along with the Premier, that Active 2010 will provide funding to increase participation in sports and physical activities, particularly

for children, youth and low-income individuals. We were happy to have Minister Ramsay at the newly renovated North Bay YMCA this morning, together with some of our community representatives -- the

mayor of Chisholm; a councillor from Powassan; some municipal representatives; representatives from our school board, including Colin Vickers from the Near North District School Board; and some

sports and fitness advocates, including Dave Saad and some representatives from our Y -- to share the news in the north.

Minister, how will Active 2010 increase participation in sports and physical activity in our province?

Hon James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism and Recreation): It's an excellent question. I think the member recognizes that perhaps some in the

Legislature don't want to concede the importance of the prevention of many of the health problems that can exist in the province.

I have some figures here which would indicate that physical inactivity costs $634 million in direct costs and $1.2 billion in indirect costs to the health care

system. Obesity costs the health care system $647 million in direct costs and $905 million in indirect costs. That is why we have developed programs which are going to encourage and facilitate the

opportunity for people of all ages in the province, starting with children and those who are very often denied the opportunity, to participate in physical activity as much as possible. That is why

we're developing and funding those programs, to ensure that we are dealing with what the member has appropriately identified as a very serious health problem and with a general enhancement of

lifestyle problems in this province.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Supplementary?

Ms Kathleen O. Wynne (Don Valley West): I'm very glad to see that our government is addressing the need to encourage a healthier lifestyle in

Ontario. As you're aware, many of the provincial sport organizations are housed in my riding of Don Valley West. These organizations have struggled for years. They're volunteer-based and have been

struggling with a chronic underfunding problem, mainly caused by the previous government. As a result, these dedicated groups have had to cut programs that would have increased participation in

their particular sport, and the children who most need access have lost access. We rely on these organizations to coordinate community volleyball, basketball, soccer, swim club, track, football,

badminton and all the sports that build bodies, foster good habits and support healthy and safe communities. Minister, what does Active 2010 do for these groups?

Hon Mr Bradley: In addition to the communities in action fund, which will allow individuals within communities -- again, children and other

groups that are not as active as they might be -- to participate through special funding of special programs, we have put an additional $1.5 million in sports organizations. As you know, for the

last eight years in Ontario those sports organizations have not seen a penny of increase. So for the first time in eight years we will be investing in those sport organizations to try to restore

some of the cuts that have been made as a result of the underfunding that took place in Ontario.

I invite all members who want to yammer at the government at this time to check with those sports organizations who for the first time since the Tories cut

them to smithereens are finally getting some additional funding to enhance the quality of health and sport in Ontario.

ENERGY CONSERVATION

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): My question is to the Minister of Energy. During your 2000 election campaign and just last week, you announced your

famous report card championing your energy conservation culture in Ontario. You know that the first thing you did in your budget was to cancel the Energy Star program, which was instituted by our

government. In fact, it was a way of providing incentives to consumers to begin reducing the amount of electricity that they were demanding from the province. Perhaps I could quote from your own

ministry Web site: "Energy is good for your budget, your comfort and our environment. Energy conservation is a way to achieve that." Minister, our Energy Star program, which you recklessly

cancelled in your budget, did reduce the tax burden on people, made Ontario cleaner and helped our economy.

When are you going to come clean and clearly respond to the broken promise of failing to conserve electricity in Ontario?

Hon Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): We have a very clear, well-delineated plan to make conservation a cornerstone

of Ontario's energy future. First of all, under Bill 100, we are creating the first conservation secretariat with a chief conservation officer -- the first time in history. In Bill 4 -- the member

would forget this -- we incented LDCs with a quarter of a billion dollars to invest in new energy conservation programs. I say to my friends opposite, wait till next week, because I'm going to tell

you something. It's happening, and it's happening bigger than it's ever happened before.

We have announced the installation of smart meters in this province: 800,000 by 2007; and 4 million by 2010. That will be every meter in the province of

Ontario, which will empower consumers to manage their conservation.

We have set two targets which are measurable, identifiable and challengeable: 5% of government by 2007, 5% province-wide by 2007; 10% by 2010, a goal that

we're proud of --

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Thank you. Supplementary.

Mr O'Toole: Minister, I believe what you're saying to the people of Ontario is, "Just wait." In fact, there's nothing to wait for, because

what you did in Bill 4 was break a promise when you raised the price of electricity. Not only that, but you went on in the budget to raise the price of electricity by reducing the Energy Star

program and other tax measures that we incented on renewable energy. It's clear that you really don't have a plan except to increase the price of electricity.

But I want to get you on the record clearly today: Will you stand in your place and promise the taxpayers of Ontario, the consumers of Ontario, that you won't

raise the price of electricity?

Hon Mr Duncan: The previous government's irresponsible price cap cancelled conservation in Ontario, and to be lectured by them about

conservation is really something funny.

Do you know what was wrong with the Energy Star tax credit? It was rejected by everybody -- business, consumers. Why? Because people would go and buy a new

appliance and put the old appliance in their basement.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Would the member for Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke and the member for Nepean-Carleton come to order, please.

The Minister of Energy.

Hon Mr Duncan: The biggest failure of any government in history on electricity was that government. When they weren't rewarding their friends

with multi-million dollar secret deals for Ontario Hydro and OPG, they weren't doing anything about conservation. Prices spiked 22% under their energy policy. Why? Because they didn't think it

through, they didn't plan it and they didn't do it right. That party's policy was a complete failure.

We're moving quickly to address conservation, and number two, to bring on new supply. And I'll remind the member that prices under the first year of a Liberal

administration are down 17% from what they were in the last year of his administration in the wholesale market. That's an energy policy that works, that's a policy that serves Ontario and that's

why they were rejected so overwhelmingly by the people of Ontario a year ago.

DETOX CENTRES

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): My question is to the Minister of Health. Detox centres across this province deliver a critical service and

are an important part of the broad range of health care. Niagara's detox centre in St Catharines announced that it's going to shut its doors for six months in the peak of this coming winter,

because after 12 years of no increases in funding, but for a 2% adjustment two years ago, it simply cannot sustain the service that it is capable of providing were it adequately funded. Other detox

centres are in similar positions of having to shut their doors. In the case of Niagara, with its 22 beds for men and 14 beds for women, it's estimated that some 300 people who need this service

will have the door slammed in their face.

Why are you letting Niagara's detox centre and other detox centres shut down their operations when they are so needed?

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I do think the honourable member raises an issue which would be of concern to

all. I'm not familiar enough, top of head, with the issue related to Niagara. I will look into it and endeavour to get back to the member as quickly as I can.

I can in the meantime say that the issues he raises are somewhat well known. We can trace a pattern of no funding increase back through a fairly long period; I

think he said 12 years. That reaches back to 1992. I think this does make the point about the challenge of adequately funding these. In my own case, I've had the opportunity to visit the detox in

my riding at St Mike's and to celebrate their long service to the community. I know of its essential nature. So I will get back to the honourable member as quickly as I can with more detail.

Mr Kormos: In the case of Niagara, the number is $121,000-plus, $122,000. And in fact, not only has the detox centre indicated that it's going

to have to shut its doors this winter; it has indicated already that it is going to have to shut its doors for a period of weeks come the next fiscal year. It hasn't been since the NDP government

in this province that these detox centres received any increase in funding -- an admitted 2% increase two years ago, but no increase in broader based funding.

These detox centres, as you know, are the beginning of treatment and recovery for alcohol- and drug-addicted women and men across this province. Closure of

these detox centres means that people will be diverted to hospital emergency rooms, putting new stress on them. People will be diverted to volunteer-staffed out-of-the-cold programs, putting

increased and new pressures on them. We're going to be filling our jails with drug- and alcohol-addicted people rather than treating them.

Will you assure this assembly today that you will address this funding shortfall and ensure that it is addressed effectively and adequately so that these

centres can reverse their decisions and announce the reversal of their decisions to close their doors?

Hon Mr Smitherman: I remind the member of what I said in my earlier answer, which is that I'm going to work to get the information together

and get back to him.

I agree that this is one element of our health care budget that is under considerable strain, and would agree with the honourable member that for three of the

five years that the NDP was in power they did not raise the base budgets of these organizations. I think that's a concern that has carried forward and become even more dramatic over time.

On December 22, when I was doing a ride out with the EMS in Toronto, I had the opportunity to visit St Mike's detox. I agree very much with the analysis that

the honourable member offers in terms of the vitally important role these detoxes provide in communities, and I endeavour to seek a resolution that is more satisfactory than the one the member

outlines.

TRANSIT FUNDING

Mr Lorenzo Berardinetti (Scarborough Southwest): My question is for the Minister of Transportation. On Friday, this government made a historic

announcement for transit in this province. We announced that, for the first time, gas tax money will be shared with municipalities. In my reading alone, gas tax money will go directly to the TTC,

and that's for the first time. What this means for the people of Scarborough Southwest is that new money will go to the three subway stations located in that riding. There will be better bus

service on roads like Kingston Road and Eglinton Avenue, as well as reduced congestion on various roads.

Toronto is getting more than half the provincial gas tax funding, which totals $81 million. The province has already committed $128 million for the TTC in

2004-05, and with this additional $81 million, the total comes to $209 million.

Minister, what I'd like to ask you is, for the record, can you explain to my constituents, the people of Scarborough Southwest, what these new benefits mean to

them and to all people in Ontario?

Hon Harinder S. Takhar (Minister of Transportation): Actually, I'm very delighted to tell you that last Friday, the Premier and I and several

of my colleagues were in Mississauga to make a very important announcement about the gas tax. We made a commitment to give two cents of gasoline tax to the municipalities and we are delivering on

it. Starting on October 1, we have set aside one cent of the gasoline tax. It will go to one and a half cents next October and, a year after, it will be the two full cents. I want to stress that

this is permanent money, this is new money and it will give the municipalities the tools to start planning ahead. We are also providing municipalities with flexibility so they can use this money

either for capital or for operating.

My friend asked, how will it benefit the communities? Definitely, funding transit will help reduce pollution, it will contribute to easing gridlock, it will

make investments in transit attractive and it will make them more accessible.

Mr Kevin Daniel Flynn (Oakville): I also have a question for the Minister of Transportation. As a member from the GTA, I too was surprised to

hear about Toronto's lukewarm reception to the funding announcement. In my riding, Oakville received a total of over a million dollars and will be using that money to increase transit service to

areas of Oakville that are currently not serviced. I know that my constituents and the municipal government in my own riding were extremely pleased with the commitment that we made and that we

delivered on.

Minister, how are you responding to the strange and misguided comments from Toronto?

Hon Mr Takhar: Let me say this again: We are very proud of the commitment that we made. Let me just tell you what the mayor of Mississauga

said: "What a difference this will make to public transit here in Mississauga and across Ontario. It's great to see a government that realizes the value of public transit, puts this kind of funding

into it and fulfills its promise."

I was in Waterloo on Friday, and the chair said, "More buses, more often, more efficiently." That's what transit riders in the Waterloo region can expect as a

result of the new funding announced yesterday.

Not only just the mayors in Ontario, but the mayor of Halifax said, "We envy them," and he said they were, "decisions we look forward to from our province."

Not only that, but the Leader of the Opposition said it's a good idea and a good first step.

I was disappointed to hear about some of the comments from Toronto, and I want to be very clear and tell the people of Toronto that this is new money. It's on

top of all the programs we already have.

OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR GENERAL

Mr Gerry Martiniuk (Cambridge): My question is to the Minister of Consumer and Business Services. Well, Ollie, it's another fine mess you've

got us into. You took over the registrar general's office, staffed by the good people of Thunder Bay to a great extent, and you have created absolute chaos. There are horror stories of delays over

eight months, no telephone calls returned -- including MPPs, by the way -- and lost applications. You cut out same-day service and substituted emergency service. Well, let me tell you about that.

All provinces have emergency or rush services, but in Ontario you have to prove that there's an emergency. You're treating Ontarians like criminals, unlike other provinces. When are you going to

stop treating Ontarians like criminals?

Hon Jim Watson (Minister of Consumer and Business Services): I'd like to welcome my new critic and thank him for his first question. I look

forward to working with him. I have extended an opportunity to the member to fully brief him on the challenges and the opportunities that we've undertaken at the ORG within our ministry. We're

still waiting to hear back from the member. The offer still stands.

I would suggest to the honourable member that he talk to some of the former Ministers of Consumer and Business Services who are in his caucus; he actually has

three of them. Maybe he can ask them why, when they were in government, they cut back the ORG by 12% and some $6.3 million. We're finally cleaning up the mess and the backlog that you left

behind.

Mr Martiniuk: Well, isn't that a surprise? When you panicked in this portfolio, you went out and hired 151 new employees, and then you fired

them all. You're right back where we were one year ago. Let me tell you --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Order. The member for Cambridge, would you complete your question.

Mr Martiniuk: You and your administration have caused hardship, pain and suffering to the many people of Ontario who have tried to get birth

certificates and marriage certificates, and yet the service you're providing -- you say on your Web site it's six to eight weeks minimum. Well, what is happening in Ontario? Why, in PEI, can you

get a birth certificate in 10 working days; Quebec, 20 days; Alberta, 24 days; Saskatchewan, two to three days; and here I've got a lady who has written to one of our members that it's taken over

eight months? Can you imagine?

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Minister?

Hon Mr Watson: I want that member to ask me a question every day. It's wonderful.

This is not back to the future. We're not interested in going back to the way your party ran the ORG. In fact, to correct the record, we still have those 151

hard-working employees fixing the mess that you created. I'd encourage the member, before he asks another question, to come on over. We'll give you a briefing. We'll introduce you to some of those

151 people who are helping to go through the backlog.

There are still backlogs at the ORG, but we've taken the backlog from about 30 weeks down to six to eight weeks for birth certificates. For birth

registrations, we still have some way to go. That's why we've kept those hard-working employees on, to get to the level of service that I have a level of comfort in, to serve the people of

Ontario.

The Speaker: New question.

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Minister of Consumer and Business Services. You've claimed for a year now that

you have fixed the problems at the registrar general's office. I want to bring to your attention today a particular problem.

When someone applies for a birth certificate and they live on a First Nation, they need to have a guarantor who can guarantee their identity. They go to their

chief, who's duly elected, and they find out that their chief cannot act as a guarantor. But if they live in a non-native community, they can go to the mayor of the community and he or she, acting

as mayor, can guarantee their situation.

Can you tell me, Minister -- you claim that you've fixed everything -- why it is that someone living in a First Nation community would be subjected to this

kind of discrimination?

Hon Mr Watson: In fact, I think that's a very reasonable and thoughtful suggestion. I have already been in contact with a number of chiefs of

First Nations. We have indicated to them that, with their support, we're more than willing to allow chiefs to have the same status as mayors and other individuals on the guarantor list. They'd be

more than welcome to sit down with my colleague the minister responsible for native affairs to ensure that they have the same kind of access, as guarantors, as lawyers and other professions as long

as they meet the criteria, and I believe they will.

Mr Hampton: I'm quite interested to receive that response after so many First Nations chiefs have raised it and my office has raised it.

I also want to raise this issue. One option might be for an aboriginal person to go to a police officer to have their identity guaranteed. When we look at the

list of guarantors, a member of the Ontario Provincial Police, the RCMP, or a municipal police force can be a guarantor, but if you happen to work for Nishnawbe Aski Nation policing, I guess you

can't. If you work for Treaty Three policing, you can't.

Once again, Minister, a year after you say you fixed the problems, can you tell us why a police officer who works for NAN policing or who works for Treaty

Three policing somehow is not classified as a police officer for the purposes of guaranteeing someone's identity for a birth certificate?

Hon Mr Watson: I have the guarantor form here. It's my understanding -- and I will verify this -- in discussing this with my officials not too

long ago that chiefs of police from the native community, the First Nations community, are in fact eligible.

I'm quite prepared -- if you have some specific examples of a police chief from the native community who has been rejected, please send them over to me,

because, quite frankly, if that is the case, that too is not acceptable.

I also point out the fact that I have not claimed that all of the problems are resolved at the ORG; far from it. But I can tell you that the McGuinty

government -- our Premier and this cabinet and this caucus -- is serious about improving the level of service for all Ontarians. I would ask the NDP to stand up and apologize for their 12% cut in

the ORG that cost $3 million and created the backlog that we're now fixing.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Mr Bruce Crozier (Essex): My question is for the Minister of Health.

Interjections.

Mr Crozier: My question, and I'm sure the opposition wants to hear it, is for the Minister of Health. I understand that some hospitals have

completed their construction projects or will have completed them later in the fiscal year. The problem is that unless these hospitals are provided with what is known as post-construction operating

plan funding, these facilities may sit empty. I'd like to know what our plan is to deal with that and when they might expect funding for their operating costs.

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I'm very pleased to be able to announce to the House today news that that we'll

shortly flow -- or instantly, I suppose, if people are watching -- to five hospitals in the province of Ontario, related to their post-operating cost construction. This is, of course, new

construction in the province: Windsor Regional Hospital in 2004-05, $8.1 million; St. Joseph's Hospital in Hamilton, $3.3 million; Joseph Brant hospital in Burlington, $1.8 million; Leamington

hospital -- in the member's home community, as I understand it -- $700,000; and Norfolk General, $200,000.

I think this is further evidence of our commitment to work with Ontario's hospitals, to make sure they're continuing to be able to provide the incredibly

important work in the province.

PETITIONS

CHILDREN'S HEALTH SERVICES

Mr Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas there are approximately 23,000 children and youth in Simcoe county and York region who have special needs; and

"Whereas approximately 6,000 of these children have multiple special needs that require a range of core rehabilitation services; and

"Whereas children with multiple special needs (and their families) throughout the province access ongoing rehabilitation services that are critical for their

development at children's treatment centres in their area; and

"Whereas there is no children's treatment centre in Simcoe county or York region. For families that can travel, the closest services are in Toronto; and

"Whereas Simcoe county and York region is the only area left in the entire province that does not have access to children's treatment centre services in their

own area; and

"Whereas the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care provided funding to the Simcoe York District Health Council for implementation planning for an integrated

children's rehabilitation services system in December 2001; and

"Whereas the implementation plan was submitted to the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care in December 2002; and

"Whereas the proposal was reviewed and approved by the appropriate ministries in 2003 and in August the Ministry of Health advised the Simcoe county and York

region ... health council that the funding had been committed and would be available shortly;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislature of Ontario to release the funding for the children's treatment centre in Simcoe county and York region so that

core rehabilitation services can be delivered to the children and youth in Simcoe county and York region."

I'm pleased to sign my name to that.

HEALTH CARE SERVICES

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

"Whereas the McGuinty Liberal government is cutting provincial funding for essential health care services like optometry, physiotherapy and chiropractic

care;

"Whereas this privatization of health care services will force Ontarians to pay out-of-pocket for essential health care;

"Whereas Ontarians already pay for health care through their taxes and will be forced to pay even more through the government's new regressive health tax;

"Whereas the Liberals promised during the election that they would not cut or privatize health care services in Ontario;

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

"We demand the McGuinty Liberal government keep its promises and guarantee adequate provincial funding for critical health services like eye, physiotherapy and

chiropractic care."

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

PHYSICAL EDUCATION

Mr Jeff Leal (Peterborough): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas North Americans (USA and Canada) have become continuously heavier, and overweight persons now make up over 65% of the population; and

"Whereas obesity among children has now been termed an epidemic; and

"Whereas diseases such as diabetes type 2, circulatory disease, knee replacements and some cancers are known to be associated with obesity; and

"Whereas such chronic diseases could be prevented by an active lifestyle and training,

"We, the undersigned citizens of Ontario, request that physical education be reinstated in our schools as a mandatory subject, with an emphasis on training

toward lifelong productive skills."

I affix my name to this petition.

CHILDREN'S HEALTH SERVICES

Mr Joseph N. Tascona (Barrie-Simcoe-Bradford): I have a petition to the Legislature of Ontario which reads as follows:

"Whereas there are approximately 23,000 children and youth in Simcoe county and York region who have special needs; and

"Whereas approximately 6,000 of these children have multiple special needs that require a range of core rehabilitation services; and

"Whereas children with multiple special needs (and their families) throughout the province access ongoing rehabilitation services that are critical for their

development at children's treatment centres in their area; and

"Whereas there is no children's treatment centre in Simcoe county or York region. For families that can travel, the closest services are in Toronto; and

"Whereas Simcoe county and York region is the only area left in the entire province that does not have access to children's treatment centre services in their

own area; and

"Whereas the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care provided funding to the Simcoe York District Health Council for implementation planning for an integrated

children's rehabilitation services system in December 2001; and

"Whereas the implementation plan was submitted to the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care in December 2002; and

"Whereas the proposal was reviewed and approved by the appropriate ministries in 2003 and in August the Ministry of Health advised the Simcoe county and York

region district health council that the funding had been committed and would be available shortly;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislature of Ontario to release the funding for the children's treatment centre in Simcoe county and York region so that

core rehabilitation services can be delivered to the children and youth in Simcoe county and York region."

I affix my signature and support it.

HEALTH CARE SERVICES

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): I have a petition.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the McGuinty Liberal government is cutting provincial funding for essential health care services like optometry, physiotherapy and chiropractic

care;

"Whereas this privatization of health care services will force Ontarians to pay out-of-pocket for essential health care;

"Whereas Ontarians already pay for health care through their taxes and will be forced to pay even more through the government's new regressive health tax;

"Whereas the Liberals promised during the election that they would not cut or privatize health care services in Ontario;

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

"We demand the McGuinty Liberal government keep its promises and guarantee adequate provincial funding for critical health services like eye, physiotherapy and

chiropractic care."

I have affixed my signature as well, and I'm sending this to the clerks' table with page Anmol.

CHIROPRACTIC SERVICES

Mr Shafiq Qaadri (Etobicoke North): I have a petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Re: support for chiropractic services in Ontario health insurance plan:

"Whereas the elimination of OHIP coverage will mean that many of the 1.2 million patients who use chiropractic will no longer be able to access the health care

they need;

"Those with reduced ability to pay -- including seniors, low-income families and the working poor -- will be forced to seek care in already overburdened family

physician offices and emergency departments;

"Elimination of OHIP coverage is expected to save $93 million in expenditures on chiropractic treatment at a cost to government of over $200 million in other

health care costs; and

"There was no consultation with the public on the decision to delist chiropractic services;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to reverse the decision announced in the May 18, 2004, provincial budget and maintain OHIP

coverage for chiropractic services, in the best interests of the public, patients, the health care system, government and the province."

I will deliver this to you, Speaker, through page Norah.

LESLIE M. FROST CENTRE

Mr Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): I have several more petitions to save the Leslie M. Frost Centre, and I shall read one.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Leslie M. Frost Centre has been Ontario's leading natural resources education, training and conference centre aimed at fostering an understanding

of natural resource management, with a focus on ecosystems and how they can be sustained for future generations; and

"Whereas the McGuinty government refused to consult with municipalities and other user groups before taking this drastic action and continues to operate in a

clandestine manner; and

"Whereas this move will hurt the people and economies of Muskoka and Haliburton, especially those in the local tourism industry; and

"Whereas the Frost centre is a valuable resource for elementary, secondary, post-secondary institutions, as well as a variety of other groups;

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

"That the McGuinty government reverse the decision to close the Leslie M. Frost Centre...."

I support this petition and affix my signature to it.

GO TRANSIT SERVICE

Mr Bob Delaney (Mississauga West): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario from a number of people in Toronto, Mississauga,

Thornhill, Brampton and Etobicoke. It reads as follows:

"Whereas the city of Mississauga has, within a generation, grown from a linked collection of suburban and farming communities into Canada's sixth-largest city,

and tens of thousands of people daily need to commute into and out of Mississauga in order to do business, educate themselves and their families and enjoy culture and recreation; and

"Whereas gridlock on all roads leading into and out of Mississauga makes peak period road commuting impractical, and commuter rail service on the Milton GO

line is restricted to morning and afternoon service into and out of Toronto; and

"Whereas residents of western Mississauga need to commute to commute, driving along traffic-clogged roads to get to overflowing parking lots at the Meadowvale,

Streetsville and Erindale GO train stations;

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

"That the government of Ontario, through the Ministry of Transportation and highways, instruct GO Transit to allocate sufficient resources from its 2004-05

capital budget to proceed immediately with the acquisition of land and construction of a new GO train station, called Lisgar, at Tenth Line and the rail tracks, to alleviate the parking congestion,

and provide better access to GO train service on the Milton line for residents of western Mississauga."

I thank them for their petition, and I agree wholeheartedly will with it. I will have Alyscha carry it.

CHILDREN'S HEALTH SERVICES

Mrs Julia Munro (York North): To the Legislature of Ontario:

"Whereas there are approximately 23,000 children and youth in Simcoe county and York region who have special needs; and

"Whereas approximately 6,000 of these children have multiple special needs that require a range of core rehabilitation services; and

"Whereas children with multiple special needs (and their families) throughout the province access ongoing rehabilitation services that are critical for their

development at children's treatment centres in their area; and

"Whereas there is no children's treatment centre in Simcoe county or York region. For families that can travel, the closest services are in Toronto; and

"Whereas Simcoe county and York region is the only area left in the entire province that does not have access to children's treatment centres services in their

own area....

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislature of Ontario to release the funding for the children's treatment centre in Simcoe county and York region so that

core rehabilitation services can be delivered to the children and youth in Simcoe county and York region."

I agree with this petition and affix my signature.

OPTOMETRISTS

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): I have a petition addressed to the Ontario Legislature.

"Whereas the Legislative Assembly of the province of Ontario will be considering a private member's bill that aims to amend the Optometry Act to give

optometrists the authority to prescribe therapeutic pharmaceutical agents for the treatment of certain eye diseases; and

"Whereas optometrists are highly trained and equipped with the knowledge and specialized instrumentation needed to effectively diagnose and treat certain eye

problems; and

"Whereas extending the authority to prescribe TPAs to optometrists will help relieve the demands on ophthalmologists and physicians who currently have the

exclusive domain for prescribing TPAs to optometry patients; and

"Whereas the bill introduced by New Democrat Peter Kormos ... will ensure that patients receive prompt, timely, one-stop care where appropriate;

"Therefore, I do support the bill proposing an amendment to the Optometry Act to give optometrists the authority to prescribe therapeutic pharmaceutical agents

for the treatment of certain eye diseases and I urge the government of Ontario to ensure speedy passage of the bill."

I have affixed my signature as well.

CHIROPRACTIC SERVICES

Mr Jeff Leal (Peterborough): I have a petition today from the Chisholm chiropractic clinic, which is located at 200 Rubidge Street in

Peterborough, Ontario. It says:

"To: Legislative Assembly of Ontario

"Re support for chiropractic services in Ontario health insurance plan:

"Whereas,

"Elimination of OHIP coverage will mean that many of the 1.2 million patients who use chiropractic will no longer be able to access the health care they

need;

"Those with reduced ability to pay -- including seniors, low-income families and the working poor -- will be forced to seek care in already overburdened family

physician offices and emergency departments;

"Elimination of OHIP coverage is expected to save $93 million in expenditures on chiropractic treatment at a cost to government of over $200 million in other

health care costs; and

"There was no consultation with the public on the decision to delist chiropractic services;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to reverse the decision announced in the May 18, 2004, provincial budget and maintain OHIP

coverage for chiropractic services, in the best interests of the public, patients, the health care system, government and the province" of Ontario.

I give it to my friend, page Justin.

HEALTH CARE

Mr Gerry Martiniuk (Cambridge): This petition is signed by thousands of good citizens of Cambridge.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Ontario McGuinty Liberal government has plans to delist chiropractic, physiotherapy and optometrist services from OHIP coverage; and

"Whereas 1.2 million people use chiropractic services each year in Ontario and many more, including numerous seniors, use physiotherapy and optometrist

services; and

"Whereas these services are an important part of our health care and if privatized will not be available to those who cannot afford them;

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

"That the McGuinty Liberal government not delist chiropractic, physiotherapy and optometrist services from OHIP coverage."

I sign the same in support of it.

IMMIGRANTS' SKILLS

Mr Bob Delaney (Mississauga West): I have a petition here from a group of employees of Skylink Travel. It's to the Ontario Legislative

Assembly and it reads:

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

raise their families, educate their children and pursue their livelihoods and careers; and

"Whereas newcomers to Canada who choose to settle in Ontario find frequent and unnecessary obstacles that prevent skilled tradespeople, professional and

managerial talent from practising the professions, trades and occupations for which they have been trained in their country of origin; and

"Whereas Ontario, its businesses, its people and its institutions badly need the professional, managerial and technical skills that many newcomers to Canada

have and want to use;

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

"That the government of Ontario, through the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities and the other institutions and agencies of and within the

government of Ontario, undertake specific and proactive measures to work with the bodies regulating access to Ontario's professions, trades and other occupations in order that newcomers to Canada

gain fair, timely and cost-effective access to certification and other measures that facilitate the entry, or re-entry, of skilled workers and professionals trained outside Canada into the Canadian

workforce."

This is a petition with which I wholeheartedly agree. I've signed it, and I'm going to have Norah carry it down.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

LIQUOR LICENCE

AMENDMENT ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LES PERMIS D'ALCOOL

Resuming the debate adjourned on October 13, 2004, on the motion for second reading of Bill 96,

An Act to amend the Liquor Licence Act / Projet de loi 96, Loi

modifiant la

Loi sur les permis d'alcool.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr Bruce Crozier): The Member for Niagara Centre.

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): Thank you kindly, Speaker. You'll recall that I began my comments on this second reading debate a few days

ago, and I have but seven or seven and a half minutes left before I have to wrap up.

Like everybody else here, I was down in Welland and Thorold and Pelham and St Catharines -- not that everybody else was down in Welland and Thorold and Pelham

and St Catharines, although they should have been, but they were in their respective ridings as well. I talked, just like everybody else here, to a whole lot of folks, a whole lot of Ontarians. I

tell you, not one, not a single one of those people, expressed to me a fervour for being able to bring their own wine to a restaurant.

I had people tell me about their fear of ever-escalating hydro rates here in Ontario, about electricity prices that are skyrocketing because this government

embarks on that foolish, painful and dangerous -- 145,000 jobs are at risk because of your electricity policy; 145,000 jobs here in Ontario because of your playing games and your partnership with

the private, for-profit electricity generation sector. I had people tell me about that.

I had people tell me about their fear of the privatization of health care here in Ontario. They were witnesses to the privatization of chiropractic treatment

and optometry and physiotherapy. They know that's but the first shoe to hit the floor.

Folks talked to me about tuition fees, frozen for two years at the highest rate they've ever been. Thank you very much for freezing them when they're sky-high

and unaffordable for the vast majority of young Ontarians and their families.

I had people talk to me about this Liberal government's shameful attack on persons with disabilities by virtue of but a 3% increase in the assistance provided

to ODSP beneficiaries.

I had folks talk to me and express concern about the fact that the minimum wage was the victim of more spare-changing by the Liberals here at Queen's Park. Do

you understand what I'm saying? When people elected Liberals, they voted for change and ended up getting spare-changed. They ended up getting but spare change.

I had folks talk to me about auto insurance premiums that continue to climb, notwithstanding this government's promise in the first instance to reduce them by

10% and then a subsequent reduction of 10%, when the reality is that the vast majority of drivers out there are continuing to get ripped off, robbed, mugged by their auto insurance companies, by

the private, for-profit auto insurance sector here in Ontario that's been crying poverty for decades but has been laughing all the way to the bank with the hard-earned money of automobile owners

and drivers, premium payers.

The only people who have committed more theft and stolen more money from more people, surely -- I suppose Conrad Black would rank as a half-decent competitor

to the auto insurance industry. If Barbara Amiel is in any way guilty by virtue of being the receiver of those stolen goods, she may fall into that same category. But there ain't a big enough jail

cell in this province to contain the insurance industries that have committed crimes against innocent accident victims and against drivers and premium payers here in Ontario.

So here we are. This government sees as somehow a priority the proposition, bring your own wine. Why not bring your own crème brûlée? Why not

bring your own carrot sticks? After all, the appetizer and the dessert are what add up when you're calculating a tab at the end of a meal. New Democrats are insistent that this bill go to

broad-based public committee hearings.

First, MADD -- Mothers Against Drunk Driving -- indicate that they were not consulted, notwithstanding the impression that the minister has attempted to give,

huh, Mr Dunlop? Mothers Against Drunk Driving have a history of credible and responsible input to legislative and policy endeavours by any number of governments of every political stripe, and I

quite frankly consider Mothers Against Drunk Driving pretty much an authority on the issue of booze and access to booze and drinking and driving. I'm interested in what Mothers Against Drunk

Driving have to say about this legislation, because I know they're concerned about it.

The government paraded a couple of individuals purporting to speak for huge parts, huge numbers from the hospitality industry. I'm afraid they speak for much

smaller portions than they would have us believe they do. I have no doubt that this government -- in fact, they have -- identified one restauranteur who's an advocate of bring your own wine, but I

say to you that the vast majority of restauranteurs want nothing to do with this proposition. More importantly, don't just talk to the corporate owners or non-corporate owners. Talk to the wait

staff.

I was at lunch recently, here in the city of Toronto, in a very good restaurant, not an inexpensive one by any stretch of the imagination. The waiter, whom

I've known for some time, has been in the business for 30 years. He's just an impressive professional. He is a professional as a wait service person. I asked him his opinion about this bill. He

thinks it stinks. He wants nothing to do with it. I encouraged him. If New Democrats were successful -- I trust, along with the Conservative opposition here -- in getting this bill before

committee, I asked him, pleaded with him, to make sure that his voice and other voices like his were articulated loudly and clearly at those committee hearings with this government once again

running roughshod over some of the hardest-working and lowest-income people in our communities: waiters and waitresses.

In high-class, high-priced restaurants, people have for decades and will continue to bring their own wine -- I know it's not advertised on the front door --

and nobody has voiced any problem or complaint about it. Is it legal? I suppose not, but it's been happening. The reality is that the government is marketing this to try to make a meal, it says,

more affordable. I say that this proposal will do nothing for the restaurant business, which depends largely on its non-food sales to make a profit. It will do nothing for wait staff, who depend

upon tips to make their wages anything more than totally insignificant. The government should not be particularly proud of this bill, nor of the speed with which it wants to have this legislation

passed.

Committee hearings: That's the bottom line, nothing less than that.

The Deputy Speaker: Questions and comments.

Mr David Orazietti (Sault Ste Marie): I'm pleased today to make a few comments with respect to Bill 96. This is a bill that Minister Watson

has shown tremendous leadership on. It is a very straightforward piece of legislation that should cause us very little difficulty in passing.

Mr Kormos commented with respect to meeting with MADD and consultations with other groups. Minister Watson has quite an extensive list of individuals he

consulted with. In fact, Minister Watson met with the national director and CEO in Queen's Park here on March 23, and he carried out a number of other consultations. Minister Watson was in my

riding of Sault Ste Marie and met with the chamber of commerce, and numerous individuals expressed their concern. But as we proceeded to indicate what specific aspects of this legislation would

apply and how they would work, the restaurant association seemed to have a greater appreciation for the impact of this.

Let's be very clear that jurisdictions such as New Brunswick, Alberta, British Columbia and Quebec participate in bring your own wine and take home the rest.

This is a very responsible piece of legislation, in my opinion. It allows individuals to take home wine they are unable to consume or do not wish to consume, relieving some of the pressure for them

to finish the wine they have at their table and drive home.

I think it's a progressive piece of legislation. It's a responsible piece of legislation. In fact, we have comments from an opposition member here, Mr Hudak,

the member for Erie-Lincoln, who said, "I'm in favour of bring-your-own. Let's look at the best practices. I think it's good for consumers, good for tourism. It was always my feeling as consumer

minister that we have to allow tourism operators to be innovative in order to compete with other locations."

Mr Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): It's my pleasure to add some comments to do with the member for Niagara Centre, who spoke so

passionately about Bill 96.

One of the questions he raised was really about priorities: Is this the top priority of the government, this bring your own wine legislation? He was talking

about all the people he's been running into and if they've been raising this on the street. I would have to agree with him that I have not run into a single person who has raised this issue as I've

gone around Parry Sound-Muskoka. I would suggest this is really a diversion from more important business that the government should be getting on with.

I can tell you some of the things I have been hearing about, though. I'm hearing a lot about the Leslie M. Frost Centre and how valuable it is to the people of

Haliburton, to the people of Parry Sound-Muskoka, to the people of all different parties -- those interested in the environment, those interested in education. There was going to be a conference

there this fall, where 1,600 young school children were going to attend to learn about the importance of the environment and learn about water. Unfortunately, that conference, which was supposed to

happen on September 30, was cancelled because they weren't able to find another location. That's what has happened because you closed the Leslie M. Frost Centre.

I'm hearing about Muskoka being taken out of the north. I've got a desk full of petitions on that issue, and on the fact that chiropractic, optometry and

physiotherapy services have been cancelled. I'm hearing about the cost of people's insurance -- auto insurance, motorcycle insurance. I'm hearing about hospital funding, for sure. South Muskoka

Memorial Hospital has received a 1% funding increase for this year; Huntsville, 1%. Those are going to cause some really serious concerns in my riding.

Those are the things I'm hearing about in the riding. I certainly have not heard from any individual I've run into about this particular bill.

Mr Kevin Daniel Flynn (Oakville): It's my pleasure to join the debate and add a few remarks. I come from a community that is quite dependent

on the tourism business. If you take a look at areas in Oakville, you'll find downtown Oakville with some of the finest restaurants in Ontario. I live in the other end of town, in Bronte. That's an

emerging area that's starting to attract tourism from all over the province and New York state as well.

When I talked to restaurant operators and people in the hotel industry -- and I understand some of the problems they've faced in the past -- what they tell me

they want is the flexibility to deal with problems, to deal with initiatives in their own way. They want the freedom of choice. They want to be able to exercise that freedom in a way that suits

their establishment, in ways that may not suit others.

It seems to me, when you look at the patrons in Ontario, the consumers of Ontario and the restaurant operators, that somehow we've been able to deal with this

issue in other jurisdictions in Canada. Take a look at New Brunswick and Alberta and Quebec: They seem to have implemented this type of legislation. Take a look at other countries. Take a look at

Australia, the United States -- several US states, actually. It's also available in British Columbia and Alberta.

It seems to me that it's the sort of thing whose time has come in Ontario. It's the sort of thing that I trust the hospitality industry and the consumers in

Ontario have the maturity to deal with. It's a sign, to me, of a civilized society. It seems to me that people in Ontario should be able to avail themselves of the same rights, when it comes to

their choice of restaurants and how beverages are served in those restaurants, as anybody else in Canada. To say, "We can't handle this," simply demeans the people of Ontario. I don't think this

government's prepared to do that.

Mr Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): I'm pleased to rise to make a few comments to the member from Niagara Centre as well. I think he was very

accurate in many of his comments. I have had no one come forward in my riding who supports this piece of legislation. I know the minister came forward with a couple of names of some restaurants --

probably his buddies up in Ottawa -- and he got some positive response from that. But I've had nothing but negative response from the restaurateurs and fine dining rooms in my riding of Simcoe

North, and I have to take their word for that. Individuals aren't coming forward a