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

September 25, 2006

38th Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2006-Sep-25 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Monday 25 September 2006 Lundi 25 septembre 2006

INTRODUCTION OF MEMBER

FOR PARKDALE-HIGH PARK

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

ONTARIO TARTAN

RIDING OF NORTHUMBERLAND

ROSH HASHANAH AND RAMADAN

CINN À HEARST

HEALTH PARTNERS INTERNATIONAL

OF CANADA

NORTHERN ONTARIO

SENIOR CITIZENS

PREMIER OF ONTARIO

CANADIAN FORCES

RESIGNATION OF MEMBER

FOR YORK-SOUTH WESTON

RESIGNATION OF MEMBER FOR MARKHAM

TABLING OF REPORTS

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

REQUEST TO THE INTEGRITY COMMISSIONER

RELEASE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

BIRTH OF MEMBER'S GRANDCHILD

VISITOR

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

COMITÉ PERMANENT

DE LA POLITIQUE SOCIALE /

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

SOCIAL POLICY

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

GENERAL GOVERNMENT

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

REGULATIONS AND PRIVATE BILLS

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

REGULATIONS AND PRIVATE BILLS

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

HIGHWAY TRAFFIC AMENDMENT ACT

(USE OF PORTABLE EQUIPMENT BY

NOVICE DRIVERS), 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 MODIFIANT LE CODE DE LA

ROUTE (UTILISATION DE MATÉRIEL

PORTATIF PAR LES CONDUCTEURS

DÉBUTANTS)

RESTORE THE DEED ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR LE RÉTABLISSEMENT

DES TITRES

CLIMATE CHANGE

AWARENESS DAY ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR LA JOURNÉE

DE SENSIBILISATION

AUX CHANGEMENTS CLIMATIQUES

MOTIONS

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

CONSUMER PROTECTION

EDUCATION /

ÉDUCATION

SEAT BELTS

ORAL QUESTIONS

AUTISM TREATMENT

EMERGENCY SERVICES

GOVERNMENT'S RECORD

AUTISM TREATMENT

EMERGENCY SERVICES

LANDFILL

ASSISTANCE TO FARMERS

AUTISM TREATMENT

EDUCATION FUNDING

WASTE MANAGEMENT

ORDERS OF THE DAY

MUNICIPAL STATUTE LAW

AMENDMENT ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 MODIFIANT DES LOIS

CONCERNANT LES MUNICIPALITÉS

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

INTRODUCTION OF MEMBER

FOR PARKDALE-HIGH PARK

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): I beg to inform the House that the Clerk has received from the Chief Election Officer and laid upon the table a certificate of the by-election in the

electoral district of Parkdale-High Park.

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Claude L. DesRosiers):

"Mr. Claude DesRosiers

"Clerk of the Legislative Assembly

"Room 104

"Legislative Building

"Queen's Park

"Toronto, Ontario

"M7A 1A2

"Dear Mr. DesRosiers:

"A writ of election dated the 16th day of August, 2006, was issued by the Honourable Lieutenant Governor of the province of Ontario, and was addressed to Ted Scaldwell, returning officer for the electoral

district of Parkdale-High Park, for the election of a member to represent the said electoral district of Parkdale-High Park in the Legislative Assembly of this province in the room of Gerard Kennedy who, since his election as representative of the

said electoral district of Parkdale-High Park, has resigned his seat. This is to certify that, a poll having been granted and held in Parkdale-High Park on the 14th day of September, 2006, Cheri DiNovo has been returned as duly elected as appears

by the return of the said writ of election, dated the 22nd of September, 2006, which is now lodged of record in my office.

"John L. Hollins

"Chief Election Officer

"Toronto, September 22, 2006."

Ms. DiNovo was escorted into the chamber by Mr. Hampton and Mr. Kormos.

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): I have the honour to present to you and the House Cheri DiNovo, member-elect for the electoral district of Parkdale-High Park, who has taken the oath and

signed the roll and now claims the right to take her seat.

The Speaker: Let the honourable member take her seat.

Applause.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

ONTARIO TARTAN

Mr. Bill Murdoch (Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound): Let me first congratulate and welcome the new member for Parkdale-High Park, Cheri DiNovo, to Queen's Park.

Mr. Speaker, I'd like to now welcome all of us back to the Legislature with a good-news story. After waiting years for this moment, it is with honour that I bring to you today, for the first time, the official

tartan of the province of Ontario. This is a district tartan identifying the wearer as being from the province of Ontario, comprised of four colours: blue, green, white and red. The tartan represents what we love about our great province and is

also a reflection of our history.

The kilt, made by Mrs. Marlene Reid of Scottish Imports in Hamilton, reflects the diversity of our province. In the tartan, the shades of green represent the forests and agriculture of Ontario, the red

represents the First Nations, the shades of blue represent our water, and the white represents the sky over Ontario. This tartan was designed by Mr. James MacNeil, Marlene Reid's father.

Mr. Speaker, this really wasn't just another opportunity to wear the kilt. Mrs. Reid did a wonderful job, and so it is my pleasure to recognize her work by being the first to wear it on our first day back to the

Legislature.

Finally, I'd like to recognize my former colleague Lillian Ross, who was the first to introduce this bill back in 1997. I'd also like to thank the government of Ontario on helping to establish the official

tartan for Ontario and adding one more symbol to our rich heritage.

RIDING OF NORTHUMBERLAND

Mr. Lou Rinaldi (Northumberland): Let me first welcome our new member to the Legislature. Welcome.

Today I rise in the House to say thank you: thank you to my fellow MPPs and colleagues who visited my riding of Northumberland last week for a caucus retreat; thank you to the government cabinet ministers who

took the time to meet with stakeholders in my riding; thank you to the local artist Beth Hoselton for donating two beautiful pieces of artwork that raised over $1,200 for the Northumberland United Way; and thank you to the best Premier this

province has seen in many, many years.

Premier McGuinty, thank you for the family health teams that are up and running in Brighton and Campbellford in my riding of Northumberland. Thank you for committing to a community health centre in Port Hope and

Trenton. Thank you for the new CT scanner at the Trenton Memorial Hospital. Thank you, Premier, for 174 new teachers in my riding of Northumberland. Thank you for the $7.6 million to improve and build local roads and bridges through Move Ontario.

Thank you for over $8 million in Ontario municipal partnership funding; that's $3 million over the old CRF funding. Thank you for providing the funding for 212 new daycare spaces when the new federal Conservative government discontinued the

funding. And thank you, Premier, for being the leader of this open and transparent government that I'm so proud to be part of.

ROSH HASHANAH AND RAMADAN

Mrs. Julia Munro (York North): I'm pleased to rise today to honour Canadians of the Muslim and Jewish faiths as we recognize Rosh Hashanah and the first day of Ramadan.

To Jews throughout the world, Rosh Hashanah represents the day of judgment, where they examine past deeds and ask for forgiveness for their sins. It is the day on which the shofar, or ram's horn, is blown in the

temple to herald the beginning of the High Holy Days. It is the day of remembrance, where Jews review the history of their people and pray for Israel. And it is, of course, New Year's Day.

For Muslims in Canada, today is the first day of the month of Ramadan. This is the ninth month of the Islamic calendar and is considered the holiest month. Prayers, fasting, self-accountability and charity have

special associations with Ramadan. Muslims believe that during Ramadan, the revelation of the Quran to the prophet Muhammad began. The entire month is spent fasting from dawn to dusk.

On behalf of this House, I join with all Ontarians in giving our best wishes for Rosh Hashanah and the first day of Ramadan.

CINN À HEARST

M. Gilles Bisson (Timmins-Baie James): Monsieur le Président, vous allez demander pourquoi je suis un peu moins barbu aujourd'hui. C'est une question que je suis sûr que les autres

députés de l'Assemblée vont demander également.

C'est bien simple. Les communautés de Hearst, Hallébourg, Mattice, Jogues, et toutes les autres communautés aux environs ont fait

partie cette fin de semaine d'un radiothon à CINN-FM, la

radio communautaire de Hearst et de la région, où elles ont mis comme défi d'être capables de soulever 20 000 $ pour la radio. L'année passée, comme beaucoup d'entre vous le savent, on a fait 15 000 $.

On a dépassé cette année 20 000 $ dans le défi qu'on a faisant affaire avec la régie d'alcool, qui était fermée ; c'est un événement cette année.

On a eu beaucoup de succès. Une des affaires qu'on a demandées, c'était que si je pourrais présider comme président d'honneur à la radio CINN à Hearst, et à environ

4 h de l'après-midi dimanche, deux heures avant qu'on ait fini l'événement, on était un peu plus que 5 000 $ à court de notre 20 000 $. Ils m'ont posé un défi. Ils ont dit,

« Monsieur Bisson, êtes-vous préparé à couper votre barbe ? Si on atteint 20 000 $, allez-vous le faire ? »

J'ai dit oui, et justement, la communauté de Hearst et les environs de Mattice, Opasatika, Constance Lake, Hallébourg et toutes les autres places comme Jogues sont arrivées au défi pour dire,

« Oui, on va supporter notre radio communautaire. » On a soulevé plus que 20 000 $. Ça va pour montrer, premièrement, que la communauté appuie toujours la radio communautaire; deuxièmement, on

est une équipe qui est très dynamique; et troisièmement, on sait comment se prendre en main au nord de l'Ontario.

Félicitations, CINN.

HEALTH PARTNERS INTERNATIONAL

OF CANADA

Mr. Kuldip Kular (Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale): It's an honour to rise today at the start of a new session of government to acknowledge yet another outstanding organization in my riding of

Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale.

During the summer, I had the privilege to visit the Health Partners International of Canada distribution centre in my riding. This charity is a national organization that helps Canadians to send medical aid to

the developing world. It works alongside many associations, such as the World Health Organization and the Canadian International Development Agency, to ensure that vital medicines are expedited quickly to aid workers for efficient delivery to the

people who need them most.

It's great to see an organization which not only has such a positive influence on the community but also on other parts of the world. I'm truly proud and honoured that HPIC is a part of my riding, and I

encourage it to continue in all its humanitarian efforts.

HPIC's response to the conflict in Lebanon was the shipment of 60 physician travel packs to Lebanon in August. There were enough medicines in those packs to treat 60,000 people.

I have every confidence that they will continue to thrive in bringing medical aid to millions of adults and children in the developing world from right here in my riding of Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale.

NORTHERN ONTARIO

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): John Tory keeps his promises. This past weekend, more than 100 attendees met in North Bay for the northern summit. John Tory committed to a northern summit

in his leadership race and, unlike Dalton McGuinty, who says anything and promises anything to get elected, John Tory does what he says he's going to do.

We heard that Dalton McGuinty broke his promise to the resource industry and his promise to take action on the high cost of electricity, a promise he made a year ago. Four thousand jobs later, his energy

minister's plan is to tell northerners, "Too bad, so bad. Wrap yourself in a blanket and drink some good red wine."

The fact is that in Dalton McGuinty's northern Ontario wait times are up, there are not enough doctors, youth are leaving, the forestry sector is dying, and northerners feel cut out of the decision-making

process. The Liberal one-size-fits-all plan doesn't work in the north.

Thankfully, this weekend we heard some exciting things that the north can do. We heard about the possibilities for the future in mining and forestry, the opportunities to create economic development for

aboriginal communities, and the wonderful results that can be achieved if we work to bring better infrastructure in telecommunications to northern Ontario.

Needless to say, it was a great weekend. I want especially to thank John Tory for holding, attending and contributing so much to the summit and, by so doing, honouring a promise he made to the north: keeping a

promise, something northerners now know not all politicians --

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

SENIOR CITIZENS

Ms. Deborah Matthews (London North Centre): I've always said that the seniors in my riding of London North Centre are especially dynamic and involved members of the community. I'd like to take

this opportunity to tell you about a few of them.

A few weeks ago I was fortunate to have the opportunity to see some amazing Londoners perform in the RBC Seniors' Jubilee at Roy Thomson Hall here in Toronto. Some of these fine people are here with us

today.

One of the performers was Sebastiano Barberi, known as Sam to his adoring friends. Sam was an outstanding performer and has wowed audiences across the world. His magnificent rendition of Nessun Dorma and La

donna è mobile brought many of the audience at Roy Thomson Hall, including myself, to tears.

Also at the seniors' jubilee, I had the joy of seeing Deborah O'Hara's Stardust Cloggers. This dance troupe was spectacular, and their energetic performance delighted the audience members and proved that age is

just a state of mind. Along with Debbie, the troupe is made up of Sylvia Nichols, Marie Munro, Janette Irwin, Annette Laidlaw, Marg Fountain, Chyleen Munday, Brenda Primmer, Sherry Jordan and Nancy Brandie.

I'm pleased to welcome this great group of seniors to the House today. I ask you to join me in thanking them all for sharing their outstanding talent with their fellow Ontarians and inspiring all of us to keep

active, no matter what our age.

PREMIER OF ONTARIO

Mr. John Milloy (Kitchener Centre): Last Thursday, my community of Kitchener-Waterloo was pleased to host fDi magazine's annual Personality of the Year Award. fDi is a leading-edge,

international business magazine, part of the Financial Times Group, which is based in London, England. Each year, it recognizes the political and business leaders from around the world who have been most proactive, dynamic and innovative in

improving the business environment of their jurisdiction. Ontarians will be proud to know that this year's overall global winner was our Premier, the Honourable Dalton McGuinty. The Premier was recognized for his vision and leadership in terms of

research and innovation, our auto investment strategy and his efforts to guarantee a safe, clean and reliable supply of energy for our future.

The ceremony was also an important recognition of Waterloo region. Thursday's event marked the first time that fDi held their awards ceremony on this side of the Atlantic. Previous ceremonies have been held in

world-class cities like London, Amsterdam and Seoul, and now Kitchener-Waterloo has joined their ranks. My community's selection as host city is a testament to its economic success particularly in the area of research and innovation, success that

has been supported by the hard work of our Premier.

I'd like to congratulate Premier McGuinty on receiving this well-deserved international recognition. I would also like to thank the sponsors of the event, the Centre for International Governance Innovation,

Canada's technology triangle --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you. I know that everyone is quite happy to be back and happy to be visiting with all other members, but the level of ambient noise in here is a little

bit much for the Speaker to deal with. So if we could take the private conversations outside, that would be appreciated.

CANADIAN FORCES

Mr. Phil McNeely (Ottawa-Orléans): Last Friday, I was part of an event hosted by News Talk Radio 580 CFRA in Ottawa. I had the pleasure of joining a huge crowd on Parliament Hill in front

of the Peace Tower in support of our troops. It is so important to let our troops know that they have our support, that we appreciate the sacrifices they are making. Every Friday, we are encouraged to wear red to show our support for the Canadian

Forces.

This past Friday on Parliament Hill, a gathering of over 20,000 people donned their red hats, shirts, bandanas and jackets and participated in a giant public rally. We were joined by police officers,

firefighters, city staff, politicians of all stripes, OC Transpo staff, paramedics, United Way workers, private business people and more in a colourful parade of veterans to show our respect and thanks in a very public way.

I attended the event with Minister Jim Watson and members of my staff, colleagues and friends. In the comfort of our safe, comfortable environment, it is so easy to forget the Canadian men and women who live

constantly in a state of uncertainty and danger. I know that Friday's rally was an important support for our troops and served as a reminder to all of us that we must always be grateful for what we have here in Ontario and Canada.

RESIGNATION OF MEMBER

FOR YORK-SOUTH WESTON

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): I beg to inform the House that during the recess a vacancy has occurred in the membership of the House by reason of the resignation of Joe Cordiano as the

member for the electoral district of York-South Weston, effective the 22nd day of September, 2006.

RESIGNATION OF MEMBER FOR MARKHAM

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): I beg to inform the House that during the recess, a vacancy has occurred in the membership of the House by reason of the resignation of Tony Wong as member

for the electoral district of Markham, effective the 22nd day of September, 2006.

TABLING OF REPORTS

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): I beg to inform the House that during the adjournment, the following reports of parliamentary officers were tabled:

On June 27, 2006, the 2005 annual report of the Information and Privacy Commissioner; and on August 9, 2006, the special report of the Ombudsman respecting the Family Responsibility Office.

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): I beg to inform the House that during the adjournment, the Clerk received the report of intended appointments, dated September 5, 2006, of the standing

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

REQUEST TO THE INTEGRITY COMMISSIONER

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): I beg to inform the House that I have laid upon the table a request by the member for York West, Mr. Sergio, to the Honourable Coulter A. Osborne,

Integrity Commissioner, for an opinion pursuant to subsection 30(1) of the Members' Integrity Act, 1991.

RELEASE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): I beg to inform the House that, pursuant to

section 28 of the Auditor General Act, I have laid upon the table the audited financial statements of the

Office of the Auditor General for the year ended March 31, 2006.

Mr. Robert W. Runciman (Leeds-Grenville): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. It is with great concern that I herewith submit what the official opposition perceives to be a matter of contempt of

the Legislative Assembly of Ontario for your consideration and that of the members of this Assembly.

As you are aware, the official opposition, under the leadership of John Tory, has placed great emphasis on the need to restore decorum and integrity to the activities and proceedings of the Legislative

Assembly of Ontario. We've made it a priority on the part of our caucus to restore order, civility and respect to the proceedings of the House and had hoped that the Premier and the government caucus would contribute to our initiative by keeping

their campaign commitment to "treat the Legislature, its members and the people they represent with respect at all times."

Our focus on restoring integrity and decorum in this assembly is rooted in respect for the fundamental doctrine of our parliamentary democracy: responsible government. This doctrine has been discussed often in

our chamber and in other legislative chambers across the Commonwealth. Indeed, as Speaker Fraser in Canada's House of Commons observed on October 10, 1989, "We are not an executive democracy. We are not an administrative democracy. We are a

parliamentary democracy that pivots on the doctrine of responsible government."

As the renowned parliamentary authority Eugene Forsey states at page 18 of his October 1985 submission, The Question of Confidence and Responsible Government, to a special parliamentary committee of the

Canadian House of Commons:

"Responsible government is the term we use to describe the harmony between the executive and the Legislature that we have already achieved. It is the essential and distinctive feature of the British

parliamentary democracy.... The essence is simple: The executive is accountable to and owes its continued existence to the Legislature. The executive is accountable and answerable, not only for its budget, its money measures and its legislative

proposals, but also for the whole range of its activities. The servants of the sovereign can continue in office only so long as they retain the confidence of the Legislature; which means only so long as they can secure the grant of supply -- the

making of appropriations from the consolidated revenue fund necessary to carry on the programs they desire....

"The House of Commons owes its origins, its growth in power, its pre-eminence and its ultimate authority over the government to money." Again, this is Eugene Forsey.

"The prime function of the House of Commons, the very source of its power in the centuries up to the first reform bill, had been the granting of supply, the control of power of the purse, involving originally

only grants and aids but later also control over the objects on which monies were to be spent and ensuring the monies voted were not spent otherwise."

In short, Mr. Speaker, our primary role as legislators and as members of this Assembly is in holding members of the executive to account, and, while this role is universal, it is most relevant in matters of

money.

Indeed, as Marleau and Montpetit observe, the history of our very processes and procedure is rooted in those matters:

"The development of parliamentary procedure is closely bound up with the evolution of the financial relationship between Parliament and the crown. As the executive power, the crown is responsible for managing

all the revenue of the state, including all payments for public service. The crown, on the advice of its ministers, makes the financial requirements of the government known to the House of Commons which, in return, authorizes the necessary `aids'

(taxes) and `supplies' (grants and money). No tax may be imposed, or money spent, without the consent of Parliament.

"The direct control of national finance has been referred to as the `great task of modern parliamentary government.' That control is exercised at two levels. First, Parliament must assent to all legislative

measures which implement public policy and the House of Commons authorizes both the amounts and objects or destination of all public expenditures. Second, through its review of the annual departmental performance reports, the public accounts and

the reports of the Auditor General, the House ascertains that no expenditure was made other than those it had authorized."

It is on the question of the fundamental importance of the role of this assembly in the second level of this "great task," specifically the review of the public accounts of Ontario, that I wish to address in

this submission.

As Marleau and Montpetit state further at pages 762 and 763:

"The financial role of the House of Commons does not end with voting supply or authorizing measures to raise revenue. The House also acts as a `watchdog' to ensure that federal money is spent in the amounts

and for the purposes authorized by the Parliament. This monitoring function (often described as `closing the loop') is delegated largely to the standing committee on public accounts, which examines and reports the public accounts of Canada, as

well as on all reports of the Auditor General....

"The fundamental purpose of the public accounts ... is to provide information to Parliament, and thus to the public, which will enable them to understand and evaluate the financial position and transactions of

the government. Two constitutional principles underlie the public accounting system: that duties and revenues accruing to the government ... form one consolidated revenue fund, and that the balance of that fund after certain prior charges is

appropriated by the Parliament ... for the public service."

The "watchdog" role of our assembly is an integral part of our responsibilities and roles as legislators in representing the people of Ontario, and it is imperative that we -- and especially representatives of

this House who sit as members of the standing committee on public accounts -- have the opportunity to both examine and understand the public accounts of the province.

Marleau and Montpetit speak to the function of this standing committee at page 768:

"Under the standing orders, all reports of the Auditor General, as well as the public accounts..., are deemed permanently referred to the standing committee on public accounts as soon as they are tabled in the

House....

"The committee's main functions are to ensure that public money is spent for the purposes authorized by Parliament, that extravagance and waste are minimized and that sound financial practices are encouraged

in estimating and contracting, and in administration generally. The committee does not concern itself with the appropriateness of government policy; rather it focuses on the economy and efficiency of its administration."

Erskine May reinforces this

interpretation of the particular and detailed oversight required of this standing committee:

"The committee is principally concerned with whether policy is carried out efficiently, effectively and economically whether than with the merits of government policy. Its main functions are to see that public

monies are applied for the purposes prescribed by Parliament, that extravagance and waste are minimized and that sound financial practices are encouraged in estimating and contracting, and in administration generally."

As in the federal House of Commons, referenced by Marleau and Montpetit, the critical mandate of the standing committee on public accounts is set out in standing orders of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

Standing order 106(13)(

g) establishes:

"Standing committee on public accounts which is empowered to review and report to the House its observations, opinions and recommendations on the Report of the Provincial Auditor and the public accounts, which

documents shall be deemed to have been permanently referred to the committee as they become available."

Further, and more particularly, the Ministry of Treasury and Economics Act, RSO 1990, entrenches the statutory terms for the tabling of the public accounts, thereby emphasizing the importance of the public

accounts in the financial processes of the province of Ontario and the oversight role of the elected assembly and its standing committee on public accounts:

"The public accounts for each fiscal year commencing on or after April 1, 2003 shall be prepared under the direction of the Treasurer and shall include,

"(

a) the annual report of the government of Ontario for the fiscal year;

"(

b) the

summary financial statements of the government of Ontario for the fiscal year;

"(

c) the report of the Auditor General concerning his or her examination of the

summary financial statements; and

"(

d) subject to subsection (2.2), any other information that is required, under another act of the Legislature, to be included in the public accounts....

"Except in extraordinary circumstances, the Treasurer shall submit the public accounts for each fiscal year commencing on or after April 1, 2003 to the Lieutenant Governor in Council on or before the 180th day

after the end of the fiscal year and the Lieutenant Governor in Council shall,

"(

a) lay the public accounts before the assembly, if the assembly is in session when the public accounts are ready to be laid before the assembly; or

"(

b) make the public accounts public, if the assembly is not in session when the public accounts are ready to be laid before the assembly, and lay the public accounts before the assembly on or before the tenth

day of the next session."

Standing order 39(

a) provides:

"Reports, returns and other documents required to be laid before the House by any act of the assembly or under any standing order or resolution of the House, or that any minister wishes to present to the

House, may be deposited with the Clerk of the House, whether or not on a sessional day, and such report, return or other document shall be deemed for all purposes to have been presented to or laid before the House. A record of any such document

shall be entered in the Votes and Proceedings on the day it is filed except that where it is filed on a day that is not a sessional day, it shall be entered in the Votes and Proceedings of the next sessional day."

Mr. Speaker, consideration historically has been given by the government of the day to ensure that the public accounts of this province are tabled while the House is in session. This allows for the appropriate

scrutiny of the accounts by the members, provides them with the opportunity to hold the members of the executive accountable, and ensures that the members of the standing committee on public accounts are able to consider the accounts of the

province in detail and in a timely manner. Indeed, there have been but three instances when the public accounts have not been tabled when the House was sitting: October 3, 1985; October 20, 1994; and August 24, 2006, when the House was adjourned

for summer recess.

While we regret that the Minister of Finance chose to release the public accounts while the House was recessed, our concern is with the manner in which the minister made the public accounts of Ontario public.

For the purposes of the matter at hand, I would like to review the chronology of events around the publicizing of the public accounts of Ontario, as we in the official opposition are aware of them:

At 9:51 a.m., The Ontario Ministry of Finance issues a media advisory on Canada NewsWire indicating that a "briefing for the media" on the release of the public accounts of Ontario would open at 1 p.m. for a

briefing by Ministry of Finance officials to begin at 1:30 p.m. and for "media availability" with the minister at 2:15 p.m. The media notice stipulates that media must be ready to show identification. No similar notice or invitation is extended to

elected officials of any party or their staff. No similar invitation is extended to appointed members of the legislative standing committee on public accounts or committee staff.

At 2:31 p.m., The Ontario Ministry of Finance issues a press release and background document, "Province Achieves Modest Surplus in 2005-06."

With all due respect, when the media advisory was issued, the majority of elected members of this House were conducting themselves in their ridings, attending to the concerns of their constituents. No specific

notice or invitations were sent to the elected members of this House. We would argue that three hours' notice of a special meeting, a special briefing, had it even been offered to members of this assembly, is hardly adequate for members to

rearrange their constituency operations and travel to Queen's Park.

We would also argue that we do not consider this briefing to be some kind of value-added presentation either. Access to the briefing meant access to the public accounts; denied access to the briefing meant

denied access to the public accounts. The members of this assembly were not afforded the privilege of even a briefing concurrent to that offered to the media that afternoon. Indeed, the only

interpretation of the public accounts provided to

assembly members came through the Ministry of Finance press release and backgrounder issued at 2:31 p.m. on August 24, 2006, one and a half hours after the media had been briefed on the contents of the public accounts for 2005-06, and through the

filter of media reports that had already interpreted the information provided to them at that special meeting.

I should note for the record that this is the first occasion in the history of this assembly that we're aware of where special briefings have been deemed necessary by the Minister of Finance on the release of

the public accounts. I'll grant you that, in the past, the House has usually been sitting and members have had the benefit of the opportunity to question the Premier, the minister and other members of the executive directly in question period. In

the past, we would have had the benefit of the standing committee on public accounts at the ready to consider the documents tabled and to question ministry officials, as is its mandate and indeed responsibility under the standing orders and the

principles of responsible government which I've already cited.

In this instance, no authorization was provided to the standing committee when this House passed, on June 22, 2006, a motion to allow standing committees to sit during the recess, so there could be no formal

sitting of that committee. Had the Minister of Finance and the government anticipated tabling the accounts during the recess, the House could have provided for the standing committee on public accounts to sit during the recess as necessary when we

passed that June 22 motion. Alternatively, the minister had until the 108th day after the fiscal year-end -- that's tomorrow, September 26 -- to table the public accounts. The minister could easily have tabled the accounts today and provided an

appropriate briefing to both media and elected members.

It's evident from this special briefing offered only to the media, however, that the minister believed that the release of the public accounts was an urgent matter and that those accounts could not be properly

understood without the benefit of expert commentary and explanation from senior officials in the Ministry of Finance. Given that any formal briefing external to that provided to the standing committee on the public accounts of Ontario is

unprecedented, the Minister of Finance should have considered the pre-eminent role of this House and its committee in the consideration of those accounts. In a situation where the minister deemed that the information contained within those

accounts merited special commentary -- and indeed where there was a marked difference between the expenditures proposed in the 2005-06 provincial budget and estimates and what the public accounts documented as having been spent -- briefings, at

the very least, ought to have been arranged for the elected members of this assembly at the same time as those provided to members of the Queen's Park press gallery. Such a process would merely have built on the practice used for briefings on the

release of the Ontario budget and the report of the Auditor General of Ontario.

We believe that it is quite proper to brief the media. However, we do not believe that it is proper that commentary on the province's expenditures was provided not merely first, but exclusively, to the media

rather than to the legislators to whom the minister and executive ought to be accountable. So the affront on the information related is not merely in its priority going to the media first but in its quality, failing to provide legislators at all

with the guidance deemed so essential to understanding the financial affairs of the province.

This recent practice and others that have followed it -- such as so-called technical briefings for media only at the Ministries of Training, Colleges and Universities, Health and Long-Term Care and, most

recently, Economic Development and Trade -- represent anything but respect for the role and representation of the elected members of this assembly. Indeed, we believe that the specific matter at hand represents an offence against the authority and

dignity of this House that fails to recognize the rights and primacy of its members to hold the government and executive accountable.

In this instance, where the public accounts of Ontario were released while the House was adjourned for the summer recess, yet still in session, detailed, technical information was provided only to the media to

allow them to judge the actions of the executive and hold it accountable. As indicated, media were afforded the opportunity to question the minister immediately and directly after having been briefed on the details of the public accounts. That

same access was denied the elected members of this assembly and appointed members of the standing committee on public accounts, where public accounts are permanently deemed referred. In this instance, the elected members of this assembly, save for

members of the executive, were reliant on media as intermediaries in understanding and reporting the details of the public accounts to the very people they represent.

For the record, we must indicate that, on the date in question, a representative of the Progressive Conservative caucus staff was denied access to the briefing, and when one of our elected members was able to

arrive in time for the media availability with the minister, both he and our staff representative were given access to that press conference only after members of the Queen's Park press gallery threatened to leave if members of the opposition

parties or representatives, including representatives of the third party, were not permitted to stay.

Did the Minister of Finance believe that a special briefing -- deemed exclusively necessary for the media -- would not be of interest or of relevance to the elected members of this assembly in our role and

responsibility of holding the executive accountable for the expenditures of the province?

While we do not intend to derogate the important role and responsibility of the media in publicizing and holding the government accountable, we believe that the role of the elected member of the Legislative

Assembly ought to be supreme. In this instance, it was not even held to be equal.

In this instance, we would argue that the Minister of Finance usurped the role and responsibilities of the broader membership of this assembly and the membership of the standing committee on public accounts.

Indeed, this instance interferes profoundly with the role of the Legislative Assembly and its officers in a system of responsible government.

Providing access to the public accounts to media first to the exclusion of the elected members of this assembly and denying elected members the same briefing afforded the media not only was unhelpful; it was a

disrespectful offence to the authority and dignity of this House and represents contempt of this Legislature.

Joseph Maingot's Parliamentary Privilege in Canada, second edition, holds:

"`As a working rule it can be said that when an offence is not identifiable as a breach of known and enumerated rights and immunities, then the offence is a contempt of Parliament'....

"The significant difference between a breach of privilege and contempt may be put this way:

"

(1) Privileges are enumerated and known and thus may be breached

whereas contempts are not enumerable.

"

(2) The extent of the law of privilege is a proper subject of inquiry for a court,

whereas the House of Commons is the judge as to whether in a particular case a breach of privilege or a contempt of the House

has been committed.

"

(3) Contempt is more aptly described as an offence against the authority or dignity of the House.

"

(4) While privilege may be codified, contempt may not, because new forms of obstruction are constantly being devised and Parliament must be able to invoke its penal jurisdiction to protect itself against

these new forms; there is no closed list of classes of offences punishable as contempts of Parliament."

In a ruling in the Canadian House of Commons on October 10, 1989, Speaker Fraser clarified that "all breaches of privileges are contempts of the House, but not all contempts are necessarily breaches of

privilege. A contempt may be

an act or an omission. It does not have to actually obstruct or impede the House or a member[;] it merely has to have the tendency to produce such results. Matters ranging from minor breaches of decorum to grave

attacks against the authority of Parliament may be considered as contempts."

Erskine May defines contempt at pages 128 and 142 of the 23rd edition: "Generally speaking, any act or omission which obstructs or impedes either House or Parliament in the performance of its functions, or

which obstructs or impedes any member or officer of such House in the discharge of his duty, or which has a tendency, directly or indirectly, to produce such results, may be treated as a contempt even though there is no precedent for the offence.

It is therefore impossible to list every act which might be considered to amount to a contempt, the power to punish for such an offence being of its nature discretionary....

"Other acts besides words spoken or writings published reflecting upon either House or its proceedings which, though they do not tend directly to obstruct or impede either House in the performance of its

functions, yet have a tendency to produce this result indirectly by bringing such House into odium, contempt or ridicule or by lowering its authority may constitute contempts."

We are arguing that the Minister of Finance, in disregarding the roles and responsibilities of the members of this House associated with the finances and expenditures of the province and the release of the

public accounts of Ontario, and in providing a special briefing deemed by the minister and the executive as so necessary to the media and to the exclusion of the elected members of this assembly and the assembly's standing committee on public

accounts, was in contempt.

The integrity of and respect for the principles of accountable, responsible government are fundamental to the effective and legitimate processes and procedures of this assembly. On May 8, 2003, Speaker Carr

noted that "parliamentary proceedings can be animated and often emotional, and they can be cumbersome. It may not be the most efficient of political systems, but it is a process that reflects the reality that members, like the people of Ontario,

may not be of one mind on matters of public policy. A mature parliamentary democracy is not a docile, esoteric or one-way communications vehicle; it is a dynamic, interactive and representative institution that allows the government of the day to

propose and defend its policies -- financial and otherwise. It also allows the opposition to scrutinize and hold the government to account for those policies. It is an open, working and relevant system of scrutiny and accountability."

Further, and ironically, on May 12, 2003, the honourable member for Ottawa South, who now sits as Premier of Ontario, stood before the assembled members of this House and largely echoed Speaker Carr's comments

as he spoke to the process used by the government of the day: "I think we can all understand that democracy is slow, it is messy, it is cumbersome, it is inefficient and it's wonderful. The government lost sight of the value of the democratic

institution itself and the Parliament, of the importance that we should always attach to conventions and rules and process."

Yet on August 24, 2006, the day that the Minister of Finance deliberately and consciously chose to table the public accounts of Ontario with the Legislative Assembly of Ontario when the House was recessed, the

minister completely disregarded the roles and responsibilities of the elected members of this House in scrutinizing and holding the government responsible and to account for those accounts. The minister disregarded that watchdog function so

fundamental to the financial role of Parliament in a system of responsible government. Indeed, to repeat Marleau and Montpetit, "The fundamental purpose of the public accounts ... is to provide information to Parliament, and thus to the public,

which will enable them to understand and evaluate the financial position and transactions of the government."

Marleau and Montpetit hold, therefore, that the principal surrogates for the public are members of Parliament. Yet on August 24, 2006, the Minister of Finance believed that the public accounts for 2005-06

needed explanation and commentary to be understood fully, and this information on the public accounts of Ontario was provided first to the media, and thus to the public and Parliament. Indeed, it was only at the behest of the media that members of

the opposition and third party were even allowed to be privy to the questions media asked the minister following their private briefing. Members of this assembly were not provided public access to the public accounts of Ontario until one and a

half hours after media had been briefed by senior Ministry of Finance officials and had had the opportunity to question the minister. If information is being made public, it must include access and full disclosure to members of the assembly. To

deny that access is contempt.

Indeed, had we at least known in advance that the public accounts were to have been tabled on August 24, 2006, our members could have made efforts to obtain copies of the accounts as soon as they had been

presented to the Clerk's office, and members could have made themselves available for the special briefing deemed so necessary by the Minister of Finance and for the opportunity to question the minister.

To that point, the 2003 budget process brought to the floor the fundamental roles, responsibilities and obligations of this assembly as they relate to the principles of responsible government and the financial

processes and procedures of the province. In that instance, the government argued that it was taking the budget directly to the people. Well, the opposition argued, and Speaker Carr agreed, that in making the budget public in a way that bypassed

the House, notwithstanding that documents had been duly tabled with the assembly and, in that instance, concurrent briefings to members, media and stakeholders in the lock-up were provided, there was sufficient cause for the House to consider the

matter of contempt.

We believe that Speaker Carr's findings in 2003 present a precedent for the House to consider the matter at hand concerning the release of the 2005-06 public accounts.

We believe that the remarks made in May 2003 by the honourable member for Ottawa South hold true, which I've already read into the record.

We therefore submit that the circumstances concerning the release of and briefing on the public accounts of Ontario on August 24, 2006, and the egregious disregard for the roles and responsibilities of the

members of this assembly, constitute a matter of contempt that merits the consideration of this House so as to ensure that such incidents never occur again.

Mr. Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): The New Democratic Party wants to join in the submissions made by the member for Leeds-Grenville. His narration of the facts is accurate and complete and

doesn't require any further comment. His reference to the precedents is, as well, exhaustive and requires no further comment. So I submit but this to you, and that is to look at the motivation of the government in this type of conduct. The only

inference that can be drawn is that it's an effort on the part of the government to have access to the press without any involvement on the part of opposition members, an opportunity for the government to spin the numbers with the press without

participation and without witnessing by members of the opposition.

I ask you further to note that the government can't argue de minimis. It's clear that any breach of this type constitutes a contempt. In this instance, it was not just a demonstration of disregard and disdain

by the government for opposition members, but it was a conscious effort on the part of this government to frustrate the opposition in the performance of their duties, their responsibilities. That comes from a government that purports to introduce

democratic renewal. That comes from a Premier who pretends to want to do things differently, but rather, we have some of the most shameful manipulation on the part of this government and some of the most egregious disregard for the role of

parliamentarians that's ever been demonstrated in this Parliament.

Hon. Greg Sorbara (Minister of Finance, Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet): On the same point of order, Mr. Speaker: I am really somewhat dismayed that, after a summer of all of us

being engaged with 12 and a half million people in Ontario, my friends opposite would come to this Parliament this afternoon with this order.

I listened attentively to my friend from Leeds-Grenville. I want to tell you that I will undertake, along with the government House leader, to provide a more fulsome and perhaps written response for your

consideration, given the allegations that are made by my friend from Leeds-Grenville -- but just, at this point, to put a couple of things on the record for the consideration of members who are sitting in this House at this point.

First of all, we are extremely proud of the fact that, consistent with the theme and the spirit of the Fiscal Transparency and Accountability Act, the government was able to release the financial statements

from 2005-06 as early and as clearly as we did, and we're going to continue to do that. The notion, somehow, that we should sit on financial statements until some time more convenient is a principle that we do not agree with.

Secondly, just to be very clear: What my friend from Leeds-Grenville is talking about was the release of the annual financial statements for this government for the year 2005-06. Those financial statements

were tabled with the Clerk of this House before they were released to anyone -- to members of the media, to members of the public -- and therefore were available to my friends opposite at 1 o'clock on August 24.

The third point to be made is that, consistent with the notion of transparency and accountability, we offered to the media a technical briefing and we offered to members opposite a technical briefing. What is

interesting is that members of the media took up the offer for a technical briefing and members opposite did not take up the offer for a technical briefing.

Finally, I simply want to say, as a precedent to the submissions that we will be making, that the approach of this government in terms of transparency and clarity and providing access to information will be

the very highest standard of any Parliament in the country or in the world, and we will continue that tradition.

The Speaker: I'd like to thank the member for Leeds-Grenville for raising the point of order with me, and the member for Niagara Centre and the Minister of Finance for their interventions. I

will reserve my judgment on this matter.

BIRTH OF MEMBER'S GRANDCHILD

Mrs. Maria Van Bommel (Lambton-Kent-Middlesex): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I just want to tell the Legislature that Rene and I became grandparents for the 10th time last week on

Tuesday. Rose was born to our daughter Amanda and her husband Aaron Shelly, and Grace now has a baby sister, so just wait for the Christmas card.

VISITOR

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): In the members' gallery east, we have a former member of this place, Ed Fulton, the former member for Scarborough East in the 33rd and 34th Parliament.

Welcome, Mr. Fulton.

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

COMITÉ PERMANENT

DE LA POLITIQUE SOCIALE /

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

SOCIAL POLICY

M. Shafiq Qaadri (Etobicoke-Nord): Monsieur le Président, je demande la permission de déposer un rapport du comité permanent de la politique sociale, et je propose son

adoption.

Speaker, I beg leave to present a report from the standing committee on social policy and move its adoption.

The Clerk-at-the-Table (Ms. Lisa Freedman): Your committee begs to report the following bill as amended:

Bill 43,

An Act to protect existing and future sources of drinking water and to make complementary and other amendments to other Acts / Projet de loi 43, Loi visant à protéger les sources existantes

et futures d'eau potable et à apporter des modifications complémentaires et autres à d'autres lois.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Shall the report be received and adopted? Agreed.

The bill is therefore ordered for third reading.

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

Mr. Norman W. Sterling (Lanark-Carleton): Pursuant to the order of the House of June 22, 2006, I beg leave to present a report on ambulance services -- land from the standing committee on

public accounts and move the adoption of its recommendations.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Does the member wish to make a brief statement?

Mr. Sterling: Yes, Mr. Speaker. As you know, the public accounts committee reviews the report of the auditor, which came out in late November 2005. In that report was a substantial finding

with regard to the inefficiency of our land ambulance services, where it was recognized that two thirds of the land ambulance operators were not meeting their legislated response times, which were the 1996 response times, so two thirds of our

municipalities had fallen back from 1996 response times. The total cost of the program had increased by 94% over the previous four years.

The committee studied various different themes associated with the problems with our land ambulance services, including plans to address delays in hospital emergency admission of patients arriving in

ambulances and problems with regard to cross-border jurisdiction in providing ambulance services.

The committee made a whole number of recommendations, and it is perhaps one of the areas in which the committee feels that there needs to be a lot of work, to improve the administration of this particular

program.

I move adjournment of the debate.

The Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

GENERAL GOVERNMENT

Mrs. Linda Jeffrey (Brampton Centre): I beg leave to present a report from the standing committee on general government and move its adoption.

The Clerk-at-the-Table (Ms. Lisa Freedman): Your committee begs to report the following bill as amended:

Bill 51,

An Act to amend the Planning Act and the Conservation Land Act and to make related amendments to other Acts / Projet de loi 51, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur l'aménagement du territoire et la

Loi sur

les terres protégées et apportant des modifications connexes à d'autres lois.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Shall the report be received and adopted? Agreed?

All in favour will say "aye."

All opposed will say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1437 to 1442.

The Speaker: Mrs. Jeffrey has presented Bill 51. Shall the report be received and adopted?

All those in favour will rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

Arthurs, Wayne

Balkissoon, Bas

Bartolucci, Rick

Bentley, Christopher

Bountrogianni, Marie

Bradley, James J.

Broten, Laurel C.

Bryant, Michael

Cansfield, Donna H.

Caplan, David

Chambers, Mary Anne V.

Colle, Mike

Crozier, Bruce

Delaney, Bob

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duguid, Brad

Duncan, Dwight

Flynn, Kevin Daniel

Fonseca, Peter

Gerretsen, John

Hoy, Pat

Jeffrey, Linda

Kular, Kuldip

Kwinter, Monte

Leal, Jeff

Levac, Dave

Marsales, Judy

Matthews, Deborah

McNeely, Phil

Meilleur, Madeleine

Milloy, John

Mitchell, Carol

Mossop, Jennifer F.

Orazietti, David

Parsons, Ernie

Patten, Richard

Peters, Steve

Peterson, Tim

Phillips, Gerry

Pupatello, Sandra

Qaadri, Shafiq

Racco, Mario G.

Ramal, Khalil

Ramsay, David

Rinaldi, Lou

Ruprecht, Tony

Sandals, Liz

Sergio, Mario

Smith, Monique

Smitherman, George

Sorbara, Gregory S.

Takhar, Harinder S.

Van Bommel, Maria

Watson, Jim

Wilkinson, John

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Zimmer, David

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

Nays

Arnott, Ted

Barrett, Toby

Bisson, Gilles

Chudleigh, Ted

DiNovo, Cheri

Dunlop, Garfield

Elliott, Christine

Hardeman, Ernie

Horwath, Andrea

Hudak, Tim

Klees, Frank

Kormos, Peter

MacLeod, Lisa

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

Martiniuk, Gerry

Miller, Norm

Munro, Julia

Murdoch, Bill

O'Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Prue, Michael

Runciman, Robert W.

Scott, Laurie

Sterling, Norman W.

Tabuns, Peter

Tascona, Joseph N.

Tory, John

Wilson, Jim

Witmer, Elizabeth

Yakabuski, John

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 58; the nays are 31.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

The bill is therefore ordered for third reading.

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

Mr. Norman W. Sterling (Lanark-Carleton): Pursuant to the order of the House of June 22, 2006, I beg leave to present a report on ambulance services -- air from the standing committee on

public accounts and move the adoption of its recommendations.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Does the member wish to make a brief statement?

Mr. Sterling: Yes. The committee looked at the functioning of the crown corporation or non-profit corporation which has been set up to run air ambulances across the province of Ontario. There

are some questions, and some improvements can be made to this particular service.

One of the things that the committee looked long and hard at was the provision of air ambulance services to non-residents who are in Ontario who require that service. At the present time, Ontario is providing

that service not at cost-recovery mode. It was felt by the committee that people from other provinces should be treated the same way as residents from our province should be treated when they are in the other provinces. The committee makes a

recommendation that full cost recovery be implemented with regard to non-residents requiring this service, unless their province provided a reciprocal service for our residents when they were there.

The committee also asked for a rationale for this new corporation taking away the responsibility of the supplier for the provision of paramedics for each of the air ambulance flights. The committee has asked

for the ministry to report to the committee in 2008 on the number of flight cancellations due to paramedics not being available and the resulting cost.

I move adjournment of the debate.

The Speaker: Mr. Sterling has moved adjournment of the debate. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

REGULATIONS AND PRIVATE BILLS

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): I beg leave to present a report from the standing committee on regulations and private bills regarding Bill 89, which was unanimously supported by

committee, and move its adoption.

The Clerk-at-the-Table (Ms. Lisa Freedman): Ms. Horwath from the standing committee on regulations and private bills presents the committee's report as follows, and moves its adoption:

Your committee begs to report the following bill as amended:

Bill 89,

An Act to amend the Child and Family Services Act and the Coroners Act to better protect the children of Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Shall the report be received and adopted? Agreed? Agreed.

The bill is therefore ordered for third reading.

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

Mr. Norman W. Sterling (Lanark-Carleton): Pursuant to the order of the House of June 22, 2006, I beg leave to present a report on children's mental health services from the standing committee

on public accounts and move the adoption of its recommendations.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Does the member wish to make a brief statement?

Mr. Norman W. Sterling (Lanark-Carleton): Yes. This report by the committee homes in on the information systems of the Ministry of Children and Youth Services. This is the first time, to my

knowledge, that the public accounts committee has asked the ministry to return at a future date to update the committee on their progress with regard to a particular administrative matter. We have asked that the ministry come before the committee

in the spring of 2007 to report on their information systems because there is a feeling that the ministry is not well enough aware of the various amounts of money that are being paid to various parts of our province and that, therefore, priorities

cannot be properly set when allocating new funds.

Also within this report are recommendations in response to the report which the committee requested on autism treatment. There are several recommendations dealing with how that particular program is delivered

by the government and how in fact that program can be delivered in a more efficient, economical way, and that the children receiving this treatment can in fact make up for many of the lost hours which they are not getting because the therapist

does not show on a particular date.

With those remarks, I would move adjournment of the debate.

The Speaker: Mr. Sterling has moved adjournment of the debate. Is it the pleasure of the House the motion carry? Carried.

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

REGULATIONS AND PRIVATE BILLS

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): I beg leave to present a report from the standing committee on regulations and private bills regarding Bill 120, again unanimously supported by committee,

and move its adoption.

The Clerk-at-the-Table (Ms. Lisa Freedman): Your committee begs to report the following bill as amended:

Bill 120,

An Act to require the Building Code and the Fire Code to provide for fire detectors, interconnected fire alarms and non-combustible fire escapes / Projet de loi 120, Loi exigeant que le code du

bâtiment et le code de prévention des incendies prévoient des détecteurs d'incendie, des systèmes d'alerte d'incendie interconnectés et des sorties de secours incombustibles, the title of which is amended to read "An

Act to deem that the Building Code and the Fire Code require fire detectors, interconnected fire alarms and non-combustible fire escapes / Loi portant que le code du bâtiment et le code de prévention des incendies sont réputés

exiger des détecteurs d'incendie, des systèmes d'alerte d'incendie interconnectés et des sorties de secours incombustibles."

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Shall the report be received and adopted? Agreed.

The bill is therefore ordered for third reading.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

HIGHWAY TRAFFIC AMENDMENT ACT

(USE OF PORTABLE EQUIPMENT BY

NOVICE DRIVERS), 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 MODIFIANT LE CODE DE LA

ROUTE (UTILISATION DE MATÉRIEL

PORTATIF PAR LES CONDUCTEURS

DÉBUTANTS)

Mr. Flynn moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 135,

An Act to amend the Highway Traffic Act to prohibit the use of phones and other portable equipment by novice drivers while driving on a highway / Projet de loi 135, Loi modifiant le Code de la route

pour interdire aux conducteurs débutants l'utilisation de téléphones et d'autre matériel portatif pendant qu'ils conduisent sur une voie publique.

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

Does the member wish to make a brief statement?

Mr. Kevin Daniel Flynn (Oakville): Very briefly, the bill would prohibit the use of cellphones and other portable devices by novice drivers, those who are under the guidelines of Ontario's

graduated licensing program.

RESTORE THE DEED ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR LE RÉTABLISSEMENT

DES TITRES

Mr. Tascona moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 136,

An Act to amend the Land Titles Act / Projet de loi 136, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur l'enregistrement des droits immobiliers.

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

The member may wish to make a brief statement.

Mr. Joseph N. Tascona (Barrie-Simcoe-Bradford): The Restore the Deed Act is a serious response to the real problem of home ownership mortgage fraud and title fraud. It will also reform the

Land Titles Assurance Fund to make it a fund of first resort. I'm confident that it will restore the confidence in the real estate system, which is lacking.

CLIMATE CHANGE

AWARENESS DAY ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR LA JOURNÉE

DE SENSIBILISATION

AUX CHANGEMENTS CLIMATIQUES

Mr. McNeely moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 139,

An Act to make April 21 Climate Change Awareness Day / Projet de loi 139, Loi visant à faire du 21 avril la Journée de sensibilisation aux changements climatiques.

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

The member may wish to make a brief statement.

Mr. Phil McNeely (Ottawa-Orléans): Climate change has become a reality. Of this fact I have no doubt. There are those who still believe climate change to be a myth, but I believe that

this is a reality that will face our children and grandchildren. Unless we do something to reverse this trend, this would soon become a very dangerous place to live. It is for this reason that I propose to name April 21 of each year Climate Change

Awareness Day.

MOTIONS

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

Hon. James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism, minister responsible for seniors, Government House Leader): I seek unanimous consent to put forward a motion without notice regarding private

members' public business.

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

Hon. Mr. Bradley: I move that, notwithstanding standing order 96(d), the following changes be made to the ballot list of private members' public business:

Mr. Tascona and Mr. Murdoch exchange places in order of precedence such that Mr. Tascona assumes ballot item 48 and Mr. Murdoch assumes ballot item 70; Ms. Matthews and Mr. Orazietti exchange places in order

of precedence such that Ms. Matthews assumes ballot item 51 and Mr. Orazietti assumes ballot item 55; and that, pursuant to standing order 96(g), notice be waived for ballot items 47, 48 and 49.

The Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

CONSUMER PROTECTION

Hon. Gerry Phillips (Minister of Government Services): I'm pleased today to tell the House that we will introduce legislation this fall that, if passed, will give the government

regulation-making authority over consumer gift cards.

Gift cards are a rapidly growing segment of the retail industry in the province. These cards are purchased in good faith by the people of Ontario for their family and friends. They rightly expect that these

cards should retain their full value until they are redeemed, no matter when that might be.

We want to ensure that Ontario consumers purchasing gift cards get what they pay for. We have heard their concerns about expired cards and we are taking action to put an end to this practice. Proposed

amendments to the Consumer Protection Act will, if passed, allow us to create regulations to remove expiry dates from retail gift cards and to put strict limits on any fees applied to these cards. In addition, we are proposing to ensure that gift

cards contain clear and comprehensible language.

I have already consulted with business and consumer groups about the gift card issues, and I'm considering their views in developing proposals for new regulations. We will continue to consult with the retail

industry as we develop and implement regulations, recognizing the need to be reasonable and accommodate their business needs. But foremost, we must be mindful of the rights and the needs of Ontario consumers. They are the ones who have made gift

cards such a successful segment of the retail industry, and they deserve to be protected. The new measures we are planning will bolster consumer protection and ensure that our thriving retail industry continues to meet the expectations of the

people of this province.

EDUCATION /

ÉDUCATION

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne (Minister of Education): I rise in the House today to reaffirm the McGuinty government's dedication to improving public education in Ontario. I want to thank the Premier

for his fundamental belief in publicly funded education and his public commitment to raising the bar on student achievement and closing the gap for struggling students. It's an enormous honour to have been asked by the Premier to take on this

role. I'm grateful to both my predecessors, Gerard Kennedy and Sandra Pupatello, for setting us on a solid course.

As a former school board trustee, parent advocate and parliamentary assistant in education, access to public education has been one of the abiding themes of my political career. We have made an excellent start

as a government on the ambitious priorities that were in our platform and that were also the priorities of the people who elected us. The facts that more students are graduating from high school, primary class sizes are being capped and we have

had no labour strife among our teachers for three years are real results and proof that our policies are working.

L'an dernier, près de la moitié de nos classes au primaire avaient déjà atteint l'objectif de 20 élèves ou moins. La tendance se poursuit, et je suis convaincue qu'elle

progressera jusqu'à ce que nous atteignions notre but dans 90% des classes.

Also, student achievement is up for the third straight year. If we help just two more students from each grade 6 class in Ontario meet the standard, we can meet our goal of 75% of students meeting the

provincial standard in reading, writing and math in 2008.

When this government took office, only two thirds of students were graduating from secondary school.

Par l'entremise de notre stratégie pour la réussite des élèves, nous donnons aux élèves la possibilité d'adapter leurs études et leur offrons du soutien et des

ressources supplémentaires.

In 2004-05, the graduation rate had risen by three percentage points, to 71%. So we've made considerable progress, but I know we still have work to do.

We have, as a government, made significant changes to the provincial funding formula. The funding formula is really an allocation formula through which the available education money flows to school boards. We

know that there's more to do on that funding formula; the Premier has said that it's a work in progress. We have to be careful, however, that we do not oversimplify the issues confronting us, and that whenever we talk about education funding,

we're absolutely clear what we're talking about.

I'd like to wish everyone returning to school a wonderful and successful year. This will be a great year thanks to our excellent students, teachers, vice-principals, principals, education workers and parent

volunteers -- not because of us, but because of them. The only way for every student to achieve his or her potential is for all of us in government to work collaboratively with all of our educators, parents, trustees, education workers and

communities. In turn, Ontario can reach its full potential.

SEAT BELTS

Hon. Donna H. Cansfield (Minister of Transportation): I say welcome back, everyone. I hope you had a wonderful summer.

I rise in the House today to talk about an issue that affects everyone in Ontario. It's called road safety. Earlier today, I joined our government safety partners in launching the annual fall seat belt

campaign.

In 1976 Ontario, under the Honourable James Snow, was the first jurisdiction in North America to make wearing seat belts mandatory. At the time, only 15.5% of drivers killed or injured in collisions were

wearing a seat belt. Since seat belts were made mandatory, the number of people killed and injured in collisions has steadily dropped and the number of people who buckle up has dramatically increased.

I'd like to recognize Suzanne Chaddock, who is in the public gallery today, along with her father, Mr. Ken Chaddock, and her two children, Christopher and Neil. Suzanne is here today because a seat belt saved

her life in 1976, so she is living proof that seat belts save lives. Suzanne survived a terrible collision because of having her seat belt on, and now she's helping to improve road safety as an Ontario Provincial Police officer. I know that she

has saved many lives throughout her career.

The most recent survey by Transport Canada found that Ontario has one of the second-highest rates of seat belt use in urban areas in Canada: nearly 93%. That's above the national average of just 91%. An

earlier survey showed that Ontario's rural seat belt use was nearly at 88%, also above the national average. But we can, and we must, do more. For every 1% use of seat belts, five lives are saved, so our goal must be 100%. About one third of all

drivers and passengers killed in motor vehicle collisions were not wearing seatbelts. The message of the fall seat belt campaign is clear: Using a seat belt is the single most effective way to reduce motor vehicle-related injuries and deaths.

The safety of children is a particular concern of mine. I'm pleased to report, that according to the 2004 Ontario Road Safety Annual Report, the number of children killed and injured in road collisions fell by

22%, compared to 2003. Sadly, collisions still are a leading cause of death and injury for children between one and nine years old, and the statistic comes from Safe Kids Canada. A properly used child car safety seat can cut the chances of death

or serious injury by as much as 75%, so we need to buckle up our children. That's why the McGuinty government brought forward legislation to make it mandatory for all caregivers -- grandparents, baby-sitters, hosts of children's birthday parties

-- to ensure that children are properly secured in an appropriate child seat, safety or booster seat when they're travelling. Drivers who don't, face a fine and two demerit points. So we are serious about safety. We know that kids are safer in a

child car safety seat and in their booster seat. Now you know why there's a law: Our children are important to all of us.

That's why we're getting the message out with the fall seat belt campaign, running from September 23 until October 8. This year's campaign includes police enforcement blitzes; seat belt counts, where groups of

volunteers actually survey and tally seat belt usage; clinics highlighting the proper use of child car safety seats and booster seats; and a public education campaign to keep buckling up top of mind for everyone.

Ontario has a lot to be proud of as we mark the 30th anniversary of mandatory seat belt use. The most recent Ontario Road Safety Annual Report also shows that for a second year in a row, Ontario has the safest

roads in North America. But road safety doesn't just happen on its own. I'd like to thank the police who hold seat belt safety blitzes, the volunteers who conduct seat belt surveys, the community groups who organize child car safety seat clinics,

the fire and emergency medical services, the local health care professionals, the committee which helped plan the fall and spring campaigns, and everyone else across Ontario who has helped to spread this important message: Seat belts simply save

lives.

There are no accidents. There's no fate. When two cars collide, it's a collision or it's a crash, and it is preventable. We know that we can make our roads safer for children in Ontario and everyone who

travels our roads. All we need to do is use our heads and buckle up and be safe in Ontario.

ORAL QUESTIONS

AUTISM TREATMENT

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): My first question is for the Premier. I know he's close by, because he couldn't be any further than 60 feet away, no matter what. So perhaps we can

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): You could perhaps stand down the lead question. Do you wish to stand down the first question? Agreed?

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Stop the clock.

I would ask the Leader of the Opposition if your second question is to a minister now present.

Mr. Tory: My second question is also to the Premier, Mr. Speaker.

The Speaker: I have no ability to know where the Premier is at this present time. Do you wish to proceed by asking the Deputy Premier? No?

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order.

We'll reset the clock. The Leader of the Opposition.

Mr. Tory: I wanted to wait for the Premier on the basis that they were suggesting I question the Deputy Premier, but I think there will be lots of days when I'll have that privilege going

forward.

My question is to the Premier. Premier, on September 17, 2003, in the middle of the election campaign, you wrote to Nancy Morrison, the parent of an autistic child, and you said, "I believe that the lack of

government-funded IBI treatment for autistic children over six is unfair and discriminatory." You also said that you would work to ensure that autistic children in our province can get the support and treatment they need, and you said that this

included children over the age of six.

We keep hearing from parents of autistic children of all ages who are not receiving the treatment that you promised. Dozens are here today, and I could read you many more than dozens more e-mails from other

parents. Are you intending to keep your word to these parents, and, if so, when?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): I thank the leader of the official opposition for the question.

Let me take the opportunity at the outset to convey to him that I had the opportunity yet again this summer to meet with some parents who were very concerned about their children and with services in the

province of Ontario that might help better address their needs as children who are affected by autism. Let me say as well that, contrary to what the previous government had done, we've made some tremendous inroads in terms of providing new

opportunities and new services.

First of all, I'm proud to affirm that children who attain the age of six in the province of Ontario are no longer aging out when it comes to receiving services. That's an important development.

I can also say that we have doubled the investment to more than $112 million this year in terms of providing services for children affected by autism.

Mr. Tory: You've also, Premier, at the same time, taken the waiting list from 76 when you took office to over 700 today. The parents and the children who are here today are not here to thank

you for things you claim to have done. If the Fente family, the DiCarlo family, the McVicar family or the MacIntosh family believed that you had kept your promise, they wouldn't have come all the way here today, including a man who drove eight

hours from Espanola with his grandson, and many hours from other cities.

What do you have to say to Lisa Prasuhn, who wrote to me about her daughter Carolyne? She said that she finds it difficult to accept that "our child cannot write with a pencil, eat with a spoon, dress herself,

ride a bicycle on her own, ride a school bus with her sister," and she goes on. Then she says, "Almost three years have gone by and our child has not yet received a single hour of IBI therapy from this province, despite the promises and press

releases emanating from this government and this minister."

That coincides with your period of time in office. If you've kept your promise, when is Carolyne going to begin to receive her IBI treatments?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I don't doubt that by any objective measure we are moving in the right direction. We have, as I said a moment ago, doubled investment to more than $112 million. We have now

more therapists. We've created a new college program to train therapists. Some 110 were hired this year; 200 graduating next year. More children than ever before are getting service in the province of Ontario. In fact, more than 900 children are

receiving IBI treatment this year. That's a 70% increase since 2004. We've also reduced the wait time for assessments. There's been a 68% reduction in the waiting list for assessments since 2004.

Is there more to be done? Undoubtedly. But again, I think that by any objective standard, we are moving in the right direction.

Mr. Tory: By any objective standard, you said anything you had to say and signed any letter you had to sign to win the election. The fact is that the number that you're not referring to is

that there was a wait list of 76 people when you took office that today stands at 753, as of this spring.

Rhoda Boyd doesn't believe you either. She's the mother of Emmett Vokral, who is one month from his sixth birthday. She says that she and her family "live in constant fear that we will be told any day now that

our child will no longer be receiving services." She says that because she got an assessment report this week and she was told, "his services may be cut pending the outcome of [the] Wynberg [case] and the development of new discharge criteria

being finalized this fall."

Ms. Boyd obviously feels that you have not kept your promise; in fact, that you've broken it. If you've kept your promise, and if you're so intent on doing so -- and you haven't said once today so far, in

three opportunities, that you will keep the promise -- will you guarantee today that Emmett Vokral will not see a break in his treatment, that it will carry on? Will you keep that promise and make it? I don't know why we'd believe it, but will you

make it anyway?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I know that parents who have had born into their families beautiful children who have been affected by autism understand the difference between our government's record and

that former government's record. But so that the rest of Ontario better understands, that former government cut children off from IBI services when they reached the age of six. We've changed that in Ontario. We've more than doubled the funding

available for these programs.

More than that, there were no programs available, no funding opportunities for services in our schools. We have more support now in schools than ever before. We're training 5,000 teaching assistants to work

with children with autism in the classroom and we've hired 170 autism consultants to advise teachers.

So kids are no longer aging out at the age of six, we're investing in a new college program to train therapists, we've got opportunities in schools that have never been there before and, on top of that, we've

said that we're going to continue --

The Speaker: Thank you, Premier. New question.

EMERGENCY SERVICES

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): I'd point out, by the way, that it's your signature on that letter making the promise and it was your government they faced in court when you took

them to court to carry on with the court case.

My question is for the Premier. In 2003, the campaign platform full of broken promises, you also promised to "unclog existing" emergency rooms.

If you had meant what you said when you were running for election, if you had any intention whatsoever of keeping that promise, among many others, we wouldn't see emergency rooms threatened with closure -- ERs

in communities like Orangeville, Collingwood and Brockville.

You promised to unclog hospital emergency rooms, and you've broken that promise. Do you have any intention of keeping this promise, among the many others? Will you unclog the emergency rooms so they're not

threatened with closure and people can get the care they need?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): I think the leader of the official opposition will want to admit that we have made significant levels of new investment in

health care in Ontario. Ontario families now have more access to doctors and nurses than ever before. They have shorter wait times than they've had in a long, long time, and we've been very public and transparent about that: Ontariowaittimes.com

is now available for Ontarians to check out. They will know that we have a new medical school in northern Ontario. They will know that we've provided funding for more than 4,000 new nurses. They'll know that the Minister of Health has made a

commitment to take on all nurses graduating next year.

He will know as well that there is a real question that weighs heavily on the minds of Ontario families, and that is, how is it that Mr. Tory can possibly purport to improve the quality of our health care if

he's going to take $2.5 billion out of our health care system?

Mr. Tory: Mr. Speaker, (

a) I've never said such a thing; and secondly, if you got such a great record, what are you spending your time talking about --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Order. I need to be able to hear the member asking the question. That means that the member asking the question is the only member in here whose voice I

should hear.

Mr. Tory: The fact is that emergency rooms across the province have had difficulty finding doctors and staying open over the course of the summer. Last November, a group of emergency room

doctors came to Queen's Park to raise this issue. They were dismissed out of hand by the Minister of Health as a rogue group. When asked by the media if he was prepared to make emergency room wait times a priority, he said, "No, I'm not." It's a

shame, actually, that the only time anybody's kept their word around here is when he said, "No, I'm not," and he didn't do it. It hasn't been a priority, and they've been closing.

People come up to me in almost every single community in this province when I visit -- and I'm sure they do with your members too -- and they talk about their mother and their sister and their children who are

waiting hours to see somebody in these emergency rooms, and now they're threatened with closure.

In the same interview conducted a year ago, the minister said he was going to bring forward an alternate funding arrangement for emergency room doctors. Here we are a year later and it's not done. When are we

going to see that promise kept, or is that going to become another McGuinty broken promise?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: The Minister of Health.

Hon. George Smitherman (Deputy Premier, Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I think it's important in the conversation with respect to the challenges related to emergency rooms that we put

on the table and acknowledge a few things.

Firstly, this is a challenge that has been apparent in the Ontario health care system not just for a few years or a few months, but for literally decades.

The honourable member asked about the alternate funding arrangement for emergency room doctors. That's in place. In fact, in the Kitchener community, perhaps the most noted experience that we're having in the

challenges related to emergency rooms is not related to an EDAFA, as it's known; there's one of those in place. The circumstances are such that some hospitals in the province of Ontario, most notably in Hamilton, had a practice for a period of

time where they were topping up beyond that arrangement which was negotiated between the government and the Ontario Medical Association. We continue to work with the Ontario Medical Association to ensure that the contractual obligations which we

fulfill on our side are fulfilled at the other.

Of course we have more work to do, but it would be important for the honourable member to acknowledge as well that 600 fewer doctors in our province, made possible as a result of the inaction by the government

that bears his name, is a big part of the circumstance that we're facing --

The Speaker: Final supplementary.

Mr. Tory: That's all very interesting, but it's of no interest to people who are sitting with their child or with their mother or with their brother or by themselves in a waiting room waiting

hours, or when they see in the newspaper or actually experience the fact that some of these emergency rooms are threatened with closure. All you've managed to do -- I give you credit for at least doing something, but what you have done when you've

done anything has been kind of a paper-clip-and-bubble-gum solution, where you make a couple of phone calls and tide us over for a few hours. That's not a solution in Ingersoll, Hanover, Kirkland Lake, Timmins, Sault Ste. Marie and Atikokan, where

they're on the front lines of this crisis.

People are worried for themselves and for their families. They are waiting hours to be seen. They just want to know, when are you going to keep the Premier's promise, yet another broken promise from your

election platform, to unclog the emergency rooms? Because whatever you've said you've done, it's not working, and more needs to be done. When are you going to act? You're the minister; get on with it.

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: The honourable member has exposed himself once and for all, because it seems that for his first two years around this place, his suggestion for the resolution to every

file was just to pick up the phone: "Why don't you just pick up the phone and call?" So we saw a circumstance emerging where the small community of St. Marys was at risk of losing its emergency room, and someone in my office did that: They picked

up the phone and they called a doctor that they knew from Strathroy, Dr. Tom Wolder. As a result of that, what you refer to as a "paper clip and bubble gum strategy," we retained coverage on an August long weekend for the people of that community.

It is an example of the efforts that we will go to.

You refuse to be held accountable for the reality that is your record. Your name and your party's name are the same. You squandered the opportunity to produce a sufficiency of doctors in this province, and

community after community pays the price. You can't pretend you weren't a backroom power. You can't pretend that, just because you were in the backroom, you didn't have influence over those policies. So stand up and fess up and be honest about the

circumstances that that Minister of Health --

The Speaker: Thank you. New question?

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Stop the clock. A few minutes ago, I gave a lecture to members about having only one member speak at a time. Our memory seems to be a little short today. Let's just try to

concentrate. Remember that only one member has the floor at a time.

The leader of the third party.

GOVERNMENT'S RECORD

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): I first want to welcome all members back to the Legislature. I especially want to welcome the member for Parkdale-High Park to the Legislature.

To the Premier: The people of Parkdale-High Park sent you a message. They are disappointed by your broken promises and your half measures. You promised to fix the school funding formula. You promised to close

coal plants. You promised to stop the creeping privatization of our health care system. Instead, you closed schools while coal plants and private health clinics remain open.

Your government is entering your fourth year of government. When are you going to stop blaming others for your failures, take responsibility, show leadership and start keeping your promises?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): I always appreciate the leader of the NDP's particular perspective on issues, but I obviously see things differently.

He made reference to a number of areas, and let me just focus on one of those: education. He may decry the lack of progress, but that's not how I see it and I don't think it's how Ontarians see it. Test scores

are going up. We have more books in our schools and in our school libraries. We have more special ed children getting the help they need. We have 6,750 more teachers on the job. Class sizes are going down in the early grades; in fact, almost 50%

of our primary classes are now capped at 20. Dropout rates are coming down. So again, I say to the leader of the NDP, he may see each and every one of those facts as bad news, but I see them as good news, and as evidence of a commitment to the

quality of public education.

Mr. Hampton: Yes, you try to tell everyone across the province that those are facts. The people of Parkdale-High Park know they are not facts and people across Ontario know they are not

facts.

The people of Parkdale-High Park told you in no uncertain terms that they are disappointed by your failure to fix the Conservatives' flawed funding formula for our schools. University students and college

students told you that they are unhappy with your broken promise to freeze tuition fees and your escalation of tuition fees instead. My question is this: When are cash-strapped university and college students going to see some relief on tuition

fees, and when is Dalton McGuinty going to finally keep his promise to fix the flawed school funding formula?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: The leader of the NDP indulges in a world of fantasy which is unlike the world that I live in. I know that one of the things he's going to want to do is to correct the

record in his supplementary and remind Ontarians that, in fact, our commitment was to freeze tuition for two years. I know he's very much aware of that, Speaker, and he'll want to make sure he corrects that record.

We're very proud to have been the government that has committed to investing $6.2 billion into post-secondary education over the course of five years. That, by the way, was not a commitment we made. We're

doing it nonetheless.

He will know that $1.5 billion of that new money is devoted to student assistance. He will know that we brought back grants to the province of Ontario. This September, some 60,000 students will benefit from

grants. He will know that we're hiring 3,300 new faculty members. He will know that we're increasing medical school spaces by 23%. He will know that, overall, we're increasing college and university spaces by 73,000 --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you, Premier. Final supplementary.

Mr. Hampton: Premier, the people of Parkdale-High Park heard all of that and shook their heads and said, "No, we don't believe that anymore." They've seen the photo ops, they've heard the

speeches laden with platitudes, and they know it's not true.

I want to ask you about the situation with our emergency rooms. Today, Cambridge Memorial Hospital is looking at privatizing emergency room services -- handing over delivery of its most urgent health care

services to profit-driven corporations. The chief executive officer says that when you're facing threats of closure, exhausted nurses and the public's fatigue with long waits, "You have to think outside of the box."

Premier, after many promises, what is the McGuinty government going to do to address the emergency room crisis in our hospitals and ensure that more health care services aren't privatized?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: One of the reasons we're facing challenges when it comes to staffing up emergency rooms and other areas that require physicians, regardless of whether they're within a

hospital or outside a hospital, is because that member and his government cut the number of medical school spaces in the province of Ontario.

What we've done is we've built the first new medical school in Canada in some 30 years, we've expanded medical school spaces by 23%, and we've more than doubled the number of spaces for our international

medical graduates. Those are the kinds of things we have done in order to work as fast as we can to address the damage that was created by the former NDP government.

AUTISM TREATMENT

Ms. Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): To the Premier: During the last election, you promised the parents of autistic children that you'd allow IBI treatment in the schools. Seventeen months later,

at the end of March 2005, Justice Kiteley said this in her autism decision: "In particular, the Minister of Education failed to develop policy and give direction to school boards to ensure that ABA/IBI services are provided to children of

compulsory school age. Indeed, the actions and inactions of the Ministry of Education and the minister created a policy barrier to the availability of IBI/ABA in schools."

Premier, that is the same sad state of affairs today in Ontario. Why have you broken your promise to autistic children who need IBI in the schools?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: It's good to learn of some passing interest in this issue by the NDP, which made not a single reference to the word "autism" in their platform. It's interesting to see that

they've developed some passing interest at this particular point in time.

Again, I'd ask Ontarians to take a look at what we inherited and what we've done so far. There were no services available for children once they reached the age of six; they were cut off. That was a Tory

policy. We've changed that. Furthermore, there were no services available in our schools. We've changed that as well. We've more than doubled the funding available for our children who are affected by autism.

Yes, we're making progress; yes, we're working together with the affected families; and yes, there is more work to be done.

Ms. Martel: I remind the Premier that his government only stopped cutting people off IBI when Justice Kiteley ordered him to do so, 17 months after you were elected.

I want to talk about Nancy Morrison, the same Nancy Morrison that you had so much to say to on September 17, 2003, when you made your promises on autism. She had this to say about IBI in the schools: "My child

has to stay home from school to get his therapy and only goes to school half days because they won't allow trained people in.... The therapist is not allowed in school.... She has been barred from the classroom."

Parents of autistic children know that what their child needs to succeed in school is their IBI therapist in the classroom, helping them to learn. That is, after all, the promise you made to Nancy Morrison in

the last election. I ask you again, Premier, why have you broken your promise to families like Nancy Morrison?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: It may be helpful to the members of the opposition to know exactly what our commitment was, and I'll restate it here.

I said in government: "My team and I will work with clinical directors, parents, teachers and school boards to devise a feasible way in which autistic children in our province can get the support and treatment

they need. That includes children over the age of six." That was the commitment.

The member opposite may, through her own particular idiosyncratic perspective, choose to interpret us as not having lived up to our commitment, but I say that we have, and I say beyond that, we will continue

to work with parents; we will continue to work with representatives to ensure that we can make still more progress.

Again, we more than doubled the funding. We've ensured that children no longer age out at the age of six. We're providing an unprecedented level of supports in our schools. Does that represent progress? Yes.

Is there more to be done? I say yes again.

Ms. Martel: I don't think the Premier wants to challenge Nancy Morrison again. He's already made many promises to her and broken them, and her son's therapist is barred from going into that

classroom to provide IBI.

What else did Justice Kiteley have to say about your government and your Minister of Education? She said: "The absence of ABA/IBI means that children with autism are excluded from the opportunity to access

learning, with the consequential deprivation of skills, the likelihood of isolation from society and the loss of ability to exercise the rights and freedoms to which all Canadians are entitled."

Every day in Ontario, school children with autism cannot go to school because they cannot learn in the classroom without their IBI therapist, and every day your government, Premier, keeps in place the barriers

that ensure that therapists cannot be there. Autistic children have a right to public education in Ontario. What are you going to do to keep your promise to ensure that they can get it?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I gather the member is changing tactics. Now that she no longer believes that we have not kept our commitment, she's going back to a court decision.

We will continue to work with parents. I say that in the presence of parents here, some of whom I've had the opportunity to meet with. We will maintain an ongoing dialogue. We've made some real progress

working together. We have more than doubled the funding. Children no longer age out at the age of six. We're providing an unprecedented level of new support in our schools. Again I say to the member opposite and to the parents present: There is

more work to be done, and we will continue to work together.

EMERGENCY SERVICES

Mrs. Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener-Waterloo): My question is for the Minister of Health. Last year in November, I raised the issue of the overcrowded emergency rooms with you here in this House

after several emergency room doctors had travelled to Toronto in order to let you know about the problems they were seeing in emergency rooms. They said that the emergency department situation was severe, it was impacting patient outcomes and it

was not sustainable with current resources. Not only did you attempt to marginalize these doctors; you refused to acknowledge that there was a problem.

Today the problem is even worse than it was last year. In fact, administrators and doctors throughout the province are telling us so, and we know that at least 19 communities have been threatened with

temporary closures of their emergency rooms. My community, Kitchener-Waterloo, is among them.

I would like to know, Minister: What steps are you taking to ensure that Grand River and St. Mary's hospitals are going to be able to continue to meet the needs of my --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): The question has been asked. The Minister of Health.

Hon. George Smitherman (Deputy Premier, Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): The honourable member tries pretty hard to tell a story. She told a story. The circumstances are a little

different by recollection.

Firstly, a group of doctors that is not the Ontario Medical Association, with whom we negotiate, came forward. They didn't represent all emergency room doctors. We work through the OMA, and we continue to do

that. In fact, Dr. David Bach, the president of the Ontario Medical Association, has been playing a role and assisting in the situation with respect to Kitchener.

The issue in Kitchener, best as I've been able to detect, is one that is challenged on a variety of bases. Most certainly at the heart of it, one of the challenges we have in our province was created by these

two parties. They like to pretend that it's not true, but they did shortchange Ontario at least 600 doctors. They could be making a difference in all of those communities.

Secondly, many of the challenges in Kitchener are locally occurring in the relationship between the doctors and the hospital. We worked hard, including at a meeting last Friday, to guide a path through that,

and we're going to continue to follow up and assist and address these circumstances in --

The Speaker: Thank you, Minister. Supplementary.

Mrs. Witmer: First of all, let me correct the record. It was our government that actually added medical doctors to the system. We increased medical school enrolment. We announced the new

medical school up north.

I would say to you that people in Kitchener-Waterloo are alarmed. Now a statement is being made that our emergency room services are going to be suspended. One of the emergency rooms is going to be closed. I

want you to commit today that our emergency rooms at both Grand River and St. Marys will not close as a result of a problem that you have left unattended for three years, despite the promise made by your Premier. You've broken your promise.

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: From the honourable member, who is a fantastic pretender -- let's get real here. The situation is so well known and so well established. In 1993, that party made a

decision to tramp down our medical schools, to make them smaller. This party waited years into its term in office to begin to expand again. The reality is clear to everyone. You can't make a doctor as fast as you can make a pizza. You sat on the

sidelines and squandered opportunity, and the result was, working with them, we lost 600 docs. Now, you can make up any story you want, but you can't escape that fundamental accountability.

On the issue with respect to the emergency rooms in Kitchener, this is a serious situation and we take it seriously on behalf of those patients. Two assistant deputy ministers from the ministry were there in

Kitchener on Friday. We've enlisted the support of the Ontario Medical Association. We will do all that is within our power to address this. But the honourable member, as a local member, cannot pretend that some of the circumstances here are not

about the relationship between the doctors --

The Speaker: Thank you, Minister. New question.

LANDFILL

Mr. Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): I have a question to the Premier. Premier, in 2004 and 2005, the Ontario Liberal Party received over $35,000 from Green Lane landfill and Green Lane

Environmental Group Ltd. Your London-area Liberal MPPs purport to oppose the mega-dumping planned at Green Lane, but that hasn't stopped the McGuinty Liberals from pocketing mega donations from the dump's owners.

If McGuinty Liberals are so opposed to this dump, why are they taking money from the very company that owns the dump and has now won approvals to expand it?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): The Minister of the Environment.

Hon. Laurel C. Broten (Minister of the Environment): It's great to be back, to have a chance to answer questions from the opposition and to bring them out of a fantasyland into reality.

Let me tell you, friends across the House, the long process with respect to the Green Lane landfill and the work that the Ministry of the Environment has done to ensure that the people of that community will

be safe and protected. The terms of reference of that landfill were approved by the former government on March 28, 2002, and a process was undertaken for several years whereby facets of that landfill, which has been in existence since 1978, would

be assured that any expansion application that was being brought forward would be examined in the fullness of science and that many conditions could be put in place to ensure that that landfill would be safe and protected. Any steps undertaken by

the Ministry of the Environment, and all steps undertaken, are done to ensure that communities are safe, healthy and protected --

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

Mr. Kormos: Oh, Minister, it didn't take that long. In only two years, Green Lane pumped $35,000 into the coffers of the Ontario Liberal Party. Even cabinet minister Steve Peters was more than

pleased to take money from Green Lane Environmental Group Ltd. Is this the new McGuinty standard: cash for trash?

Hon. Ms. Broten: Perhaps I'll ask my friend opposite a question: Would you cancel the Green Lane landfill? Would you seek to interfere in a legally binding --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Minister?

Hon. Ms. Broten: The responsibility of the Ministry of the Environment is to examine the facts, the reality, examine the science and ensure that communities can be safe and protected. There is

no doubt that reducing waste is our first priority. But we don't live in a fantasyland and we recognize that landfill may be required. This application came forward to the Ministry of the Environment. It was fully examined, conditions were put in

place, and those conditions will ensure that the community will be safe and protected. The members opposite may seek to close Green Lane landfill, may in fact want to interfere in a legally binding agreement. That's not the ability or --

The Speaker: Thank you. New question.

ASSISTANCE TO FARMERS

Mr. Jeff Leal (Peterborough): My question today is to the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. The Peterborough riding was pleased, and in particular Keene, Ontario, to host the

International Plowing Match last week. The IPM usually attracts more than 150 competitors and over 500 exhibitors and is considered the largest outdoor farm and rural expo show in Canada. The farm show includes historic, modern, educational,

artisan and agriculture exhibits as well as special events. This year's plowing match attracted over 81,000 visitors. It was hosted by Jim and Mary Glenn, the owners of Glenn Isle Farms, and Norm Blodgett and his committee did an excellent

job.

Minister, I was delighted to have the Premier and so many of my colleagues attend this event. It was truly a successful week. I was very pleased that our Premier announced new investment in rural Ontario that

will build opportunities for farmers and strengthen vital infrastructure in rural communities. Minister, could you share with us the details of this wonderful announcement?

Hon. Leona Dombrowsky (Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs): I'm very happy to have the opportunity, first of all, to congratulate the organizers of the International Plowing

Match, who I believe did an outstanding job for their event this year in Keene, also the host couple, the host farm, Jim and Mary Glenn, as well as our colleague Jeff Leal. He did a great job of advertising for his local community. He got two

wagonloads of his colleagues out to the International Plowing Match. It was an opportunity when our Premier was able to announce $185 million of new money. That's on top of the federal announcement that was made at the time of their budget last

spring. Of that $185 million, $110 million will go directly to farmers and $75 million will be going to rural municipalities across Ontario.

Mr. Leal: Minister, this is exciting news for rural Ontario. I'm sure the constituents of Peterborough and the folks who were at the plowing match really appreciate this commitment.

However, it would seem that the Leader of the Opposition has got his numbers wrong again. I was shocked when I read in the papers the suggestion that the Leader of the Opposition said that the $110 million

that was announced is actually federal money which allegedly the Ontario government has been sitting on for four months. Once again, when John Tory visits rural Ontario, it's one foot in the furrow and one in his mouth. Minister, can you set the

record straight?

Hon. Mrs. Dombrowsky: I'm very happy to. I can't tell you how disappointed I was. I think it certainly reflects very sloppy research, very poor math skills and very empty rhetoric on the part

of the opposition to try and suggest that this government was sitting on federal dollars. Nothing could be further from the case in the province of Ontario. The money that was announced last week is new money. I would also like to clarify that

that is a result of our Premier listening to farmers in rural Ontario. He spent the entire summer going across Ontario and he indicated that this investment is essential if we are to continue to have a strong agriculture sector.

We are providing a 40% match to the federal dollars that were announced in the federal budget last spring, even though there is absolutely no requirement. The federal government made it very clear in their

announcement last spring that provinces would not be required to come up with 40%, and this Premier has come up with $110 million for farmers in Ontario. That is our commitment to farmers.

AUTISM TREATMENT

Mr. Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): I have a question to the Minister of Education. Today, Dennis Lendrum travelled from Espanola with his daughter, Trinna Lendrum, and her son, Alex Bertrand. He is

autistic. He is not receiving the services that we hear about today. There is a great gap between the rhetoric of your government, the services that you say are there for autistic children, and what parents are experiencing in a practical way in

their homes every day.

You, as minister, made your first major announcement relating to autism. We were encouraged by the fact that it related to autism; we were greatly disappointed to hear how quickly you've learned the art of

spin over substance, because your announcement related strictly to the creation of yet one more study. You're going to appoint a reference group to study this issue three years after your government has taken office. I want to ask you this

question --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): The question has been asked. Minister.

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne (Minister of Education): Thank you to the member for the question. It is with great pleasure that I'm going to counter the claim of the member opposite; I can't tell you

how much pleasure it gives me. We have this year already put $50 million more into special education generally. We have given $5 million from our ministry to the Geneva Centre to train education assistants. We know very well that training is

needed.

What the member opposite is referring to is the establishment of an autism reference group. It is not to study; that reference group has been set up to advise both the Minister of Children and Youth Services

and myself on the best practices that are needed in our province.

There is no silver bullet. I wish there were a silver bullet to help all those families who are dealing with children with autism. We need to know from the experts who are sitting in that autism reference

group what the best practices are so we can make the best difference in this province with the money that we're --

The Speaker: Thank you. Supplementary.

Mr. Klees: My question is, very simply: Why has it taken you three years to bring those people to the table to find out what the best practices are? Ask the parents; they'll tell you what the

best practices are. You don't need another reference group. I suggest, Minister, that effectively what you have done is you've deflected one more time. You're creating another photo op instead of getting down to the heart of dealing with the

issue. Every one of these parents will tell you today what the answer is. Why will you not simply implement and meet the commitment that your Premier made, and that is to look after the needs of these autistic children?

Hon. Ms. Wynne: We need this group to talk to us about good practices because in fact we know about the bad practices. The bad practices were practised by the previous government. Aging

children out at six was a bad practice. Not putting the resources into the system to allow the schools to work with the community agencies was a bad practice. What we need are the transition plans. We need to make the links between what's

happening in the community and what's happening in the school so that those kids who are not aging out at six are continuing to get training. But they need to be in the mainstream in the school. How do we do that? That's what we're asking the

reference group, and you did not start on that road.

EDUCATION FUNDING

Ms. Cheri DiNovo (Parkdale-High Park): My question is for the Premier. I was sent here by my electorate in Parkdale-High Park with very simple questions: Why don't we have fully funded public

schools? Why do we still have a flawed funding formula? Why do we still have the Toronto District School Board running an $84-million deficit and the Catholic school board running a $34-million one? Why did the Campaign for Public Education

yesterday send me here to ask these questions as well -- parents, teachers, trustees and, finally, students? I would like the Premier to answer.

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): Let me first of all take the opportunity to congratulate the member on her success and to offer her my very best wishes as

she engages in this privileged opportunity to represent her constituents. I mean that in the most sincere way possible.

The member will know that we have put together a team of people who are working now with the Toronto school board in a genuine effort to learn more about their particular financial challenges. We do know that

we are getting class sizes down in the TDSB. We know that we have more teachers, that we have more textbooks, that the graduation rate is going up. Those are all good things. They're all moving in the right direction. At the same time, the board

has a responsibility to ensure they are managing that new, unprecedented level of dollars in the best way possible. We have a process in place. My advice to the member opposite would be to allow those people to work together to come back to us

with their very best advice so we may then decide on the best plan going forward.

Ms. DiNovo: My question, then, to the Premier would be: Why did the electorate send you an interim failing report card? Also, aren't these advisers the same sorts of advisers and overseers

that the Harris-Eves government sent in?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I know that the member, in her heart of hearts, doesn't believe that. She would know, for example, that in our first three years in government we put $2.7 billion more into

education and she would know that in their first three years the Harris-Eves government took $200 million out of education.

I would remind the member of what it was that the chairperson from the Toronto District School Board said when we first announced that we were sending in these three people:

"It demonstrates clearly that the government is looking for solutions, and I think the experience and knowledge these individuals have about TDSB's challenges and programs will be very helpful in assisting the

board with its budget issues.

"I commend the minister.... Brian and Joan have demonstrated throughout their careers that they are interested in finding solutions to challenging issues in education."

What we said to the TDSB was, "Let's sit down. Let's work together."

WASTE MANAGEMENT

Ms. Deborah Matthews (London North Centre): My question is to the Minister of the Environment. Minister, people in London and southwestern Ontario are asking why Toronto can't deal with their

own sewage sludge and their own garbage in their own backyard. I'm asking the same question. I know that municipal waste is a municipal responsibility, but clearly the province has some responsibility here too. I think it's important that we step

up to that responsibility and take action. Minister, what are we