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

October 17, 1988

34th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

L088 - Mon 17 Oct 1988 / Lun 17 oct 1988

LEGISLATIVE PAGES

WRIT OF ELECTION

COMMISSION ON ELECTION FINANCES

CONSTITUTIONAL REFORM

MEMBERS’ STATEMENTS

CHILD POVERTY

JEAN-FRANÇOIS AUBÉ

PERSONS DAY

INCO LTD.

LANDFILL SITE

HOSPICE PETERBOROUGH

HOMES FOR THE AGED AND NURSING HOMES

RETAIL STORE HOURS

VISITOR

WILLIAM NEWMAN

P. MICHAEL DEWAN

WILLIAM NEWMAN

VICTOR COPPS

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

DRUG ABUSE

APPRENTICESHIP TRAINING

1988 OLYMPIC SUMMER GAMES

ACID RAIN

RESPONSES

DRUG ABUSE

1988 OLYMPIC SUMMER GAMES

APPRENTICESHIP TRAINING

DRUG ABUSE

APPRENTICESHIP TRAINING

ACID RAIN

1988 OLYMPIC SUMMER GAMES

ORAL QUESTIONS

CHILD CARE

METROPOLITAN TORONTO HOUSING AUTHORITY

MEMBERS’ ANNIVERSARIES

WASTE MANAGEMENT

ÉLECTION DE CONSEILLERS SCOLAIRES / TRUSTEE REPRESENTATION

WORKERS’ COMPENSATION BOARD

LANDFILL SITE

FIRE PREVENTION

RECYCLING

METROPOLITAN TORONTO HOUSING AUTHORITY

BREAST CANCER

SOCIAL ASSISTANCE

PETITIONS

PARLIAMENTARY ASSISTANT

RETAIL STORE HOURS

SCHOOL OPENING EXERCISES

NAMING OF ROAD

RETAIL STORE HOURS

MADAWASKA TRUST PARK

PENETANGUISHENE MENTAL HEALTH CENTRE

QUARRY TRUCK ROUTE

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

MOTIONS

INTERNATIONAL OMBUDSMAN CONFERENCE

STANDING COMMITTEE ON THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

PRIVATE MEMBERS’ PUBLIC BUSINESS

MOTION TO SET ASIDE ORDINARY BUSINESS

WASTE MANAGEMENT

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

Prayers.

LEGISLATIVE PAGES

Mr. Speaker: I would like to ask all members to join me in welcoming the first group of legislative pages to serve in the fall session of the 34th Parliament, 1988. They are:

Jeffrey Bakker, St. Catharines; Colin Baryliuk, York North; Elie Basch, Markham; Zia Bismilla, Scarborough-Ellesmere; Carolyn Boyer, Renfrew North; James Campbell, Oxford; Gianpiero Cognoli, Downsview; Darcy DeMarsico, Ottawa South; Stephanie Dunthorne, Durham-York; Shelagh Freedman, Scarborough East; Sherri Gaertner, London North; Matthew Gallinger, York Centre; James Gravelle, Windsor-Sandwich; Christina Gural, High Park-Swansea; Zoe Janzen, Wellington; Katrina Kam, Hamilton West; Andrew Nelson, Mississauga East; Tom Ormiston, Kenora; Maxim Panitch, Fort York; Paul Peer, Sault Ste.

Marie; Christine Philpot, Hamilton Mountain; Adrianna Smart, Nepean; Jayshree Soni, York South, and Kyle Wilcox, Brampton North.

Please join me in welcoming our new group of pages.

I have one or two other points of information.

WRIT OF ELECTION

Mr. Speaker: I beg to inform the House that during the summer adjournment, a vacancy occurred in the membership of the House by reason of the resignation of Mel Swart, Esq., as member for the electoral district of Welland-Thorold effective 11:59 p.m., Thursday, June 30, 1988. Accordingly, my warrant has been issued to the chief election officer for the issue of a writ for a by-election.

COMMISSION ON ELECTION FINANCES

Mr. Speaker: I also wish to inform the House that today I have laid upon the table the 13th annual report of the Commission on Election Finances for the year 1987.

CONSTITUTIONAL REFORM

Mr. Speaker: I also wish to inform the House that the Clerk has received from the Clerk Assistant of the Senate of Canada a copy of a resolution to amend the Constitution of Canada adopted by the Senate on April 21, 1988.

MEMBERS’ STATEMENTS

CHILD POVERTY

Mr. Allen: As we take up our work in this Legislature, the first thing we need to be reminded of is the appalling evidence of child poverty in David Peterson’s Ontario. Among dependents of working poor families there are close to half a million poor children.

The odds are stacked against them at birth. They are more likely to die as babies, and as children they are more likely to have fatal accidents. They are twice as likely to get leukaemia and twice as likely to die from it. They are far more likely to suffer from pneumonia, anaemia, tooth decay, ear infections, retardation and learning disabilities.

A Hamilton study tells us that boys in welfare families have a 40 per cent rate of psychiatric disorder and girls have a 27.8 per cent poor school performance. Low-income young people drop out of school more often and end up more frequently unemployed or in low-wage, dead-end jobs. Even the bright ones rule out further schooling because they assume they cannot afford it.

Toronto children’s aid society statistics tell us that, by far, the largest part of the intake of children at risk comes from poor families. Child poverty takes an immense toll of persons, and the costs are enormous in social programs and wasted potential.

I challenge this government to tackle child poverty at its root, to begin immediately on George Thomson’s proposal of a children’s benefit and to institute a comprehensive strategy to get all children off to an equal start.

JEAN-FRANÇOIS AUBÉ

Le décès de Jean-François touchera bon nombre de personnes. On se souviendra de Jean-François comme étant un pionnier au sein de la communauté francophone.

Au nom de mon parti, et en mon nom personnel, je désire offrir nos plus sincères condoléances à Andrea Aubé, à son père, à ses frères et à sa soeur.

We wish to express our condolences with the passage of Jean-François Aubé, who contributed enormously to the political life of Ontario.

PERSONS DAY

Mrs. Sullivan: Tomorrow is the 59th anniversary of Persons Day, and that is indeed a time for celebration. Persons Day marks a significant milestone in Canadian history, the day women become persons in the eyes of the law.

Six decades ago, not that long a time, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that only men were persons. Magistrate Emily Murphy and four other courageous Canadian women took their case to the judicial committee of the Privy Council in London, England, and on October 18, 1929, Canadian women were given the legal right to be people. Not until then were they eligible for appointments to the Senate.

Persons Day reminds us of the tremendous changes that have taken place in our society since then. The changing role of women is one of the most dramatic social changes witnessed in this century. Women’s achievements have caused us to re-examine the roles each of us, both women and men, play in our society. We are shifting from a sense of personal struggle to a concept of responsibility within the larger community. This government is committed to women’s equal participation in society and to supplying the supports necessary so that each and every Ontario woman can participate to whatever degree she chooses in all functions of society.

Please join me in marking this occasion.

INCO LTD.

Mr. Laughren: A couple of weeks ago, the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology (Mr. Kwinter) rode into Sudbury and handed over a $2.81-million cheque to Inco Ltd. to do some research on mining methods.

At the same time the minister was handing over almost $3 million to Inco, Inco was announcing a $1-billion program to feed back into itself in order to avoid a hostile takeover. The $1 billion that Inco is going to spend on itself would create no jobs, no money for exploration and development, no more money for acid rain improvements, no improvements for health and safety, or wages and benefits or pensions for its ex-employees.

At the same time the minister was handing that $2.81 million to Inco, Inco was getting the word that it had just won a couple of assessment appeals through the province’s assessment review court to the tune of $239,000 for 1987 and $248,000 for 1988, and there is more to come.

This is the same year that Inco is going to net about $500 million, and this minister thinks he has to hand over almost $3 million to it. It is truly remarkable. Surely to goodness that has nothing to do with the free enterprise system. That is simply self-indulgent and incestuous enterprise.

LANDFILL SITE

Mr. McLean: My statement is directed at the minister of Agriculture and Food (Mr. Riddell) and his colleague the Minister of the Environment (Mr. Bradley). I would like to point out one more example of this government’s lack of leadership and the conflicting opinions and views held by many of the government’s ministers.

The Midland Free Press and the Midland Times newspapers carried stories in September about the Minister of Agriculture and Food’s opposition to using site 41 in Tiny township as a new landfill site. This site is also opposed by Tiny township council, neighbouring residents and several tourism facilities, but the same site has the backing of the North Simcoe Waste Management Association and the Ministry of the Environment.

This clearly shows that these two ministers cannot get together and work together to solve an extremely serious problem that is affecting people in North Simcoe and throughout the rest of Ontario. Rather than showing leadership, rather than working together for a common cause and rather than solving a critical problem in this province, these ministers are ducking the issue and they are sweeping the problem under the rug. When is the government going to show some leadership and solve the garbage crisis in this province?

HOSPICE PETERBOROUGH

Mr. Adams: Hospice Peterborough is an independent agency which helps terminally ill people live at home as fully and comfortably as possible until they die. It also provides a support system for the grieving family. It is composed of a board, a part-time director and a dozen trained volunteers.

Hospice Peterborough’s goal is to enhance the quality of life for the terminally ill and their families. The workplace is the client’s home. The agency offers an assessment of the needs of the client and family, emphasizing coping with pain and symptoms of the disease. At the same time, Hospice Peterborough co-ordinates services available in the community. It works with health care professionals, Red Cross homemakers, Meals on Wheels, the Victorian Order of Nurses and other services. Its entire budget is considerably less than the cost of hospitalization of one terminally ill person.

Hospice Peterborough feels that its goal of keeping people at home enjoying a richer and happier life while reducing the burden on health care resources more than justifies its calls for financial assistance. The hospice receives 70 per cent funding from the Ministry of Community and Social Services, the remainder from the United Way and donations. There is much to be done. The only paid staff member needs help. Equipment is needed to help the clients. Services must be extended around the clock.

Mr. Speaker: The member’s time has expired.

The member for Beaches-Woodbine, for 42 seconds.

HOMES FOR THE AGED AND NURSING HOMES

Ms. Bryden: During the heat wave last summer, it was reported in the press that there had been about 20 deaths in homes for the aged and nursing homes in the Metro area. It was suggested that the heat could have been a contributing factor.

A coroner’s inquest was held to determine the cause of death and to produce recommendations whether the heat had anything to do with it. They recommended last week that the province develop a province-wide emergency plan at homes for the elderly during intense heat waves.

I would like to ask the minister, when will she bring that sort of plan to this Legislature?

RETAIL STORE HOURS

Mr. Philip: On a point of privilege, Mr. Speaker: I believe members of this Legislature have had their privileges abused by the Solicitor General (Mrs. Smith).

The Solicitor General circulated information concerning Sunday shopping to some members, a package that contained an alleged study conducted by Clayton Research Associates of Toronto and entitled The Impact of Sunday Shopping in Alberta.

The clear intention of that package was to discredit arguments against Bill 113 and Bill 114. No such study exists; there is no such study. I ask that the minister apologize to the members of the House and to the public for this obvious deception.

Mr. Speaker: I listened carefully to the member rising on a point of privilege. At the end of his statement, the member asked a question. I suggest that he continue and ask that question at the appropriate time.

VISITOR

Mr. Speaker: I would like to ask all members of the assembly to recognize in the Speaker’s gallery, from Barbados, the Minister of Employment, Labour Relations and Community Development, the Honourable Keith Simmons. Please join me in welcoming the minister.

Hon. Mr. Conway: I would like to ask for unanimous consent so the House can observe the passing of our former colleague the member for Durham North, who was the former Minister of Agriculture and Food, and the late Vic Copps, the mayor of Hamilton.

Agreed to.

WILLIAM NEWMAN

Mr. Sterling: It was with deep regret that we learned of the death Wednesday, October 12, of Bill Newman, a former Ontario cabinet minister and former member for Durham North.

Members will know that Bill Newman was first elected to this Legislature in 1967 for the riding of Ontario South. When the electoral boundaries were changed in 1975, he won the seat in the new riding of Durham North. He was appointed Minister of the Environment in 1974, and later that year he warned Metro that it would have to look to alternatives to dumping its garbage in Ajax and Pickering. He was appointed Minister of Agriculture and Food in October 1975.

Advised by his doctor to take things easy after a heart attack in 1979, he did not run in our 1981 general election. Instead, he returned to farming his acreage in Balsam, Ontario, where the pace of living and working was much more relaxed. In 1981, he was appointed to the Liquor Control Board of Ontario on a part-time basis. In 1985, he was named to the committee set up to study the best use of the Pickering airport land.

Before his election to the Legislature he served as a councillor, deputy reeve and reeve of the township of Pickering. At the time Bill was elected as reeve of the township of Pickering, he was the youngest ever to be elected to that position.

Bill was known around this Legislature as being a straight shooter. In fact, Bill was known as being such a straight shooter that he was also known as being one of the poorest card players in all of the Legislature of Ontario. He was unable to bluff any of his opponents and the press gallery soon learned about that.

Bill Newman was a Conservative, and he was proud to be a Conservative. He was a team player and could always be counted on by his colleagues in the Conservative caucus.

Described as bold and blustery by the then leader of the New Democratic Party, Stephen Lewis also recognized that his heart was that of a lamb. Bill Newman cared about people and that was shown by the tremendous turnout of people at a memorial service held this past Saturday in the United Church at Balsam, Ontario.

He was born in Toronto on January 17, 1928, and he was educated at the University of Toronto and the University of Guelph.

Bill enjoyed the last few years of his life around his wife, Molly, his children, Cathy, Carrie, Allan, and especially his three grandchildren, who will miss him in the future.

We extend our sympathy to his family.

Hon. Mr. Riddell: It is with great sadness that we note the passing of William Newman on Wednesday, October 12, 1988. To all who knew him as the member from Ontario South and Durham North, as parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Transportation and Communications, as Minister of the Environment and as Minister of Agriculture and Food, he was a gentleman of integrity who served his constituents and this province well.

Under his guidance as Minister of the Environment, Ontario was given the far-reaching Environmental Assessment Act in 1975, setting the foundation for environmental protection in this province.

During the four years he served as Minister of Agriculture and Food, from 1975 to 1979, at which time I was opposition critic, I gained a deep respect and admiration for Bill. He was a man who withstood the slings and arrows of politics, a man who showed great leadership and who all the while remained steadfast in his commitment to the farmers of this province.

Bill took the farsighted step of introducing the first food land preservation guidelines in Ontario and was heavily involved in some of the early battles to protect and strengthen our supply management systems. His commitment came from an understanding of farming and a deep love of the land. Although he was raised in Toronto, he pursued an agricultural education at the University of Guelph and spoke proudly of his being the only farmer in his family.

After his retirement from provincial politics in 1981, Bill continued to serve this province as a member of the Liquor Control Board of Ontario and also as an active participant in land use issues.

With his passing, the people of Ontario have lost a friend and a capable leader. In his own words: “My first concern was the people I represented and served. Then, as cabinet minister, there was the knowledge that I was taking

part in major decisions that would affect the future of people in this province.” We must never forget the wisdom of those words.

May I express, on behalf of the members of this party, our sincere condolences to his wife, Margaret, and his children, Catherine, Allan and Carrie.

William Newman will be missed, but his service to Ontario will not be forgotten.

P. MICHAEL DEWAN

Hon. Mr. Riddell: I would like to take a few moments to pay tribute to a former member of the Legislature and a former Minister of Agriculture for Ontario who passed away July 29, 1988.

With the passing of P. Michael Dewan, Minister of Agriculture from 1937 to 1943, we have lost an important link with our history. Mr. Dewan will be remembered as a minister who played a key role in the co-ordination of the rapid expansion of the agricultural industry during the war years, when farmers provided the food needed for the war effort.

Mr. Dewan presided over the Ontario agricultural industry during an important period in which Ontario farms underwent a technological revolution. Many of the policies he brought in helped set agriculture on a successful course for the next 45 years. The success of our agriculture and food industry today is owed, in great part, to P. Michael Dewan.

On behalf of the members of this party, I express condolences to the Dewan family on its loss.

WILLIAM NEWMAN

Mr. Breaugh: For about 30 years, Bill Newman served the people in his area at different levels -- at the local level, at the county level and here in the provincial Legislative Assembly. He served them in a neighbouring riding to mine. He is one of the first people I met who was a provincial cabinet minister.

He was not exactly a smooth talker, but he certainly was a straight talker. He was the kind of man you could respect immensely, and you knew you could enter into a full-fledged political argument and give it as hard as you could because you were about to get it back as hard as he could. He believed in what he was doing very strongly. I think democracy works well when the people who are elected to serve believe in their causes, put them forward in a straightforward manner and, when the debate is through, leave with no hard feelings.

That was always my experience with Bill Newman, that he did not give an inch, but at the end of the day, when the argument was settled, he did not hold a grudge either.

Locally, I think his hallmark is that he did what each one of us is supposed to do. He served the people whom he represented individually. His reputation as someone who, in our terms, was a constituency worker is immense. Even after he left public life, he continued to try to help people with various problems.

All of the members here know that each day you are confronted with a wide variety of people who have problems with the bureaucracy of any level of government, personal problems and all of that. That is one of the things Bill Newman did well. He would serve as an excellent example for all members here on how to do this job: to do it ferociously when you have to, to do it steadfastly and never to forget that there are people back in your own constituency who need your help.

Bill Newman was not a political friend, but in every other sense of the word he was a friend. He shared on many occasions the different responsibilities that we all have. He set an example as someone who served very well the people who lived around him for a very long period of time. There are not many people who can survive in politics for 30 years. Bill Newman is one of those. He was one of those people who made a distinguished mark on the life of the people around him and on the political landscape of Ontario.

To his family and to all of his friends, I want to join, on behalf of the New Democratic Party, in expressing our sorrow in the loss of Bill Newman; but to all of us who remain here at Queen’s Park, there is a memory and an example and a mark that has been set by a man who gave as hard as he could every day of his political life. He will be remembered here.

Mrs. Stoner: My community is in mourning, because it was just present at the memorial service for Bill on the weekend and Bill Newman was our representative, as our reeve and our deputy reeve, as a member of council and as our member of this Legislature.

He was seven years on the councils and was elected to this Legislature in 1967 in the first place, and served on a number of legislative appointments at that time and was eventually appointed to be Minister of the Environment and Minister of Agriculture and Food. Those were most appropriate appointments, because he was always close to the land and he was always sensitive to the needs of the land. As a member of the council and as a member of this Legislature, he leaves great, large footsteps for those of us who follow him.

After leaving provincial politics, he was very active in community issues. He was a member of our local police commission. He was on the federally appointed board studying the best land use for the expropriated airport site in Pickering. He was instrumental just recently in forming a rural area ratepayers’ association, and even after he became ill, he still spoke out against Metro Toronto’s plans for a landfill site within the community. He had told Metro as far back as 1974 that this was not appropriate.

Bill’s commitment to his community earned him a great deal of respect and affection. We always knew that his community came first. His friendships crossed all partisan political boundaries. In a report card on cabinet in 1978, Stephen Lewis said of Bill Newman that underneath the howls, the volume and the verbal velocity, there beats the heart of a lamb, and he was absolutely right; he was loved by his community for his honesty and integrity.

Personally, I have lost a good friend and I know that all of you join me in extending our sympathy to Bill’s lovely wife, Molly, and to his children, Cathy, Carrie and Allan, to the grandchildren and also to his three brothers, his sister and 20 nieces and nephews.

I thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity to express my condolences on Bill Newman to this Legislature today.

VICTOR COPPS

Hon. R. F. Nixon: The citizens of Hamilton and citizens right across Canada were very sorry indeed to hear of the death of Victor Copps over the weekend. He was never a member of this House but all of us here, as people involved in the community and public life in the province, know of his great energy and activity, his success in leading many causes and the example that he set in municipal affairs in the city of Hamilton.

He will be greatly missed there, although, as members know, he has been seriously ill for a number of years, ever since a stroke felled him as he was taking

part in an around-the-bay race. It is typical that he would have the energy and the enthusiasm never to think for a moment that he should not even have participated in that at the time.

He and I had been involved in many political incidents. As a matter of fact, we ran for the leadership of the party back in 1964, as the earth was cooling. I was not successful on that occasion but even before that, when he was just beginning to be directly active in the politics of the municipality of Hamilton, he undertook to run against Lloyd D. Jackson, who happened to be another Liberal and, incidentally, my uncle. I was out working very hard under those circumstances and, once again, let’s put it this way, I did not win.

But Vic and I, over those years, became good friends indeed and along with many people here we were impressed with his enthusiasm, his energy and his ability, his belief in the democratic process and his love for the fight, whether it was political or otherwise. There was never an occasion when things cleared up and the storm clouds rolled away when anything had impeded in any way at all his strong feelings of friendship for people on all sides of the political battle. Surely this more than anything else is an earmark of an intelligent politician, a person who understands the system and, in that respect, Vic was an example to everybody here and those interested in public life elsewhere.

His family, as members know, have been involved in politics as well and he has set a great example for them. His wife, Geraldine, had a stellar career as a citizenship judge and was highly respected in all communities. His daughters are both candidates for election to the Parliament of Canada and, without commenting on their prospects, I am sure all of us wish them and all other candidates who move into this field of public endeavour well.

My own experience is a personal one and I know that Vic was a brave man, a great fighter and almost always successful in his endeavours. He will be missed personally and by the people of his own community.

Mr. Mackenzie: On behalf of my colleagues in the New Democratic Party caucus, I want to convey our sympathy to the Copps family and to say a few words about Victor Copps.

Victor Copps was well respected by all of the citizens of Hamilton. Very few municipal politicians have earned the support and love that he achieved in our community. There were occasional differences but they never negated the respect that people had for Vic and for his commitment to the city of Hamilton.

Victor Copps was elected to the board of control in 1962 and two years later became the mayor of Hamilton and served until his untimely accident in 1976. Vic was a promoter of the first order. He was prepared to defy convention occasionally if it was something that he thought was in the interests of the citizens of Hamilton, as some members will remember from this very chamber when he disagreed with the direction we were taking in terms of regional government and grants to the city of Hamilton.

His cause was always the people of the city of Hamilton. In his 1962 run for mayor of the city of Hamilton, he asked for support of the Hamilton and District Labour Council. Such support is not often given to old party supporters but he got it, almost unanimously, at the meeting and I think it is indicative of the respect which workers accorded him.

His relations with my own union, the United Steel Workers, were always most cordial. They respected his honesty and commitment to Hamilton and appreciated the fact that even when involved in a disagreement, Victor Copps had no partisan comebacks. He was always a gentleman and respectful of the views of others, as hard as he might fight on a specific issue.

He marched proudly in every Labour Day parade in the city of Hamilton, not because it was a political thing to do but because he really believed in the pivotal role that labour played in our particular community. To march alongside Vic with the executive of that labour council and see the way the people called out to him, as I had the privilege of doing on two or three occasions, was an awesome experience. His memory, the number of people he could respond to by name as he marched in that parade, made you wonder just how far you had to go to match what he had done in terms of respect from the people in Hamilton.

Victor Copps liked to think of himself as the mayor for all the people, and he came as close, I think, as is possible to achieving that goal.

Mr. Jackson: I wish to state as well, with all members of this House, our deep sadness at the passing of a great Ontario public servant. Victor Copps will be remembered by many. He will be remembered particularly by myself. I remember my days as a young boy growing up in the north end of Hamilton and watching his political career. He is remembered best for his love of his family, his very deep love of his city and, of course, his love for a Canadian game which is played very well in Hamilton, thanks to his devotion and commitment.

People seldom realize how deeply devoted he was to the game of football and how much he believed in its role. He clearly made commitments above and beyond what anyone in public life should ever be called upon to do. Just recently, a story surfaced which indicates that he was known one day to go to city hall, but on the way he took his wife, Geraldine, and stopped by the bank right on James Street in Hamilton.

They got out and went inside, and Geraldine found that they were putting their house up as collateral to guarantee a loan to make sure that the Canadian Football Hall of Fame would become a reality in this country and a reality in Hamilton. That was the kind of commitment that Victor Copps gave his entire life.

He helped develop the civic name The Ambitious City, and he provided all the dynamics and the vision to make that a reality. The landscape of that city bears very much his sense of direction and his sense of belief in that city.

He had a very common touch and yet he had the ability to lead both within his political party and on national forums. He was an outstanding public servant who will be sadly missed, and we wish to join with all members of this House in expressing our very deep sympathies to the Copps family at this time.

Mr. Speaker: On behalf of all members of the assembly, when Hansard, the official record, is printed, I will make certain that a copy is sent to the Newman, Dewan and Copps families so that they are aware of your words of sympathy.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

DRUG ABUSE

Hon. Mr. Peterson: I am very pleased to table in the Legislature today the report of the member for Muskoka-Georgian Bay (Mr. Black) on illegal drug use in Ontario.

I want to thank the member for Muskoka-Georgian Bay for his excellent work in writing this report. It is action-oriented and it brings forward a number of key recommendations. More important, it provides us with a strategy for responding to this most serious problem.

Combating the use of illegal drugs is an issue which the government views with the highest priority. I will be taking the member’s report and recommendations to cabinet this week to ensure that action can be initiated immediately. Specific program responses will be announced by the relevant ministers in the very near future.

As both a legislator and as a parent, I understand the depths of concern in our society about this problem, and I would invite the assistance of all members of the Legislature in pursuing the directions that the member for Muskoka-Georgian Bay has highlighted in the battle against illegal drug use.

APPRENTICESHIP TRAINING

Hon. Mr. Curling: Today I wish to make a statement regarding apprenticeship funding in Ontario.

Apprenticeship is the most cost-effective training system delivered by any government in this country. As well, apprenticeship provides highly skilled workers for critical industries in our economy.

As members may be aware, for the first time the federal government has unilaterally capped its funding of apprenticeship training. This year the federal government limited its funding in Ontario to $37 million, a cut from last year’s level of $37.4 million. Increased demand brings the cost of this important training to $42 million.

This does not only leave a shortfall of $5 million but, more important, it leaves 5,000 apprentices and 3,000 employers throughout the province discouraged and frustrated.

Critical trades in construction and industry will be hardest hit, trades in which employers are already experiencing shortages of skilled labour, trades that are vital to our economy at a time when the provincial economy is strong.

The government of Ontario is not prepared to stand by and see the apprenticeship system eroded by the federal government. We cannot allow apprenticeship training, which is based on real labour market demands, to be delayed.

Therefore, the government of Ontario will make up this shortfall. We are committing $5 million to ensure that 5,000 apprentices who were expecting to take in-school training in their chosen trade receive that training. This does not mean that we are assuming responsibility for an area of federal jurisdiction. We will vigorously pursue the federal government to recover these costs.

The labour market adjustment challenge facing Ontario has never been greater. Changing demographics, international markets and technological innovations all have significant implications for labour market policies.

Against this backdrop, the federal government is pursuing policies that will further accelerate these adjustment pressures: Ottawa’s initiative to drastically alter our trading relationship with the United States.

At the same time, the federal government is cutting back its support for labour adjustment programs.

Since 1984-85, federal funding for training and employment development has been reduced by more than $500 million, from $2.2 billion to $1.6 billion in the current year, a drop of 27 per cent. In Ontario, federal funding has dropped from $552 million in 1984-85 to $375 million this year, a 32 per cent decrease.

Apprenticeship is just the most recent victim.

In contrast, Ontario has almost doubled its spending on training from $133 million in 1984-85 to $264 million in 1988-89.

We are working to ensure that apprentices and employers who depend on this program will not be held in a state of uncertainty over government commitments to apprenticeship in the future.

Notwithstanding our current difficulties in this and other areas, we remain committed to building a strong training system in partnership with the federal government. We will continue to negotiate with the federal government to renew its commitment to a growing and flexible apprenticeship system.

A strong apprenticeship system is vital to the Ontario economy as we move into the 1990s and beyond. We face rapid technological change, skills shortages and tough international competition. Apprenticeship is an absolute necessity in meeting this challenge.

We must be sure that Ontario has the skilled workforce it needs to compete successfully in a rapidly changing international marketplace. Apprenticeship training is critical to this success.

1988 OLYMPIC SUMMER GAMES

Hon. Mr. O’Neil: At the Seoul Summer Olympic Games, 169 young men and women from Ontario competed as part of the Canadian team. I was proud to be there with them, to cheer their efforts, to visit with them at the athletes’ village and to witness their pride on the winners’ stand while our national anthem was played.

During the past few weeks, a great deal of attention has been focused on only part of the Seoul Olympics story. This afternoon, I would like to broaden that focus.

Ontario athletes comprised 45 per cent of the Canadian Olympic team -- a number in excess of Ontario’s percentage of Canadian population. Ontarians won three individual medals and were a part of four team-medal victories.

Lennox Lewis of Kitchener was the first Canadian boxer to win a gold medal in the superheavyweight category. It has been 56 years since a Canadian won a gold medal in boxing, and that was Toronto’s Horace Lefty Gwynne.

Also in boxing, Egerton Marcus of Toronto won the silver medal in the middleweight category -- quite an accomplishment in view of the fact that Mr. Marcus competed with a fracture in his hand.

The other medallists include Victor Davis of Waterloo and Sandy Goss of Toronto, members of the men’s 400-medley relay swimming team, silver medal.

Lori Melien of Whitby, Allison Higson of Brampton and Jane Kerr of Mississauga, members of the women’s 400-medley relay swimming team, bronze medal.

Cynthia Ishoy of King, Eva Marie Pracht of Cedar Valley and Ashley Nicoll of Toronto, members of the equestrian team dressage, bronze medal -- the first medal ever won by Canadians in this event.

Frank McLaughlin and John Millen, both of Toronto, Flying Dutchman event in yachting, bronze medal.

Dave Steen of Burlington, decathlon, bronze medal. Mr. Steen is the first Canadian ever to win a medal in this event.

The athletes I have named make only a partial list. At the ministry, we will be closely following the Seoul Paralympics where some of our province’s finest disabled athletes are competing. Those games officially opened yesterday.

I am proud to say that my ministry helped some of these young people on the road to Seoul through our support of the Ontario amateur sport system. In fact, 21 per cent of the Ontario Olympians benefited from our Best Ever program.

During the Olympics and the Paralympics, many young Ontarians showed, and are showing, the world their courage and determination. They were part of the true Olympic spirit, the kind of spirit shown by their fellow Canadian, Lawrence Lemieux.

As you will recall, he was the sailor from Alberta who, in the middle of a race, saved the life of one of his competitors who had fallen overboard and was in distress. For his selfless heroism, Mr. Lemieux received a special award from the International Olympic Committee. That is the kind of Olympic spirit that should be honoured.

As Minister of Tourism and Recreation for this province, I feel strongly that the Olympic spirit of our Ontario athletes should also be honoured.

As an aside, I would also like to mention to the members of the Ontario Legislature that Robert Marland, the son of Mississauga South MPP Margaret Marland, was one of the Olympic participants in the rowing event. Robert is a real nice young gentleman and it was a pleasure to meet him. He also made Ontario proud. He would make a good young Liberal.

ACID RAIN

Hon. Mr. Bradley: Last April, Ontario filed a petition asking the United States Environmental Protection Agency to begin the necessary legal procedures to force American acid rain polluters to clean up. That petition was filed in the context of an appeal court ruling which stated it could not order the US EPA to force an acid rain cleanup, as Ontario had asked the court to do, until the EPA first took several procedural steps.

Therefore, Ontario petitioned the EPA officially to publish the findings of its former administrator, Douglas Costele, that acid rain generated in the US endangers public health or welfare in Canada and that the US government has been granted a reciprocal right to acquire control of acid rain from Canadian sources.

After considering any submissions, the EPA could then formally act on these findings and require states whose emissions cause international pollution to impose additional pollution controls. The major targets for enforcement are large coal-fired power plants in the midwestern states. These plants are causing much of the acid rain which falls on Ontario and Quebec.

As we know, the US government has all the authority it needs under existing laws to act now to stop acid rain. Our petition was a formal request to the EPA to stop stalling and enforce its laws.

Last Friday evening, the US EPA said that it was “premature to rule” on that petition.

“I do not believe that EPA presently has sufficient information to undertake the regulatory program required,” a US EPA official wrote.

“Identifying the blameworthy states and determining the actions that would be required to eliminate the problem are very complex issues which must be answered before regulatory action would be appropriate.”

The US EPA said it intends to wait for a report due in 1990 before it will consider action.

This reasoning flies in the face of both centuries-old knowledge and sophisticated computer air pollution modelling, which has been verified by testing. As Sir Isaac Newton noted with regard to gravity, what goes up must come down; and as our scientists have conclusively demonstrated, acid rain pollution going up the smokestacks of the Ohio Valley and adjacent US states rains down upon Ontario’s sensitive lakes, forests, streams and cities.

The Reagan administration has an eight-year history of ignoring environmental reality, and as it limps into history, it seems intent on retaining the dubious virtue of being consistently wrong on environmental matters.

My ministry’s lawyers are now examining the US EPA’s denial of Ontario’s request for action with a mind to challenging that denial in court. Even as more sensible people prepare to administer affairs in the United States, our government intends to press our neighbours for relief from their acid rain assault upon us.

RESPONSES

DRUG ABUSE

Mr. B. Rae: I want to respond to the statement by the Premier (Mr. Peterson) with respect to the report on drugs by the member for Muskoka-Georgian Bay (Mr. Black).

I think it is important to note that the member has made some very substantive criticisms of his own government. He has said, for example, that there is a shortage of treatment programs for adolescents. He has also said in his report there is a shortage of programs and services in northern Ontario, something, I might add, that my colleagues and I heard very directly about in our recent visits to North Bay and Kirkland Lake and Timmins and Kapuskasing just two weeks ago.

“Finally,” he said, “There is a great need for the development and implementation of program evaluation throughout the intervention and treatment field.”

I know that the member for Muskoka-Georgian Bay might not like to present this report as a criticism of the status quo or as a criticism of the government, but I say to the Premier that now that this report is public, all the talk and headline-grabbing will not get him any further. We know what the lack is; we know what the need is; it has been carefully identified, It has been identified by many experts, and now it has finally been identified by the member for Muskoka-Georgian Bay.

We say it is time for action. This thing cannot afford to gather dust on the shelves. We expect this government to act in those areas where even its own members are now identifying a serious shortage of programs to deal with this very important problem of drug abuse.

1988 OLYMPIC SUMMER GAMES

Mr. Farnan: I note that the minister was proud to be with our athletes in Seoul. No doubt he enjoyed the visit; I hope he did. I am looking forward to the future when I may attend the Barcelona Olympics in the capacity of minister -- in the same capacity -- to bring back a report.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Mr. Farnan: We believe we must continue to support the achievement of athletes through the Best Ever program. I would have liked the report to reflect all the participants, some 80 Ontario participants, perhaps by name. I encourage the minister perhaps to read into the record of the House at some stage all participants who represented Canada at the Olympics who came from Ontario, because we do believe it is not just the winners. We want to recognize the winners -- we are proud of the winners -- but we want to recognize all those who achieved these very high standards, who represented Canada and who came from Ontario.

We would emphasize again that we support the Best Ever program. The emphasis must always remain, we believe, on encouraging participation, particularly in minor sports and recreation facilities, for the broad range of the population of Ontario.

I thank the minister for his report.

APPRENTICESHIP TRAINING

Mr. R. F. Johnston: Just briefly to the Minister of Skills Development (Mr. Curling): The $5-million announcement should have been made immediately we knew this default by the federal government was coming. I am glad it is here; I just hope it will be spent, unlike the other money that was supposed to be spent for increasing the number of women in apprenticeship positions or getting the tools for apprentices, which was how many months late? Give us a break.

I am shocked that the Minister of Education Mr. Ward) has not made a statement today. The Supreme Court of Ontario has shown that Bill 125 is unconstitutional.

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Mr. R. F. Johnston: This is part of my response to the Minister of Skills Development; apprenticeship is a kind of education. We already have a very chaotic situation coming up this fall in the elections, and now the French-speaking electorate does not know what to do. It is irresponsible of the minister not come into the House today and tell us what the --

Mr. Speaker: Order. Further responses?

DRUG ABUSE

Mr. Brandt: I would like to respond to the report released today by the member for Muskoka-Georgian Bay with respect to the drug problem in Ontario. This is a matter our party did raise before the close of the last session and certainly one in which we can agree with the fundamental and basic findings of the report, which indicate that there is a critical problem with respect to the widespread use of illegal drugs in our society.

Certainly, we cannot disagree with the 29 recommendations which have been made, most of which are directed towards the provincial government in terms of action that should be taken; but we do take some exception to the fact that this government has not taken any steps whatever to attempt to co-ordinate any of the limited number of programs out there now. More particularly, I have been calling on the Solicitor General (Mrs.

Smith) to make the Ontario Provincial Police more co-operative with municipal, local and federal police forces in order to bring at least some limited kind of control to the flow of drugs which is not only coming across our borders but in a transprovincial method of shipment as well.

I think there has to be some very clear commitment on the part of this government to direct its attention, as well as its financial resources, towards a problem which is growing very rapidly in our society, which cannot be taken lightly and I am sure is not being taken lightly by any member of this Legislative Assembly.

In our response to the report of the member for Muskoka-Georgian Bay, let me simply say that we are looking for the government to respond to some or all of the 29 recommendations. We are looking for a commitment with respect to a coordinated policy to respond to this particular problem. We are looking on the bottom line for some action from the government to show that its true commitment is in trying to come to grips with a very critical and growing problem in our society which has to be dealt with by government.

APPRENTICESHIP TRAINING

Mrs. Cunningham: I would like to take this opportunity to respond to the statement by the Minister of Skills Development. Actually, for $5 million it is a wonderful opportunity to once again speak to the inadequacies in the delivery system for skills development programs, especially with regard to apprenticeship programs.

I commend the minister for his intent today and I will commend him even much more loudly if he can do anything about program delivery. His ministry underspent by $77 million. His own budget this year was slashed by $47 million. In his own cabinet document which showed plans for the delivery of apprenticeship programs, he did not begin to put in enough money in this province to deliver the programs he promised. I am now talking about some 20,000 potential positions over five years. He cannot begin to do it.

I am very disappointed today that he even bothered to bring this to the attention of the House. I should tell him that in North Bay this summer, he was not even able to transfer money from one department to the other so that students who were already halfway through their apprenticeship programs did not have to drop out. I request that the minister take a look at his delivery system and not worry so much about the money and spend it more efficiently.

ACID RAIN

Mrs. Marland: I want to comment on the statement by the Minister of the Environment (Mr. Bradley). I think the statement is really an example of deflecting attention from himself and his ministry and redirecting the focus to the United States. What we are doing is copping out on our own responsibilities. We must strengthen our position by demonstration, and one of the demonstrations this minister could make is by reconvening his select committee on the environment, which he has now promised for about two years.

1988 OLYMPIC SUMMER GAMES

Mrs. Marland: I want to take a moment to thank the Minister of Tourism and Recreation (Mr. O’Neil) for his kind comments about my son Robert. Our caucus shares in his congratulations to all the athletes of Ontario who competed in the Olympic games. We are indeed proud of those young people. Whether or not they brought home medals, they took with them the pride and glory of this province in their individual personal achievements.

Certainly, the Olympics are still the only worldwide, unifying event that ignores all the ongoing barriers of war, strife, colour and creed. It is a superb example of a nonpolitical, unifying force throughout the countries of the world. We hope that the message of the Olympic games will broaden throughout the world into other areas where it is so needed.

Mr. Speaker: That completes the allotted time for ministerial statements and responses.

Mr. Harris: I wonder if I could offer unanimous consent to revert to ministerial statements for one from the Minister of Education (Mr. Ward), if he would like to tell us how they are going to deal with --

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Order.

ORAL QUESTIONS

CHILD CARE

Mr. B. Rae: I have a question for the Premier (Mr. Peterson) this afternoon. I wonder if he might cast his mind back to the last election when, on September 1, 1987, he told the people of Ontario, “The Ontario Liberal government is committed to building a comprehensive child care system to meet the needs of all Ontarians, a system that recognizes child care as a basic public service.”

In the gallery today there are a number of women and their children. They have something in common. They are all either on a waiting list, waiting to get into child care, or else they are in a child care centre that is about to be closed.

I wonder if the Premier can possibly square the promises he made on child care, on behalf of the Liberal Party, to the working men and women of this province with the presence in our gallery today of Janice Thomson, who is 16 years old. She is a sole-support parent; she wants to return to grade 9; she cannot get care for her 15-month-old child, and she is on welfare. I wonder if the Premier would not recognize that is a disgraceful situation and is something that should be addressed right away by this government.

Hon. Mr. Peterson: I think the minister could bring the honourable member up to date on all the programs he has instituted in the last three years.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Order. It has been referred to the Minister of Community and Social Services.

Hon. Mr. Sweeney: I would remind the honourable leader of the official opposition that in the three years we have been the government of Ontario, subsidized spaces in the Metro area have increased from approximately 10,000 to 18,000. That is an 80 per cent increase.

I would also remind the honourable member that three years ago we made a commitment to double those subsidized spaces. That commitment has been kept. Ontario’s total number of subsidized spaces in 1985 was approximately 20,000. By the end of this fiscal year, it will be 41,000. That is a doubling, as we committed.

I would remind the honourable member that the Metro area has approximately 20 per cent of the day-care-age children in Ontario but it has 47 per cent of the subsidized spaces. I think this government has treated Metro and Metro citizens fairly.

Mr. B. Rae: Since the Premier is unwilling to answer a question based on a promise and a statement that he made in the last election, I want to again remind the minister what his leader said. Since his leader is not prepared to stand up and respond to questions dealing with this issue and does not have the courage to come forth and debate on the question, I would like to simply say to the minister --

An hon. member: The Brian Mulroney of the provincial House.

Mr. B. Rae: It has been alleged that the Prime Minister of Canada plucks his eyebrows. This is a Premier who plucks his promises. That is what we have, a Premier who is not --

Mr. Speaker: Order. Do you have a supplementary?

Mr. B. Rae: The Premier said: “Schools are a natural focal point for Ontario’s neighbourhoods. We believe that neighbourhood schools must play an active role in the development of a comprehensive, integrated child care system.”

How can the minister possibly square that -- not with respect to whether it is Metro or whether it is Thunder Bay, where there is a waiting list of nearly 600 people, or whether it is his own constituency in Kitchener where there are people who are on waiting lists and cannot get into child care. This is not a Toronto issue. This is not a yuppie issue, as the minister has been telling some people in attempting to divide this province. This is an issue that unites working families across Ontario and they expect a response from the government. That is what they are waiting for.

Mr. Speaker: Do you have a question?

Mr. B. Rae: How can the minister square that commitment made to neighbourhood schools when in fact there are three schools in my own constituency that are about to be closed because of what the minister has done. How can he square that?

Hon. Mr. Sweeney: The statement of the Premier and the statements of this minister have been very clear and very precise. With the releasing of the document called New Directions for Child Care, we set very clear time frames, we set very clear dollar amounts, we set very clear numbers of spaces that were going to be provided. We have kept every single one of those commitments in that document.

As a matter of fact, we are ahead of our

schedule with respect to every single commitment in that document; every single one. We indicated that we were going to triple the amount of money spent on child care. We have gone from $88 million to $270 million this year. That is a tripling of that amount of money. We said we were going to double the number of subsidized spaces. Those subsidized spaces will be doubled this fiscal year. We indicated that we were going to increase the number of licensed spaces. We are increasing them at the rate of 8,000 every single year.

We indicated that we were going to deal with the wage policy for people working in those day care centres. We have increased, this year alone, the average wage of day care workers by $3,500. We kept those commitments; every one of them.

Mr. Callahan: Do more research, Bob.

Mr. B. Rae: The member for Brampton (Mr. Callahan) talks about the numbers. I would like him to simply step outside and talk to the women who are there with their children. That is research. Those are the numbers that are there. Those are the people who are there. That is the reality.

There are nearly 10,000 people who are on a waiting list. There are 10,000 people who are not going to get to work because this government has not been prepared to adequately fund centres. There are staff who are being laid off --

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Bradley: What is this, a lecture?

Mr. B. Rae: They do not want to hear the truth. There are staff who are being laid off. They do not want to hear about it. There are staff who are being laid off and the government is not prepared to meet the need that is there.

That is the question. The question is whether or not they are prepared to meet the need that is there. It is a need that is growing and --

Mr. Speaker: Is that the question?

Mr. B. Rae: I want to ask the minister: Does he think it right and fair that in this year there should be women 16, 17, 18 years old who are not going to school because his government is not prepared to spend 30-cent dollars on child care subsidized spaces in this province, which is exactly what is happening?

Hon. Mr. Sweeney: I do not know where the honourable member gets the 30-cent dollars. I would remind him that the current cost-sharing between the federal government and Ontario is such that the federal government allocates 38 cents and the province picks up the balance.

The other point I would make to the honourable member is that, when he drew to my attention about people going back to school, he would know that Burnhamthorpe school had a proposal before us. That proposal has been met. He will be aware of the fact, and I cannot remember the name, but a school in North York had a proposal before us. That one has been met.

The honourable member referred to three elementary school programs in his own area. I would draw to his attention that the learning enrichment centres have 70 per cent of their spaces subsidized. Metro will advise the honourable member that is the highest rate of subsidization of any organization in the Metro area.

We never said at any time that those centres would be 100 per cent subsidized. We have always said it is in the best interest of the centre, for a broad base of support in those centres, that there should be some subsidization and some full-fee-paying parents.

That is what we have there, but those particular centres the honourable member is referring to are subsidized at the rate of 70 per cent of all of their spaces. That is pretty good.

Mr. B. Rae: What the minister is saying about the learning enrichment centres is that it is too bad the people --

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Mr. B. Rae: Mr. Speaker, I have a question to the Premier, if you will allow it.

METROPOLITAN TORONTO HOUSING AUTHORITY

Mr. B. Rae: t would like to ask the Premier a question, if he is prepared to answer this question. It deals with housing and it deals with the dismissal of Mr. Sewell as the chairman of the Metropolitan Toronto Housing Authority.

We have seen already the incredible situation with respect to waiting lists for child care. Since his government came to power, the waiting list for Metropolitan Toronto housing has gone up from 4,600 families to over 10,000 families.

Sitting on the desk of his Minister of Housing (Ms. Hošek) since last year there have been three proposals from Mr. Sewell with respect to redevelopment of existing sites, one of them in Jane-Finch, one of them in Birchmount and one of them in Moss Park.

This government has done nothing with any of these proposals with respect to redevelopment. How can the Premier justify firing Mr. Sewell, and second, failing to act on proposals that are practical and down to earth and that would deal with the problems facing those thousands of families who are waiting for a decent place to live in this city?

Hon. Mr. Peterson: With great respect to my friend opposite, Mr. Sewell was not fired. I say to my honourable friend, I am sure he can understand that is just not the case factually.

On a number of questions he raises with respect to proposals on the minister’s desk, I can tell my honourable friend that a number of very significant initiatives have been undertaken in the city of Toronto and elsewhere. I refer to St. Lawrence East and other places, and I say to my honourable friend that I think he is seeing the minister and the Ministry of Housing wrestle with tough problems in a very aggressive way.

Mr. B. Rae: The waiting list for housing across the province has grown to over 38,000 in July 1988. That is from 27,000, and that represents nearly 60,000 people, The waiting list in Toronto has grown by nearly 73 per cent.

The question I have for the Premier is this: We have from Mr. Sewell, which he has made available -- they are now public documents -- architects’ designs for three sites. One of them, in the Jane-Finch corridor, would deal very directly with the drug problem, with the enforcement problem and with the security problem, which are all issues of enormous importance, and the Premier will be aware of those from comments that he has made publicly.

How can the Premier justify this delay of over a year in dealing with practical proposals that have been made to his government by the Metropolitan Toronto Housing Authority, proposals that his government has simply sat on for over a year, and then dismiss Mr. Sewell without so much as a thank you?

Hon. Mr. Peterson: The minister can comment in detail on specific proposals that the honourable member would like to discuss, but I say to him it is somewhat understandable that there is an enormous pressure on housing now with the massive net in-migration into Ontario in the last year, and this year we are anticipating another 120,000 or so. My honourable friend, I am sure, can understand the enormous pressure this puts on the housing system and, in spite of great progress that has been made, the pressure continues.

I say to him that we will continue to be unrelenting in our efforts to try to solve these problems. Massive amounts of money have been put in. The Treasurer (Mr. R. F. Nixon) has put $2 billion into co-operative housing in his last budget. He has seen a number of agreements being signed with municipalities.

So I say to my honourable friend that I do not want to mislead him to think we can meet that enormous demand coming from net in-migration tomorrow morning, but I think any fair assessment will say that progress is being made.

Mr. B. Rae: Perhaps the Premier could just answer this question: If he is really interested in producing more housing stock, why has he sat on three practical proposals that have been put forward to him by the largest public housing authority in Ontario? I would like to ask him why he has not acted on any of these when the waiting list is expanding, the need is clearly there, the moves for reform have been asked for and he has not moved. Can he explain why that is?

Hon. Mr. Peterson: I say to my honourable friend that I cannot respond to each specific proposal that has been put forward; there are many. But I can tell him that many have been acted upon. Look at St. Lawrence East, for example, which will house some 10,000 people.

I say to my honourable friend that we are using the limited resources we have in a creative way and going ahead. I can tell him that no sensible proposal that is affordable is turned down. They are all prioritized, and I think a reasonable assessment will say that real progress is being made.

MEMBERS’ ANNIVERSARIES

Mr. Brandt: Before asking my first question, I would like to pay tribute to the member for Niagara South (Mr. Haggerty) and to the member for Perth (Mr. Edighoffer), who happens to be the Speaker, on having served 21 years in this House. I think that is a tribute that deserves mentioning.

I would like to extend the congratulations of my party as well to the Leader of the Opposition, the member for York South (Mr. B. Rae), who is now celebrating his 10th year in elected office.

WASTE MANAGEMENT

Mr. Brandt: My question is for the Minister of the Environment and it relates to what many believe to be the most serious problem, in environmental terms, in this entire province: namely, that of the waste management crisis. I say it has reached crisis levels when one recognizes the number of municipalities that are presently without a waste site, those that are very quickly going to exhaust their present facilities and others that have spent literally millions of dollars in an attempt to solve their problems.

I wonder if the minister was, in fact, quoted correctly when he indicated that the province will not step in to solve waste problems and that he feels it is purely a municipal or local government problem, apart from advice he is prepared to give. Is that his position on this matter of growing consequence?

Hon. Mr. Bradley: First of all, I want to join with the leader of the third party in paying tribute to you, Mr. Speaker, to my friend the member for Niagara South (Mr. Haggerty) and to the member for York South (Mr. B. Rae) the leader of the New Democratic Party, on their special celebrations today.

To go to the question that the former Environment minister has asked me, I indicated very clearly on a number of occasions that our ministry has been in communication with, had meetings with, has been involved in joint planning with, through our advisory capacity, municipalities across Ontario for some period of time. He will recognize that we have, in fact, provided the kind of leadership -- many of the people who are enlightened in the municipal scene, and he knows there are many of those people who have been looking to the field of recycling, for instance -- that diverts materials that would normally go into a landfill site away from that landfill site.

For instance, that is why this government has changed from the $750,000 a year that the member as Minister of the Environment was providing in his last years of government, to $7.7 million this year on the part of this government, to promote recycling. This is why we will be reaching a point where one million households in Ontario will, in fact, be on the first-class, curbside blue box recycling program in this particular month, as we are here in the Legislature. That is why we have enhanced a number of programs which are designed to assist municipalities in going through the processes --

Mr. Speaker: Thank you.

Mr. Brandt: I applaud the minister on enlarging a program that a previous government started with respect to recycling; but let me say to the minister, when the region of Halton has been 14 years in attempting to prepare for a landfill site and has spent some $18 million, and when the people of Halton, in fact, are required to ship their waste to the United States to be incinerated, I think the Minister of the Environment should stand up and take notice and perhaps take some action.

What is he prepared to do about municipalities when he talks about working co-operatively with them, and they do have a recycling program, as the minister is well aware, in that community? What is he prepared to do to reduce the time lines, streamline the process in some fashion, to help regions like Halton bring to a head the problem of their waste landfill sites?

Hon. Mr. Bradley: It is interesting that the member should bring up problems with waste landfill sites because I can recall, as a member of the opposition, a legacy of mistakes that were made by the previous government because it did not appropriately apply the Environmental Assessment Act and the Environmental Protection Act in this province.

The member will recall it was the former government that allowed the Ontario Waste Management Corp. to move forward with this proposal in South Cayuga and exempted it from the Environmental Assessment Act, and it was this government that in fact placed that under the Environmental Assessment Act. It was the former government that allowed the Pauzé landfill site to be poorly located and mismanaged. When it was finally forced to accept the reality that the landfill was leaking, it never shut it down despite promises to do so, and it was this government that kept its promise to shut down the Pauzé landfill.

It was the former government that allowed the Smithville polychlorinated biphenyls site to be established and to operate in a rather laissez-faire fashion. It is this government that is going to have to spend millions upon millions of dollars of provincial taxpayers’ money to clean that up --

Mr. Speaker: Thank you.

Mr. Brandt: And it is his government that is allowing waste to be shipped to the United States. It is his government that has some 100 municipalities waiting for approvals under the Environmental Assessment Act for new landfill sites. It is his government that has 300 municipalities which, in the short-term future, are going to have to get approval through his ministry to find someplace to put their garbage.

Forget about what happened three years ago. Forget about anyone else’s faults. Why does he not look for a moment at trying to solve the problem himself? He is the minister. What is he going to do about the landfill site crisis in this province?

Hon. Mr. Bradley: I know the seven blue box programs that were going on when the leader of the third party was in government were a very small start in the program. Of course, everyone in this House will remember that they did not have the intestinal fortitude on the other side to deal with the pop container regulation. It took this government to implement soft drink container legislation which has brought $20 million additional from the private sector to ensure that recycling is going to work in this province.

Members should know that all across the province there are waste management master plans that are being developed by municipalities working together, by municipalities which are gathered together, not working in several different directions but coming together to solve their problems with the advice, the financial support and the technical and scientific support of the Ministry of the Environment.

If the member wishes to fabricate a situation that he thinks exists, if he wishes to go back to the old --

Mr. Speaker: Order.

ÉLECTION DE CONSEILLERS SCOLAIRES / TRUSTEE REPRESENTATION

M. Pope: J’aimerais poser une question au ministre de l’Éducation. Nous avons eu la décision, ce matin, de la Cour suprême de l’Ontario au sujet de la Loi 125. Il n’y a eu aucune réaction du tout de la part du gouvernement de l’Ontario ni du ministre de l’Éducation. Qu’est-ce qui se passe avec la Loi 125 et les élections des membres de conseils d’éducation dans les communautés touchées par cette décision?

Hon. Mr. Ward: I will refer that question to the Attorney General.

Hon. Mr. Scott: This morning, Mr. Justice Sirois of the Supreme Court of Ontario gave a short oral judgement with respect to the proceedings that were before him. He indicated that his formal written reasons would be available this afternoon. When they are, the Minister of Education (Mr. Ward) and I and our staffs will be examining them.

It is interesting to note that he did not declare any of the sections of the bill unconstitutional. What he said orally was that he thought a provision of the bill which determines the proportion of school trustees to represent the majority and minority sectors should not take effect at this time.

In the next 24 hours, the minister and I and our staffs will be looking as to how we can respond to assure that the elections that are presently under way proceed and take place.

Mr. Pope: That is all very nice, but the Minister of Education, who today has washed his hands of this issue, ignored the advice of members of the opposition when this bill was being debated. He ignored the advice of the trustees’ organizations in the province, which sought him out to plead with him not to proceed at the late date immediately prior to these elections with his project, Bill 125, and asked him not to do it because he had left it so late.

He ignored their advice. He ignored private advice he was given in his office by those involved in the education system, and we now have a shambles on our hands that is the making of the Minister of Education. He will not stand up and make a statement and he will not answer questions in the House today. That is what we have, a Minister of Education who is abdicating his responsibility for a problem that he created.

Under what rules will the election go ahead this fall -- under the old law or under the new law? Today is the last date for the filing of nominations. Is the minister going to extend the date for the filing of nominations? Saturday was the last date for revisions to the enumeration list.

Mr. Speaker: I heard a question. Order. The question has been asked.

Hon. Mr. Scott: The one thing I have learned is that when you are dealing with complicated matters in court, it is dangerous to overreact. The sound of the bull moose in heat, of course, is threatening to all of us and there is a natural inclination to be stampeded.

Interjection.

Hon. Mr. Scott: In all these important agricultural matters, I defer to the member for Riverdale (Mr. Reville).

Interjection.

Hon. Mr. Scott: As a matter of fact, the honourable members of the official opposition obviously react in the same way I do to the question posed by the member for Cochrane South (Mr. Pope).

The first thing to observe is that Mr. Justice Sirois did not conclude that this provision was unconstitutional. That is the first thing. What he said was that he thought that issue should be decided at some other time and in some other place, but he directed that the representation provision should not go into effect at this time.

It is a very unusual order and I want to assure the honourable members that the Minister of Education and I are working very closely so that we will be able to respond to the House and to the public as soon as possible in a way to ensure that the elections which are already under way will take place.

Mr. Pope: The minister may think that this is a sporting or Natural Resources exercise but we have elections going on across Ontario. Nominations have to close today at five o’clock. There will be some impact from this decision with respect to the number and type of trustees in school board regions across the province. There will be that effect.

There is going to be an impact with respect to what enumeration list you are going to be on and your rights to revision under the new decision that was reached today by the Court of Appeal of Ontario. The minister may want to sit there and study this matter. He has left everything to the last minute throughout this whole exercise on Bill 125. It is the people in different parts of the province who have to suffer the consequences of his negligence and inaction.

What is the minister going to tell prospective candidates for election and the electors of these regions of Ontario when the right to be nominated as a candidate closes today at five o’clock and the right to be placed on a certain selected enumerated roll expired last Saturday? What is the minister going to do to remedy the injustice that the Minister of Education has created across --

Mr. Speaker: Order. The question has been asked.

Hon. Mr. Scott: If you heard the judgement given this morning -- we hope to read it when it is released later today -- the first thing that is perfectly clear is that the enumeration lists have not been attacked or criticized in any way by the judge. The enumeration that has taken place appears to be satisfactory.

It is also clear that nominations can take place and that persons who have been nominated or may be nominated before the close of the process today will be able to be elected. What we have is no determination by the judge that any provision of the act is unconstitutional.

He deals with one provision, apparently, and says it should not go into effect yet. We propose, over the next few days, to examine that in light of what it may mean in respect of the allocation of the population to the two boards. When we have determined what the appropriate legal, legislative or regulatory response is, the House will be informed in the usual way.

WORKERS’ COMPENSATION BOARD

Miss Martel: I have a question for the Minister of Labour concerning Bill 162 which will come back into the House on Wednesday. The minister has stated on several occasions that before he introduced this bill he had broad discussions with many groups across this province. In fact, in August he said he had had “very extensive discussions with virtually all the participants, all of the stakeholders in the workers’ compensation system.”

We in this House know that is absolutely untrue and that the only people the minister consulted were the employers and the top brass at the Workers’ Compensation Board, and that in fact the very people who are going to be most affected by the bill -- that is, the workers themselves -- had no participation in this bill.

I want to ask the minister, given the fact that the legal clinics, the trade union movement and the injured workers’ groups are completely opposed to this bill -- and they have read it, I might add -- will he not do the decent thing; that is, throw this bill out, start again, and bring in people who actually know something about the system and actually care about injured workers?

Hon. Mr. Sorbara: I do not know what I have to do to prove to the member for Sudbury East that I consulted broadly prior to the drafting of the bill. I could, if she likes, send her over my appointment book and show her the number of times and occasions upon which I have met with representatives of injured workers. Indeed, subsequent to the introduction of the bill, on many occasions during the summer, I met with the injured workers’ community and its representatives.

They said to me over and over again, “We want a system that more fairly provides for those of us who have permanent injuries and we want a system that makes a better commitment to rehabilitation and we want a system that helps us get our jobs back. Besides that, we want a system that provides realistic ceilings on the kinds of earnings that we were making prior to our injuries.”

That is precisely what this bill does. That is precisely the impact of Bill 162, and if my friend the member for Sudbury East would simply take a careful look at the bill, I think she would have to acknowledge that in this House as well.

Miss Martel: I have taken a careful look at it. Why does the minister not read it and find out what it is all about?

If there were injured workers in this province who truly believe this bill was going to make the system more fair, they would not have been demonstrating outside today with the trade union movement, injured workers and the legal clinics across this province and they would not have been demonstrating outside Liberal MPPs’ offices across this province as well.

I want to ask the minister, in view of the fact that there is widespread opposition to this bill, will he now guarantee in this House there will be full public hearings across the province on this bill? He can do that simply by advising the government House leader and the six committee members on the resources development committee that is what he wants. Will he commit --

Mr. Speaker: Order. The member has asked her question.

Hon. Mr. Sorbara: Let me just make a comment about the demonstration that was held today. I am not surprised that injured workers are demonstrating. I am not surprised, frankly, for two reasons.

Let me tell the member the first. First, injured workers in this province have been living for many, many years on a system that has been arbitrary and unfair to far too many workers.

But the second reason is this: Some of the misinformation that has been given to injured workers in this province is absolutely shocking. I saw the document that the member and her leader distributed to meetings of injured workers, and I will tell her quite frankly, I have never seen such a distortion of a piece of legislation as I have in the pamphlet that they handed out.

In closing, let me just read a brief, brief, paragraph, if I could --

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: No. Order.

LANDFILL SITE

Mrs. Marland: My question is to the Minister of the Environment. I am sure this minister is well aware of the problems that he has created in Peel with respect to his recent notice of order on the subject of the proposed landfill site and the environmental assessment in Peel.

Thanks to this proposed order, we now have two serious problems. One is a need for a landfill site and the other is the need to free up acceptable land for the construction of housing.

I would like us to put all excuses aside for a moment and look at the reality of the situation. The region of Peel’s present dump site will close in 1990. The minister’s recent decision will delay the construction of a new site by up to five years. It takes only simple math to calculate that Peel will have nowhere to put garbage in two years.

Mr. Speaker: Your question?

Mrs. Marland: My question to the minister is, how does the minister intend to solve the real problem and why has he refused to meet immediately with Chairman Frank Bean, Mayor Hazel McCallion, Mayor Ken Whillans and Mayor Emil Kolb of Caledon?

Hon. Mr. Bradley: To answer the latter part of the question first, I some time ago agreed to meet with some of these individuals. In fact, I agreed to meet with Mayor McCallion. At the same time, I suggested that the other two mayors be present for that. Mrs. McCallion indicated that was not satisfactory to her and that it would be a period later on when I could meet with of all these people that would be useful. I want to clarify that. That offer was made; there was a meeting that was established; I thought it would be appropriate to invite the other two mayors at the same time, and I will be meeting with the entire group in the not-too-distant future.

I want to indicate as well, as the member may know, that in fact the Ministry of the Environment has been indicating its concern about the environmental assessment process in Peel, I think since 1984 at the officials’ level, and that the former Deputy Minister of the Environment, Rod McLeod, directed a letter to the region in June 1987 and personally communicated his concerns and my concerns about the process it was going through at that time.

I think one has to look carefully at many instances where we have to choose what --

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Mrs. Marland: The meeting to which the minister refers is not until October 28. It is significant that it is after the appeal period, and the gamesmanship in this whole matter is really unacceptable to the people of Peel. The region of Peel has now been forced to place a freeze on unregistered land. Each day this delay continues to cost developers, builders, workers and home buyers a great deal of money. The Minister of Housing (Ms. Hošek) and the Premier (Mr. Peterson) promised the municipality three months ago they would ensure that the government red tape would be cut to provide housing for people at a faster rate and better prices.

Now this ministry comes in at the 11th hour to back up not only the building of new houses but the construction of a Peel dump site. My question is, when will the minister stand up and help resolve this crisis that we are facing? Or will he continue to wash his hands of the whole matter and run and hide and not deal with the issue that his deputy minister --

Mr. Speaker: Order. The member has already asked two questions.

Hon. Mr. Bradley: The member is simply misinformed. She does not have the information, and the member should be aware, as I think those who sat in municipal council and as members of the regional government staff and of municipal staffs will know, that the Ministry of the Environment, since 1984, has expressed concern about the environmental assessment process.

This has come as no surprise to anyone in the region of Peel. You see, it is no longer acceptable to say that we will not have a site in this location because the mayor does not want it there, or we will not consider a site in another location because somebody else does not want it there, or it is some municipality’s turn to have it, somebody else’s turn. None of those, of course, puts the environment as the primary consideration.

I put the environment as the primary consideration and that is why our ministry, since 1984, has expressed concerns about the process it has gone through. It is time that people looked at all of the sites from an environmental point of view.

FIRE PREVENTION

Mr. Faubert: My question is to the Solicitor General. As the minister is aware, 154 people were killed in fires in Ontario in 1987. To emphasize the significance of this figure, it is greater than the number of Ontarians who died from acquired immune deficiency syndrome last year, and yet people still have that “It won’t happen to me or to my family” attitude.

Public education and awareness could help prevent many of these human tragedies. Can the minister advise this House of any recent initiatives her ministry has taken to deal with this matter and the progress made thus far?

Hon. Mrs. Smith: Yes. The member for Scarborough-Ellesmere will be very happy to know that the ministry very much concerns itself with the matter of fire deaths, and we recognize that the most important area to be addressed is that of prevention. To this end, in 1987 we started a major initiative on prevention. We appointed a prevention officer, seconded from North York, who has been working extensively with the fire marshal’s office, existing municipalities and especially those areas that do not have fire departments.

We have addressed $500,000 to this, and many initiatives are already coming forth from this. We have a new videotape out, made up of many segments which, in their own right, can be used on TV but which, as a totality, can be set on TV by the public service programs. This has been edited and spoken to by David Suzuki and is an excellent piece, which I recommend to all the members for their own localities. As well as that, we have had Fire Prevention Week this past week and travelled around the province giving out seven awards and drawing attention to the importance of fire prevention in all of these communities.

I think the member can see that we very much stress fire prevention as the most necessary tool for stopping deaths.

Mr. Faubert: I commend the minister for her efforts in the area. However, the minister did indicate earlier that she was contemplating forming an advisory committee of persons who have expertise in the firefighting field. Would the minister advise this House if she has decided to go ahead with this initiative? If so, could the minister provide some details of this advisory committee’s potential mandate and structure?

Hon. Mrs. Smith: Once again, the setting up of this committee has been slightly delayed because we find, in looking into the facts behind fire deaths, that we have been putting the wrong emphasis. Indeed, firefighting is not the emphasis we wish, either in the ministry or on this committee. We have such figures as the fact that we address 95 per cent of our funding to fighting fires and only five per cent to prevention.

As a result of this sort of emphasis, we find that we have twice the death rate by fire as they do in Europe -- this figure is true for the whole of North America and not just Canada -- and in fact we have five times the death rate of Switzerland. We know we must address this in a new and creative way and want to put together a committee that can give us the appropriate kind of advice to get into the preventive field in a big thrust. We will be doing this, setting up the committee. We welcome from all the members of the House suggestions on the kind of people and individuals they might like to see on that committee.

RECYCLING

Mrs. Grier: I have a question for the Minister of the Environment. We heard earlier this afternoon a recitation by the minister of all the programs on recycling that he had initiated. Will the minister not acknowledge that even with those and even with the million households with blue boxes, only 7.1 per cent of municipal solid waste will be diverted from landfill in 1989?

It is now a year since the minister spoke to the Recycling Council of Ontario and said he hoped to see Ontario recycle 25 per cent of its waste in the near future and eventually recover more than 50 per cent. On that occasion, he went on to say that he would consider legislation to force municipalities to recycle if incentives do not work. “‘We will pull out the stick if the carrot fails,’ Mr. Bradley said.” Will the minister not acknowledge that the carrot has failed and that the stick ought to be pulled out? Will he give us some commitment that he will get all municipalities recycling 50 per cent before the end of this year?

Hon. Mr. Bradley: The member does not have the faith in certain municipalities which are at the present time embarking upon these kinds of programs. I have been very impressed by the number of municipalities that are now coming on stream with the curbside blue box recycling program. If someone had predicted that a million households would be on this program in late October 1988, a lot of people would have scoffed at that. In fact, we are reaching that point and we are going far beyond that point.

Almost on a daily basis now, municipalities are kicking off their blue box programs. That is as a result of initiatives that have been taken at the local level. There have been citizens’ groups concerned about it, which have asked that they establish these programs and expand them; and of course, the Ministry of the Environment has increased its funding from $750,000 in the last year of the last government to $7.7 million this year; and OMMRI, Ontario Multi-Material Recycling Inc., as a result of our regulation, has invested some $20 million to encourage it.

I see nothing but a movement upward in this regard. I see municipalities across this province coming on stream very quickly; not only that, but looking at new initiatives, such as Guelph is, for composting, for getting apartments on the recycling program. A lot of people said you cannot have apartments --

Mr. Speaker: Thank you very much. Supplementary.

Mrs. Grier: The statistic I quoted to the minister was from the recycling council, and it was for the end of 1989: 7.1 per cent of municipal solid waste to be recycled.

Does the minister not realize that as well as recycling we have to get into reduction of our waste? Does he not realize that the people of this province are way ahead of the government in their desire to really do something meaningful and to have some leadership and some action from the provincial government on little things as well as large?

Mr. Speaker: I thought that was the question.

Mrs. Grier: When I first came to this House, we had china cups outside in the lobby; now we have styrofoam -- styrofoam for the members of the Legislature and for the minister to drink from. Is that a symbol of the kind of commitment we have from this government?

Hon. Mr. Bradley: I will speak to the Board of Internal Economy, which has representatives of all three parties on it. I am surprised that the board member from the New Democratic Party has not heard about this from the Environment critic, the member for Etobicoke-Lakeshore, previous to this. I know the Board of Internal Economy would want to change this very quickly. Certainly, I support all of the initiatives of the Board of Internal Economy to make those changes in this Ontario Legislature. As we know, this building is governed strictly by the members of this Legislature.

With regard to beyond the blue box program, in fact, we are initiating commercial, industrial and institutional recycling at this time right across Ontario. We have doubled funds in terms of industrial four Rs. We are involved in all of those programs which are designed to recycle, recover and reduce the waste that is produced. We will continue to be involved in those programs, and wherever the member and I see that there are instances where people would vary from that, we can join with others in encouraging them.

Mr. Speaker: Time for a new question.

METROPOLITAN TORONTO HOUSING AUTHORITY

Mr. Harris: When John Sewell was hired, the minister of Housing said the former mayor would bring “a new sensitivity to the day-to-day management of public housing in Metro.” Given that this is what the government wanted, and I would concur, a hands-on, full-time chairman involved in the day-to-day management, could the Minister of Housing tell us why Mr. Sewell was fired for doing exactly as he was asked to do?

Hon. Ms. Hošek: The choice of the chair for the Metropolitan Toronto Housing Authority is extremely important to us, because we want to make sure that the agenda for reform which was begun in 1985 will continue. That is the reason we chose Jean Augustine, a truly outstanding individual, as the new chair for Metro Toronto Housing beginning in November.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Hon. Ms. Hošek: Members of the House may not be fully aware of Ms. Augustine’s background. She came to Canada in 1961 as a domestic worker. Against very great odds, she has achieved a level of education and accomplishment that is very significant. At the moment, she has been working as a principal in the Metropolitan Toronto separate school system. She has risen to a position of great prominence against great odds. She has worked in a variety of areas, including children’s aid and various other social areas. Her community credentials and her experience are unassailable.

I am very pleased that she has agreed to take on the position of chairman of Metro Toronto Housing Authority beginning in November to continue on the road to reform. There are many issues that need to be addressed in Metro Toronto Housing, and I believe that Jean Augustine is admirably suited to do that.

Mr. Harris: Given that the question had nothing to do with Ms. Augustine, I sense a great deal of concern on the minister’s part over the appointment and I will have to look a little closer.

Mr. Reville: She is defensive.

Mr. Harris: She is very defensive. Perhaps the minister doth protest too much.

Let me get back to my question, though. The minister will be aware now, among all the other complex problems that are in the housing situation and with the Metro Toronto Housing Authority, of the drug problems and the trafficking problem in the Jane-Finch area. She knows maintenance staff who work there have requested protection because they have been robbed and threatened. They are afraid something worse will happen.

Given the tensions in that area, the problems that have to be overcome, the challenges facing the tenants and the employees, can the minister explain to the House why she made the position of chairperson of the Metro Toronto Housing Authority a part-time position instead of leaving it a full-time position, as it should be, and could she tell this House if Mr. Sewell was offered the new part-time position?

Hon. Ms. Hošek: The new chairman of the Metro Toronto Housing Authority will be involved in the housing authority as much as is required. She has made a commitment, an agreement with her board, to have as much time to work on housing issues of Metro Toronto Housing Authority as is required, with all the staff support that is required.

Let me say that at the time the decision was made not to continue to have a new appointment to the end of November of a new chairman of Metro Toronto Housing Authority, the Housing critic of the member’s party suggested that we might appoint a business leader as head of the Metro Toronto Housing Authority. We resisted the temptation to appoint Conrad Black and decided instead to appoint someone whose credentials in this area are very strong.

As to the issue of drugs in Metro Toronto Housing Authority and otherwise, all of us in this House deplore the spread of drugs anywhere in this society. I want to say that one of the very important things that we are doing, with the complete support of the tenants in Ontario housing and under the leadership of the Ontario Housing Corp. as well as Metro Toronto Housing Authority, is working with the police to make sure that drug dealing that is happening inside any of those places will be stopped, because we know that the people who live in that housing have every right to be protected and to live safely.

Our commitment to work on that issue is very strong and --

Mr. Speaker: Thank you.

BREAST CANCER

Ms. Collins: My question is for the Minister of Health. The minister is aware that breast cancer is a physically and emotionally debilitating, potentially fatal disease that last year killed 1,600 of the 4,500 Ontario women it affected. The minister will also know that breast cancer can be treated and cured if it is detected in the early stages. Would the minister inform the House of what plans her ministry has to establish a province-wide breast screening program?

Hon. Mrs. Caplan: I would like to thank the member for the question. I know of her interest not only in this matter but also in other health matters as they relate to both prevention and promotion strategies. She is aware, as I think all members of this House are, of the fact that we are concerned about giving people in this province the information they need so that they can protect themselves and prevent preventable diseases.

At the present time, the Canadian Cancer Society provides educational materials to women and Ontario participated in a Canadian national breast screening program to evaluate the effectiveness of breast screening, both through mammography and self-examination.

Ms. Collins: Many women do not recognize the first stages of this killer disease simply because they do not know the warning signs in their bodies. Given the importance of early detection in the successful treatment of breast cancer, will the minister commit her ministry to undertake a public awareness campaign so that all Ontario women will have the knowledge to combat this deadly disease?

Hon. Mrs. Caplan: The ministry and myself feel it is extremely important that in our programming, promotion and prevention strategies be a part of our provincial programs. We are at the present time reviewing core programs of public health and we are also at this very moment reviewing a proposal before the ministry from the Ontario Cancer Treatment and Research Foundation in this area of importance to women in this province.

SOCIAL ASSISTANCE

Mr. Allen: I have a question of the Minister of Community and Social Services. As he knows and we all know, winter is rapidly approaching and over a million poor people in Ontario are looking forward to that experience with some dread, while the government maintains a rather icy silence on the Thomson report and its landmark proposals for dealing with their problems.

Three years ago the minister knew the rough proportions of the problem of poverty in Ontario when he appointed that committee. Six months ago he had some notion of the details in which Mr. Thomson was going to be reporting to him. He could then have begun preparing his ground and the Treasurer (Mr. R. F. Nixon) could have begun making some space in the budget to respond, but none of that happened.

Why have we heard nothing; and what, if anything, is the minister going to do to respond in concrete ways to the needs this fall of the growing numbers of poor in Ontario?

Hon. Mr. Sweeney: The honourable member is aware of the fact that during the two-year period of time when George Thomson and his committee of 12 were putting together this Transitions report, this ministry was putting additional resources into the income-assistance part of the program. The honourable member will be aware of the fact that over the past three years we have added $337 million to the income-assistance part of our ministry’s budget. That represents a total of a 23 per cent increase during a point in time when the cost of living went up 13 per cent, so that was not only matching the cost of living but adding a 10 per cent increase above and beyond that.

The member will also be aware of the fact that if we want to pick selected groups -- single parents, disabled people and families of four -- in fact the increase was closer to the neighbourhood of 30 per cent. So it is not correct to say that we have been doing nothing while the report was being drafted. In fact, we were doing something.

The second point the member alludes to is the time of response. He will be well aware of the fact that the report itself very specifically says that it is appropriate and it is desirable for the government to take up to six months to respond to the report in an official capacity. All that having been said, the member will know that the normal procedure would be to make an announcement --

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Mr. Allen: Whatever they have done, the problem of poverty remains, and it remains a dire experience for those who live in it. No government can rest on its laurels. Even the small amount it has done to date certainly does not match the amount it is going to have to do in years to come.

What really worries this party, I think, is not just that the minister has not made a clear response, to date, to the Thomson report but that, in a number of respects, moves have been made by this government recently that run directly counter to the directions of Mr. Thomson himself; for example, in the last few months, a regressive sales tax increase, failure to pass on the Canada pension plan disability benefits, holding back on literacy grants, cutbacks in the homemakers’ budget --

Mr. Speaker: And the question?

Mr. Allen: -- refusal to accept the comfort allowance decision for psychological --

Mr. Speaker: Do you have a question?

Mr. Allen: -- funding of community clinics -- all together a major attack not on the problem of poverty but on the poor.

Will the minister not announce now the concrete steps he will take this fall, not after the next budget, to implement year one of the Thomson proposals. I remind him that Mr. Thomson said there were things you could do within the next two months.

Hon. Mr. Sweeney: I would suggest that a more careful reading of the document clearly says that neither this minister nor this government should take bits and pieces out of that and implement them apart from the entire proposal; that it is designed very specifically to be a package proposal and that, in fact, that is what we should do.

I would also remind the honourable member that, in his reference to the CPP disabled pass-through, the entire amount of money flowing through from the federal government was $18 million and the amount of money allocated by this government to the disabled was $54 million -- three times as much. The honourable member also makes a reference with respect to comfort allowances. He will remember that just this past year we increased comfort allowances to the nonelderly from $77 to $100. That was the largest single increase that has ever been put into that program.

He is also aware of the fact that the Minister of Health (Mrs. Caplan) and myself are at the present time negotiating ways to add that comfort allowance to the psychiatric hospitals, as we now have them for those same people in the general hospitals. That is in process right now.

PETITIONS

PARLIAMENTARY ASSISTANT

Mr. Laughren: “To the Lieutenant Governor and the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“We, the undersigned, beg leave to petition for the need for a parliamentary assistant for the constituency of Sudbury.

“In view of the fact that there are 94 Liberal members, surely a city as important as Sudbury should be represented by at least a parliamentary assistant.

“And since the member for Sudbury is a Liberal and is willing to serve, we urge the Premier to erase his recent insult to Sudbury and to its member by removing Sterling Campbell from his back-bench humiliation and reinstate him as a parliamentary assistant.”

RETAIL STORE HOURS

Mrs. Stoner: I have a petition with 100 signatures:

“To the Honourable the Lieutenant Governor and the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“We, the undersigned, beg leave to petition the parliament of Ontario as follows:

“We are opposed to open Sunday shopping and want to retain a common pause day in Ontario.”

SCHOOL OPENING EXERCISES

Mr. J. M. Johnson: I have a petition:

“To the Honourable the Lieutenant Governor and the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“We, the undersigned, beg leave to petition the parliament of Ontario as follows:

“This letter is in protest of removing the Lord’s Prayer and Bible scripture reading from the public schools in Ontario.

“There are children who would benefit from hearing and learning the Lord’s Prayer.”

This is signed by 22.

I also have a similar petition signed by 35.

NAMING OF ROAD

Mr. Wildman: I have a petition that is signed by 28 residents of Algoma riding:

“To the Honourable the Lieutenant Governor, the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, and in particular, the Honourable Ed Fulton, Minister of Transportation:

“We, the undersigned, beg leave to petition the parliament of Ontario as follows:

“That the portion of old Highway 17 north between the Trans-Canada Highway and Trout Lake Road be named MacIntyre Road after the family who originally owned the majority of the land in the area.”

This petition is signed by 100 per cent of the residents along the road in the Heyden area north of Sault Ste. Marie, and I support the petition.

RETAIL STORE HOURS

Miss Roberts: I would like to present a petition signed by 28 individuals that reads:

“We, the undersigned, beg leave to petition the parliament of Ontario as follows:

“Whereas we strongly oppose the intention of Bill 113 for Sunday opening, we believe that the Ontario government must act to maintain Sunday as a common pause day.”

MADAWASKA TRUST PARK

Mr. Pollock: I have a petition from 168 people which reads:

“To the Honourable the Lieutenant Governor and the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“We, the undersigned, beg leave to petition the parliament of Ontario as follows:

“We oppose the creation of Madawaska Highlands regional trust park.”

PENETANGUISHENE MENTAL HEALTH CENTRE

Mr. McLean: I have a petition signed by 95 patients at the Oak Ridge division of the Penetanguishene Mental Health Centre addressed to the Honourable the Lieutenant Governor of Ontario, the Provincial Auditor and the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, asking that their concerns be thoroughly investigated and any interest on their money recovered:

“We, the patients of the Oak Ridge division of the Penetanguishene Mental Health Centre ask that you investigate our following concerns:

“(

A) It is our belief that during the past several years the Treasurer of Ontario has received, as revenue, interest on patients’ ‘pin money’ contained in the hospital bank accounts; and

“(

B) It is our belief that we are entitled to the interest accumulated on our money which is kept in the Penetanguishene Mental Health Centre’s bank accounts.”

QUARRY TRUCK ROUTE

Mr. McLean: I have a petition signed by 324 concerned citizens addressed to the Honourable the Lieutenant Governor of Ontario, the Minister of Transportation (Mr. Fulton) and the Legislative Assembly of Ontario who are opposed to alternative route 4 in the township of Mara:

The petition reads:

“We, the concerned citizens of the regional municipality of Durham and the county of Simcoe, request the immediate cancellation of plans to construct a quarry truck route as detailed by alternate route 4 in the study by Totten Sims Hubicki and Associates.”

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

Mr. Laughren from the standing committee on resources development presented the committee’s report and moved the adoption of its recommendations.

Mr. Laughren: Very briefly, I should say that in the throne speech the government suggested this entire matter of mining fatalities be referred to the standing committee on resources development.

Last January and February, the committee went across northern Ontario and some parts of southern Ontario, in the dead of winter I might add, and visited 10 different mine sites. Some of the members on the resources development committee had never even been in northern Ontario, let alone in an underground mine. Nevertheless, they worked extremely hard in familiarizing themselves with the whole question of mining fatalities and accidents in mines.

The members of the committee worked very hard as well on coming up with a unanimous report. There are 22 recommendations in the report, which are unanimous, and there was not a member of the committee, I do not think, who did not work hard to make sure it was unanimous. It is our hope that the government will respond with some substance to the report later this session, and also that there will be a full-fledged debate scheduled by the three House leaders to deal with this report.

I would be remiss if I did not take this opportunity to express on behalf of the committee appreciation for the hard work done by the clerk of the committee, Todd Decker, then at the latter part of the hearings Lynn Mellor, and our research assistant, Lorraine Luski.

As the chairman of that committee I say that I appreciated very much the co-operation of all members of the committee because it was not an easy task, either the tour of the various mine sites in the dead of winter, as I said, or coming up with a unanimous report. The members of the committee worked extremely hard on what I think is in the best interest of people who work in the mines in this province.

On motion by Mr. Laughren, the debate was adjourned.

STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

Mr. Philip from the standing committee on public accounts presented the fourth interim report, 1988, and moved the adoption of its recommendations.

Mr. Speaker: Does the member have a brief comment?

Mr. Philip: On February 25, 1988, the standing committee on public accounts reviewed the auditor’s findings of questionable operating practices at the Ontario Housing Corp. The auditor had identified several concerns in the course of his annual audit. These included several of the Metropolitan Toronto Housing Authority’s privately managed projects that experienced significant unauthorized cost overruns and had incurred questionable expenditures, which were subsequently investigated by OHC, the Solicitor General (Mrs. Smith) and the Ontario Provincial Police.

There were problems with the maintenance staff. MTHA had a level of workers’ compensation claims in 1986 that was five times as high as the average for janitorial workers and, in fact, exceeded the level among the most hazardous of occupations. Also, one of the three housing authorities visited had awarded most of its 1986 contracts without any public tender.

The committee made a number of recommendations on this and also expects the ministry to report back within 120 days of tabling the committee’s report. We look forward to the ministry’s response in November of this year. With great reluctance, because this is such an excellent report, I would move the adjournment of the debate.

On motion by Mr. Philip, the debate was adjourned.

Mr. Philip from the standing committee on Public accounts presented the fifth interim report, 1988, and moved the adoption of its recommendations.

Mr. Speaker: The member may have a few comments.

Mr. Philip: The Provincial Auditor’s 1987 report,

section 3.4, dealt with the ministries’ internal audit operations and pointed out a great number of improvements that were needed.

Section 4.4 pointed out some problems with the Ontario student assistance program in the Ministry of Colleges and Universities. This report also deals with the need for improved administration of institutions required by the Ministry of Correctional Services. It also deals with the better management practices needed at the mines and minerals division in the Ministry of Northern Development and Mines. It also deals with improved budgeting compliance and measures needed in the Futures program in the Ministry of Skills Development.

The report also deals with the Provincial Auditor’s report dealing once again, Mr. Speaker -- and I know this will be a surprise to you -- with the Ontario Provincial Police telecommunications project, the office of the chief coroner and the Ministry of the Solicitor General.

The committee makes a number of recommendations, which I am sure each of these ministries is now probably implementing.

On motion by Mr. Philip, the debate was adjourned.

MOTIONS

INTERNATIONAL OMBUDSMAN CONFERENCE

Hon. Mr. Conway moved that a subcommittee of three members of the standing committee on the Ombudsman be authorized to adjourn to Canberra, Australia, to attend the fourth International Ombudsman Conference to be held there from October 23 to October 27, 1988.

Motion agreed to.

STANDING COMMITTEE ON THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

Hon. Mr. Conway moved that, notwithstanding any previous order of the House, the House authorizes the meetings of the subcommittee on agenda and procedure of the standing committee on the Legislative Assembly held at the National Assembly of Quebec on Wednesday, October 5, 1988.

Motion agreed to.

PRIVATE MEMBERS’ PUBLIC BUSINESS

Hon. Mr. Conway moved that Mr. Swart be deleted from the order of precedence for private members’ public business, and that all members of the New Democratic Party caucus listed thereafter be advanced by one place in their turn, and that, notwithstanding standing order 71(h), the requirement for notice be waived with respect to ballot item numbers 35 and 36.

Motion agreed to.

MOTION TO SET ASIDE ORDINARY BUSINESS

Mr.

Brandt moved, pursuant to standing order 37(a), that the ordinary business of the House be set aside to discuss a matter of urgent public importance, that being the waste management crisis in the province and the present government’s mismanagement, total lack of leadership and absence of planning for the future with regard to this matter, resulting in a rapid depletion in the capacity of existing landfill sites, municipality pitted against municipality, exorbitant costs being incurred by those seeking to act responsibly in the disposal of waste materials, the ever-increasing threat to our quality of life, the threat to the health of individuals living in the vicinity of leaking landfill sites and the incremental destruction of our natural environment.

Mr. Speaker: This notice was received in my office at 12:54 p.m. on October 14. Therefore, the motion is in order. I will listen to the honourable member for up to five minutes, as well as representatives from the other two parties.

Mr. Brandt: I truly believe this is a matter of urgent public business in that the crisis -- and I do not use that word lightly -- is certainly mounting in Ontario as it relates to the problem of municipal landfill sites.

As I had the opportunity to tour the province this past summer, I had occasion to discuss with a number of municipal leaders what their number one or most serious problem was. Time and again, in virtually every case where I had an opportunity to meet these municipal leaders, they indicated that the Ministry of the Environment was their most serious problem and, more specifically, the minister’s dealing with their landfill sites.

The minister, in response to my questions in question period earlier today, indicated that there has been a very substantial amount of money spent on recycling programs and the blue box program. I applaud the minister for that action, but I would like to say that his $7 million commitment pales when one looks at the cost of $1 million a month that Halton is paying simply to haul its garbage out of the country, out of the province into a foreign jurisdiction, because there is no place in Ontario where it can dispose of its garbage, right here in its own community and its own area.

I think that is a disgusting situation when we would, in fact, be highly critical if there were garbage being created in the state of New York and shipped into Ontario. I can imagine the hue and cry from many of our citizens, indicating how irresponsible it was of another jurisdiction to expect that we were going to take its waste.

I have heard members in this very House make that comment, so the reverse situation is totally unacceptable to me. It is interesting to note that while the minister takes credit for this increase in spending that he is committing to the recycling program, during the term of his office not one new municipal landfill site has been created. Not one new site has been put in place to help solve one of the most serious problems our society is attempting to come to grips with today.

All he has is three years of applications before him from municipalities that are spending literally multimillions of dollars, and no approvals. I think it is about time the minister came to grips very seriously with the frustration that is being sensed right across this province by both large and small municipalities that no longer can come to grips with the problem of finding a way to dispose of the wastes that are being generated in their own communities.

It is pointed out that with the best of intentions, the recycling program, even for the foreseeable future, perhaps into the next decade, will be a relatively small percentage of the total volume of garbage that is generated by our respective communities.

The fact of the matter is that we have to use a whole host of programs, one of the most important of which is to put in place that vital component in any kind of a waste program, an appropriate landfill site. Yes, I want them to be environmentally safe and I want them to be environmentally sound, but is it not about time that the minister made a decision? Is it not about time that he came forward and said to some municipalities, “Yes, the millions of dollars that you have spent is certainly appropriate, and we can now allow you to go ahead with your municipal landfill site so that you can dispose of your garbage.”

In the municipalities, interestingly enough, of Welland, the Welland-Thorold area, where there has in fact --

Hon. Mr. Bradley: Oh, I wonder why we are mentioning that.

Mr. Brandt: Yes, I bring that one up because it is a matter of some interest to the people in that jurisdiction. It is interesting that two municipalities there are prepared to get together on a landfill problem and join forces, but the minister has taken the rather dictatorial attitude that it has got to be a more regional and more comprehensive response to the problem, and that four municipalities or more have got to get together in order to solve the landfill problem.

If Welland and Wainfleet can get together and solve their problem, why not let them do that, because they have indicated they can extend the life expectancy of their landfill by 20 or 25 years if they are allowed to proceed?

The sense of frustration is not appreciated by the minister. He sits rather smugly, expecting this problem to solve itself, when the regions of Peel and Metropolitan Toronto and Durham and the Pickering area, and right across this province, including my own municipality, are fed up with his inaction and are fed up with the lack of response and municipal