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

October 23, 2002

37th Parliament, 3rd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2002-Oct-23 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Wednesday 23 October 2002 Mercredi 23 octobre 2002

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

HYDRO CHARGES

WOMEN'S INSTITUTES

LAND DEVELOPMENT

TENANT PROTECTION

W.F. HEWITT PUBLIC SCHOOL

KYOTO PROTOCOL

PUBLIC LIBRARY WEEK

PREMIER OF ONTARIO

GO TRANSIT

VISITORS

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

JUSTICE AND SOCIAL POLICY

STANDING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

CELEBRATION OF HELLENIC HERITAGE ACT, 2002 /

LOI DE 2002 SUR LA FÊTE DU PATRIMOINE HELLÉNIQUE

ORAL QUESTIONS

ACADEMIC TESTING

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

KYOTO PROTOCOL

ACADEMIC TESTING

MEMBER FOR MISSISSAUGA WEST

VICTIMS OF CRIME

TORONTO WATERFRONT

SMALL BUSINESS

SOCIAL ASSISTANCE

SUPPLY TEACHERS

URBAN STRATEGY

EDUCATION FUNDING

POLANYI AWARDS

FOREST INDUSTRY

LAND DEVELOPMENT

PETITIONS

NATURAL GAS RATES

CUSTODIAL CARE

PHYSIOTHERAPY SERVICES

CHILD CARE

CENTRES D'ACCÈS

AUX SOINS COMMUNAUTAIRES

OPTOMETRISTS

AUDIOLOGY SERVICES

CHILD CARE

LONG-TERM CARE

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

CHILDREN'S HEALTH SERVICES

LONG-TERM CARE

OPPOSITION DAY

KYOTO PROTOCOL

Wednesday 23 October 2002 Mercredi 23 octobre 2002

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

HYDRO CHARGES

Mr Michael Bryant (St Paul's): The Harris-Eves government has bungled on Hydro again, this time botching the Hydro debt retirement charge and

playing tax collector of the GST for a charge that deserves no tax at all.

It turns out that the Tories failed to structure the Hydro debt charge to exempt it from the GST. Worse, the self-described tax fighters actually volunteered to

collect the GST for the federal government on the debt retirement charges back in 1999.

Now that hydro bills are unbundled "gobbledygook," according to the Tory energy minister, Ontarians know we're all paying GST on something that simply should not

be taxed, the retirement of the multi-billion-dollar Hydro debt, which somehow continues to increase under Tory rule.

While provincial and federal members of Parliament have appealed to the federal finance minister on this matter, the Harris-Eves government has managed to,

first, attract the GST for the charge through their own negligence, and then failed to lift a finger to relieve consumers of this unfair tax.

Today Dalton McGuinty and Ontario Liberals repeat our demand that the province stop playing tax collector for the feds on the debt retirement charge. Cease and

desist collecting the GST on the debt charge.

Next, I say to the government, fix your bungled debt retirement charge so that it is exempt from the GST. As the federal finance minister makes clear in his

letter of yesterday to MPs, the Ontario government could have structured the debt charge such that there would have been no application of the GST.

How badly have the Tories bungled Hydro? Somehow this provincial government managed to heap a federal tax on a charge to reduce a provincial debt, itself partly

of the Tories' own making. It's time for this government to stop royally penalizing consumers, clean up this hydraulic mess and remove the GST from the debt retirement charge.

WOMEN'S INSTITUTES

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): I respectfully rise in the House today to pay tribute to an important milestone in the history of the Women's

Institutes in Ontario.

Women's Institutes is a nonprofit, charitable organization that supports local hospitals, libraries, museums, shelters and community endeavours across the

province. They build safe and healthy communities. Through their Tweedsmuir histories, Women's Institutes are also stewards of local history. Through the widely supported ROSE program, they provide

vital health care information to women and their families in remote and rural parts of Ontario.

This past weekend, the Central Ontario Area Women's Institutes celebrated their 100th anniversary. It is estimated that in the past 20 years alone, the central

Ontario area has raised $1.3 million and provided almost a million hours of volunteer service. The achievements are indeed a cause for celebration.

I'd like to congratulate each of the Women's Institute branches in my riding for their role in this celebration. Some of the branches and presidents in our

Durham riding include Jennifer Bowman from Solina, Bernice Puk from Bowmanville, Marjorie Prescott from Maple Grove and Marilyn Martin from Providence-Shaw's.

In the northern communities of Durham riding, the branches and their presidents include Margaret Bruce of Bethesda-Reach, Gloria Fralick of Scugog Island, Muriel

Wotten of Shirley, Pat Sleep of Blackstock and Dorothy Tindale of Honeydale.

I'd also like to extend congratulations to Billie Power, chair of the Central Ontario Area Women's Institutes, and to Viola Ashton, first vice-chair. They have

given much to their country.

It's time we celebrate home and country along with the Women's Institutes of Ontario.

LAND DEVELOPMENT

Mr Mike Colle (Eglinton-Lawrence): Sadly, our provincial government has struck a secret deal with developers that makes the $10-million gift

they gave to professional sports teams look like pocket change.

Not only has Municipal Affairs and Housing Minister Hodgson ordered that Richmond Hill council and the Ontario Municipal Board permit the building of 8,000 homes

smack in the middle of the Oak Ridges moraine, its most sensitive area, he is also about to further compensate some of these same developers by giving them thousands of acres of provincially owned

public land in north Pickering and Seaton, also an environmentally sensitive area.

Concerned environmentalists and citizens in Durham and all across the GTA are asking the Eves-Harris government to make the terms of the secret land swap deal

public. They are asking that they justify why they are allowing developers to build 8,000 homes on the moraine and then further compensating them with thousands more acres of public land in Durham

and Seaton. The public is saying that if you've got nothing to hide about this secret deal, Mr Hodgson, let's see what the terms and the land values are. Put it on the table and let the Provincial

Auditor look at it. Why are you keeping this deal that's going to mean maybe $500 million to developers secret? Why is it in the public interest to keep this deal or make this deal?

Stop the Seaton land swap immediately. It's a scandal.

TENANT PROTECTION

Mr Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): Today all members of the House have learned what housing advocates and tenants in this province have known

for all too long, and that is that the government's housing policies are simply not working.

The former minister stood up in this House some four years ago when he introduced the Tenant Protection Act and talked of great, huge promises. He promised there

would be 10,000 apartment units built a year; that there would be cranes across Toronto, Ottawa and Hamilton, building new apartment units; that there would be rental housing for everyone who

needed it; that there would be homes for everybody who was desirous of having a rental unit.

But we have seen in the past four years, since that disastrous policy was adopted, what has really happened. The Tenant Protection Act has not protected tenants

at all. We have learned today that, in that period, 40,000 housing units have gone from the rental portfolio in Ontario; we have learned about vacancy decontrols and the escalating costs that

tenants have to pay to live in their homes; we have seen the above-guideline increases; we have seen the record number of evictions under this act; and we've seen the homelessness on our

streets.

The minister and all of the associate ministers must take responsibility for this. They must do something about the housing crisis that is facing the tenants of

this province. They have to take control of this. Today's news in today's newspapers has to be resolved. I would invite all the ministers to do something about this very serious problem.

W.F. HEWITT PUBLIC SCHOOL

Mr Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): Every year, people from across Ontario converge on the quiet community of Waterford for the annual

Pumpkinfest celebrations. While visitors to this weekend's festivities were thrilled with the usual impressive pumpkin-themed displays, not to mention the parade and the pies, there was an added

attraction for many this year as the small school of W.F. Hewitt celebrated its 50th anniversary. To mark the occasion, faculty and alumni got together to hold a reunion for former students and

teachers.

Despite the years, the school has withstood the test of time and soon reminded returning visitors of their days spent learning and living within those same halls

and classrooms. Hundreds of alumni spent this past Sunday roaming the halls, gazing at the collection of pictures of old friends and rekindling good memories of what it meant to attend W.F. Hewitt.

The extensive collection of photographs provided a detailed history of life at the school, thanks to a tradition of taking photos every month of the students and the school, and while there is

little doubt that much has changed, the smiling and earnest faces of rural-area students who have passed through the school remain constant.

W.F. Hewitt opened its doors to the people of Waterford and area in 1953, and it stands today as a testament to the importance of rural schools to our smaller

communities.

KYOTO PROTOCOL

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): Today is an historic day in Ontario, as members of the Ontario Legislature will be voting on a very

straightforward, unequivocal resolution which reads as follows: "The Legislative Assembly endorses the ratification of the United Nations Kyoto Protocol in Canada." This Legislature will have an

opportunity to send a positive, encouraging message to the people of this province, this nation and the world by endorsing the Liberal resolution this afternoon.

Included in the long list of supporters of the Kyoto Protocol is the Society of Alberta Medical Officers of Health, who in May of this year passed a unanimous

resolution encouraging governments to work to meet or exceed Kyoto targets. Unfortunately, Dr David Swann, one of the most respected public health experts, was fired from his job as the medical

officer of health for the Palliser Health Authority in Alberta for speaking out in favour of the Kyoto Protocol.

Prominent scientists across the world have warned of the dangers of inaction in dealing with the problem of global warming and climate change. Traditionally

Ontario, its Premier and its Legislature have played a leadership role in national environmental initiatives, urging other provinces to join us in working hand in hand with the Canadian government

to achieve genuine environmental progress. Our first obligation is to the health and environment of the people of Ontario, not to the protection of the financial interests of the coal and oil

industry and its long-time defenders. It is time to reject the tired and predictable arguments of the environmental naysayers and to embrace positive change, which will be of immense benefit to

both our health and our economy.

PUBLIC LIBRARY WEEK

Mr Bert Johnson (Perth-Middlesex): I rise today to tell my fellow members of my visit to the North Perth Public Library in Listowel this past

weekend. Rather than the usual hush of a library, when I entered the Listowel branch this Saturday I was welcomed by music from Listowel's Senior Serenaders. They were helping to launch the

library's newly automated services.

After I picked up my new library card, I was pleased to see first hand the new services, which include a Web site where people can search the library's catalogue

from their home computer. The newly automated services were unveiled this weekend to coincide with Ontario's Public Library Week. That is particularly appropriate, considering that the theme of

this year's Public Library Week is Get Internet Smart at your Public Library.

Public libraries play a crucial role in their communities, offering access to information as well as a place for the community to come together. Despite this

important role, libraries are often taken for granted, so it's important to recognize Public Library Week.

I want to take this opportunity to congratulate chief librarian Gay Kozak-Selby and her staff, as well as the members of the North Perth public library board,

headed by Chair Mary Turner, for their ongoing efforts and accomplishments.

PREMIER OF ONTARIO

Mrs Sandra Pupatello (Windsor West): The question we have is, who is the real Ernie Eves? Yesterday he tried to pretend that he was a rural boy

from Perry Sound. We know this is the same Ernie Eves who eats at Bigliardi's steakhouse in downtown Toronto so often that he doesn't get a bill, he gets a monthly statement.

Today we learn from a confidential memo from Janet Ecker that Ernie Eves says he's a Windsor boy. But that doesn't mean he wants to solve our border crisis.

He'll come down for a quick photo opportunity, but what the memo reveals is that Ernie Eves will say anything at any time just to buy himself a vote. On the issue of the Windsor border, this memo

is crystal clear. He won't support a solution based on merit. He won't look at facts or evidence. What the memo says very clearly is that Ernie Eves will make a decision based on "what makes

political sense."

So the real face of Ernie Eves is revealed. The Bay Street boy will pretend to be rural and he'll pretend to care about Windsor, but when push comes to shove,

it's all down to which way the wind is blowing or, I suppose, who makes the best steak.

The government is in crisis, with no agenda and no leadership. We have a Premier with no plans for the Windsor border, the most significant border in the

country, and on health care, on the environment, no plan to bring down skyrocketing hydro rates either -- a Premier who's prepared to say anything to anyone in order to get their vote. The people

of Ontario will see right through it.

GO TRANSIT

Ms Marilyn Mushinski (Scarborough Centre): I rise today to extend my sincere appreciation to the Minister of Transportation for his announcement

this morning that two additional GO Transit trains will travel the Lakeshore east route in the morning. This is good news for commuters along the corridor that runs from Oshawa to Union Station,

including a stop in Scarborough. I believe today's announcement will mean that more commuters will decide to choose public transit over the use of their cars.

This is a very important issue. My constituents have been telling me that gridlock is a serious problem for them. As today's announcement makes clear, the Ernie

Eves government is responding to the concerns expressed in my riding. More commuters using GO Transit means there will be less congestion locally than there otherwise would be. This means that

people who must use their cars will also benefit as well as those who enjoy the improved convenience that two additional morning trains will offer commuters along the GO Transit Lakeshore east

line.

I commend the minister for addressing this concern of my constituents, and I look forward to further good-news announcements of initiatives that will reduce

congestion on our streets and improve the environment.

VISITORS

Mr Monte Kwinter (York Centre): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I have the privilege and honour of recognizing a group of students from St

Robert school in my riding of York Centre, who are here with their parents and teachers. They are a wonderful young group, and I have to tell you why. While I had a question-and-answer period, one

of them said to me, "How old are you," and I said, "Very old." He said, "40?" and the other one said, "No, he's probably only 30."

I just want to tell you that I really appreciate that comment. Thank you.

Mr Gerard Kennedy (Parkdale-High Park): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: It's a privilege to ask the Legislature to acknowledge Mary Szkambara,

who is the past president of the Ukrainian Canadian Congress, and her guest here from the Ukraine, Iryna Holobyeva, who is the assistant to the Minister of Youth and Family, president of the

National Council of Women of the Ukraine and also assistant to the mayor of Kiev. They're in the members' gallery.

Mr Steve Peters (Elgin-Middlesex-London): I'd like to ask everybody in the House to recognize the presence in the members' gallery east of Mr

Bob Eaton, who served as member of provincial parliament for the riding of Middlesex. Welcome, Bob.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): I'd like to welcome at the table Marian Johnston, who is the Clerk Assistant and Clerk of Committees at the Prince

Edward Island Legislature. She will be visiting our Legislature for the next two weeks. Please welcome our special guest.

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

JUSTICE AND SOCIAL POLICY

Mr Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): I beg leave to present a report from the standing committee on justice and social policy and move its

adoption.

Deputy Clerk (Ms Deborah Deller): Your committee begs to report the following bill as amended:

Bill 30,

An Act to amend the Fire Protection and Prevention Act, 1997 in order to protect the employment of volunteer firefighters / Projet de loi 30, Loi

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

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Shall the report be received and adopted?

All those in favour will please say "aye."

All those opposed will please say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1348 to 1353.

The Speaker: Mr Barrett has moved the adoption of the report of the standing committee on justice and social policy regarding Bill 30.

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

Ayes

Arnott, Ted

Baird, John R.

Barrett, Toby

Clark, Brad

Clement, Tony

Cunningham, Dianne

DeFaria, Carl

Dunlop, Garfield

Ecker, Janet

Elliott, Brenda

Eves, Ernie

Flaherty, Jim

Galt, Doug

Gill, Raminder

Guzzo, Garry J.

Hodgson, Chris

Hudak, Tim

Johns, Helen

Johnson, Bert

Kells, Morley

Klees, Frank

Martiniuk, Gerry

Mazzilli, Frank

McDonald, AL

Miller, Norm

Molinari, Tina R.

Munro, Julia

Newman, Dan

O'Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Runciman, Robert W.

Sampson, Rob

Snobelen, John

Spina, Joseph

Sterling, Norman W.

Stockwell, Chris

Turnbull, David

Wettlaufer, Wayne

Wilson, Jim

Witmer, Elizabeth

Young, David

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

Nays

Agostino, Dominic

Bisson, Gilles

Bountrogianni, Marie

Boyer, Claudette

Bradley, James J.

Brown, Michael A.

Bryant, Michael

Caplan, David

Cleary, John C.

Colle, Mike

Cordiano, Joseph

Crozier, Bruce

Curling, Alvin

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duncan, Dwight

Gravelle, Michael

Hampton, Howard

Kennedy, Gerard

Kormos, Peter

Kwinter, Monte

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

Martin, Tony

McGuinty, Dalton

McLeod, Lyn

McMeekin, Ted

Patten, Richard

Phillips, Gerry

Prue, Michael

Pupatello, Sandra

Ramsay, David

Ruprecht, Tony

Sergio, Mario

Smitherman, George

Sorbara, Greg

Wood, Bob

Clerk of the House (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 41; the nays are 38.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

STANDING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): I beg to inform the House that today the Clerk received the seventh report of the standing committee on

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

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

CELEBRATION OF HELLENIC HERITAGE ACT, 2002 /

LOI DE 2002 SUR LA FÊTE DU PATRIMOINE HELLÉNIQUE

Mrs Bountrogianni moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 193,

An Act to proclaim a day and a month to celebrate Hellenic heritage in Ontario / Projet de loi 193, Loi proclamant un jour et un mois de fête du

patrimoine hellénique en Ontario.

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

All those in favour will please say "aye."

All opposed will please say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

The member for short statement.

Mrs Marie Bountrogianni (Hamilton Mountain): The Hellenes, the Greeks of today, are the proud descendants of a culture that originated in the

glorious civilization of ancient Hellas. Many of the ideas, ideals and institutions upon which modern civilization is based, such as freedom and democracy, were first developed by the ancient

Greeks.

Today, over 100,000 people of Hellenic descent thrive in Ontario. Ontario citizens of Greek descent continue to make significant contributions to the economic

and cultural growth of Ontario and Canada.

In honour of Hamilton's Greek community's 50th anniversary and in recognition of all people of Hellenic descent living in Ontario, the bill would proclaim

March 25 as Hellenic Heritage Day.

ORAL QUESTIONS

ACADEMIC TESTING

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): My question is to the Premier. Premier, when you were running for your job, you made some very

deliberate statements about the private school tax credit. You said the fact that there was no accountability on the part of private schools for the public money they were about to receive was, to

use your word, ludicrous.

I have here a memo to your Minister of Finance and it says that you are backing off even the meagre standards you were going to enforce for the private school

tax credit. Instead of the standardized test that we use in public schools, your plan "would result in a lesser standard of a test per se and therefore would not deliver the same calibre of

accountability."

All of Ontario knows where I stand when it comes to your private school tax credit: we will cancel it and we'll invest the money in public education. We know

where you stand in terms of being in favour of the private school tax credit, but can you tell us, Premier, why private schools receiving public money should not be subject to the same standardized

tests as public schools?

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): The leader of the official opposition asked several questions there and made

several statements, so I'll try to deal with each of them.

With respect to where he stands, no, the public doesn't know where you stand. In the Canadian Jewish News of December 17, 1998, you're quoted: "Opposition

leader Dalton McGuinty told Ontario's Jewish leadership that he had no ideological opposition to ensuring public funds to support Jewish day schools. It is believed that this is the first time any

provincial party leader has made such a declaration." Then, Dalton McGuinty of June 17 of this year: "Liberal leader Dalton McGuinty meanwhile is urging the government to cancel the private school

tax credit introduced in last year's budget."

For your statement that the public knows where you stand, you stand wherever it's convenient, depending on what audience you're talking to at that particular

time on that particular day. Where we stand is on equal opportunity for every student in Ontario.

Mr McGuinty: Premier, since you would appear to be the last person left in Ontario who understands so little, I'm going to give you a copy of

our Excellence for All plan. I'll ask one of the pages here. Grant, you might take this to the Premier.

I strongly recommend that you take the opportunity. There are some very good ideas about supporting public education.

This, further, from the memo summarizing the rigorous testing standards that our Premier would impose on private schools for the public money he insists on

giving to them: "The Premier does not want finance to prescribe a testing approach for private schools." I go on: "We need something that is flexible and something that the independent schools will

agree with. The Premier's office indicated that this could be as many different types of tests as we have independent schools."

Premier, again, I will cancel the tax credit. No strings or standards will save it. You, sir, are doing nothing more than catering to special interests at

public expense. Why are you allowing special interests to dictate your standards?

Hon Mr Eves: I'm not going to comment on what some staff person speculates he thinks somebody told somebody that I might have thought. But I

will tell you what I have said very directly to the director of communications of the Ontario Alliance of Christian Schools in a letter of February 19 of this year.

"As I travel the province, most supporters of independent education tell me that it is very important to measure how our children's education is progressing in

the critical core subjects of reading, writing and arithmetic. For that reason I am supporting" -- this is my letter, this is what I think -- "measuring the progress of students in both public and

independent schools. This can be accomplished in different ways and I would look forward to discussing this with you in detail."

Now, we know where I stand. We don't know where you stand. In 1998 you stood on one issue, in 2002 you stand on another side. But we do know where your member

for St Paul's stands. He says, "I can't suck and blow on the tax credit. I've got to support this. This is a step in the direction of equity." Exactly, and you should get on board with your member

for St Paul's.

Mr McGuinty: Premier, you are spending more time on the fence on this issue than John Snobelen spends on a horse. At least John Snobelen has

the benefit of a saddle. It must be very painful for you, sir, to spend all that time on the fence.

Public schools are in trouble. Students are struggling, schools are closing and teachers are leaving. The record speaks for itself. I've got a plan to fix and

improve our schools: smaller class sizes, kids learning until 18, and better and more learning opportunities for our teachers. I will cancel the private school tax credit and invest that money in

public education. Your own confidential cabinet document shows that you cannot be trusted. You say one thing publicly; internally, you give different instructions to your own cabinet minister.

Premier, how can you continue to sell out all those students, in fact the 96% of Ontario students who find themselves in our public schools?

Hon Mr Eves: The leader of the official opposition knows very well that the supposed memo he talks about is not an official cabinet document.

I'm sure you would want to do the right thing and correct the record.

Interjection.

Hon Mr Eves: You are really grasping.

The leader of the official opposition might want to get onside with some of his own caucus colleagues. We've talked about where the member for St Paul's

stands.

With respect to the member for York Centre: "I've always supported it. As a matter of fact, I've advocated it for 16 years, since before the last election; I

sponsored a rally outside Queen's Park. We had 5,000 people in support of that position, and there's the real issue of discrimination." I couldn't agree more.

Your honourable member has also said, "I'm not thrilled with the idea that we're going to repeal the tax credit."

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): I would suggest there's a lesson there, Premier, when it comes to strong leadership.

My next question is also to the Premier.

Today, after months of bobbing and weaving, hopefully the people of Ontario will learn where their government stands on the Kyoto accord. Later this afternoon,

the Legislature is going to debate an historic resolution, one introduced by our caucus. It reads as follows: "The Legislative Assembly endorses the ratification of the United Nations Kyoto

Protocol in Canada." Premier, it's time you climbed down off that fence. How are you going to vote, how is your government going to vote, on this historic resolution?

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): This government is not in favour of the technical

interpretation of the Kyoto

Mr McGuinty: Those splinters have got to be painful, Premier. They've got to be causing you some significant pain. You look at the Kyoto

accord and all you see are problems. I look at the Kyoto accord and I see a tremendous economic opportunity for our province. I see high-paying, high-skill jobs.

Progressive, visionary governments around the world are rushing to embrace the very important economic shift away from fossil fuels to cleaner sources of

energy. You've got a choice, Premier. You can stay with the Flat Earth Society or you can join Ontario families -- and by the way, you can join companies like BP, Shell and DuPont, which have been

busy reducing their greenhouse gases and making more profits. Where would you like to take us, Premier? Will you take us to a bright future or a bleak one mired in the past?

Hon Mr Eves: The leader of the official opposition proves exactly the point. These firms he just rhymed off were doing this without and before

the Kyoto accord was even thought of. His idea of a bright future is to willy-nilly follow some technical wording that even the federal government admits is flawed and has no intention of

following, and he's going to put 450,000 Ontarians out of work in the process. If you want to talk about the Flat Earth Society, you're a charter member.

Mr McGuinty: Premier, the difference between DuPont, Shell and BP and your government is that those companies had the benefit of strong

leadership that embraced economic opportunities to be found in the future. That's the difference between them and you.

Let's talk about renewable energy. Unlike you, I've got a plan to bring those new jobs to our communities. I will ensure that 10% of our electricity comes from

renewable sources. That's a powerful incentive to bring those jobs of the future here.

Let's talk ethanol now. Agriculture is one of the most important industries in our province. My plan to require that all gasoline contain 10% ethanol is going

to clean up the environment and create thousands of new farm jobs.

Let's talk about conservation. My conservation plan is going to help save the environment and help consumers save money on their electricity bills, something I

know you know very little about.

Premier, when are you going to get it? It has to be, it must be win-win when it comes to the environment and the economy. When are you going to do the right

thing on behalf of business and the Ontario environment and stand up for the Kyoto accord?

Hon Mr Eves: The leader of the official opposition has a plan all right; he has a plan to black out part of Ontario by shutting down certain

plants before there are other sources of energy to take over.

We over here on this side of the House came up with the Drive Clean program, which has reduced emissions from vehicles by 25%, something you and your member

for St Catharines, although he chattered a lot about it when he was Minister of the Environment, did absolutely zip about. We have set goals and they are being met by OPG and others. And those

companies he talks about are taking those steps because they are the right thing to do, exactly as the province of Ontario has done for many years.

Your plan is to put 450,000 people out of work. Our plan has already created 955,000 jobs in Ontario.

KYOTO PROTOCOL

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Premier. Ralph Klein, the Kyoto killer, wants you to join his gang. It seems

you're ready to kill Kyoto and ride off with Klein and Chrétien, leaving Ontario citizens choking on more smog and global warming. Tell us again, Premier, why are you, Klein and Chrétien

so ready to put the kibosh to Kyoto?

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I want to say to the leader of the third party that at least he understands

the Prime Minister has no intention of implementing the Kyoto accord as it's drafted because he understands it's unworkable and would put hundreds of thousands of Canadians out of work. I would say

to the leader of the third party that I'm sure your friends in labour unions across the province and across the country would not want to put literally hundreds of thousands of people out of work

by signing on to an agreement that is unworkable.

What Ralph Klein has proposed for Alberta, as I understand it, is a plan he thinks is appropriate for his province. I would suggest to the honourable member

that every single province is different. They all have different economies. All we've ever asked for is an opportunity to sit down with the Prime Minister of Canada and propose a plan where we can

reduce greenhouse gas emissions and not lose hundreds of thousands of jobs at the same time.

Mr Hampton: Premier, I've spoken with some of those trade unions. They want you to get on board with Kyoto, because they've talked with other

trade unions elsewhere in the world which acknowledge that you can actually create jobs by moving to counter global warming.

If you don't act, global warming will get worse. You're inviting killer smog, deadly heat and more global warming, more climate change. And your scheme of

hydro privatization will make things worse because it means burning more dirty coal. It's high noon for global warming. Do you support Kyoto or do you support Klein?

Hon Mr Eves: We agree that you have to act and act now. We have been acting and we will continue to act. Indeed, as the member of the official

opposition has pointed out, many private enterprises are already doing this. We should be acting, as Ontarians and as Canadians, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

That is not the subject of debate here. The subject of debate is, is the best way to do it the highly technical

interpretation of the Kyoto accord? By

everybody's admission -- even the Prime Minister of Canada's -- except for the leader of the official opposition, it's unworkable in its current form. We have to find a made-in-Canada solution to

lead the way in greenhouse gas reductions while at the same time protecting, in fact I would argue creating, hundreds of thousands of new jobs.

Mr Hampton: Premier, it's obvious from your comments that you've already swallowed everything that Ralph Klein has had to say. Take a trip to

Norway or Sweden or anywhere in western Europe and look at the changes that are already being implemented, changes that are creating jobs -- a whole new industry in terms of wind turbine power --

and paper mills that have lowered their emission of greenhouses gases. They're not talking about privatization and burning more coal. They're already implementing Kyoto.

Why have you swallowed Ralph Klein's arguments hook, line and sinker, and ignored all of the arguments from the rest of the world? Why are you following Klein

and ignoring all of those countries in western Europe that clearly are already two and three years down the road in terms of implementing Kyoto?

Hon Mr Eves: Ontario, and Canada for that matter, all of Canada, have led the way in greenhouse gas reduction. We have led the way. We on this

side of the House actually provided for independent operators and generators of power to come on the grid, which your government steadfastly for five years would not allow to happen. So don't

lecture us about wind turbines when your government wouldn't allow one single new producer of electricity to come on the grid. What kind of leadership is that? I'm glad we didn't follow you off the

edge of the cliff like a bunch of lemmings.

ACADEMIC TESTING

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): Premier, it has emerged that you're letting private schools set their own test for qualifying for over

a half-billion dollars of private school tax credits. Across Ontario you're creating a growth industry of private schools fuelled by public money with no strings attached.

Why have you created a testing mania for public school teachers and students but you let private schools get off scot-free?

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Perhaps the leader of the third party wasn't listening earlier in question

period when I read out the text of my letter of February 19 of this year to the Ontario Alliance of Christian Schools.

Mr George Smitherman (Toronto Centre-Rosedale): Just read the last line.

Hon Mr Eves: Read the last line? To the members opposite and to the leader of the third party, every school system is different. The important

thing is whether you can measure the progress of students in the important areas of reading, writing and arithmetic -- basic skills. I see no reason why you can't accomplish those goals and sit

down with different schools throughout the system and make sure that every student in the province of Ontario is qualified and has an equal opportunity in education.

Mr Hampton: Premier, if you're a public school student in Ontario, you are the subject of a $50-million testing bureaucracy which insists that

everybody write the test on the same day, under the same regimen. But if you're a private school and you get money from the private school tax credit, they're completely different rules. In fact,

it doesn't appear as if there are any rules at all.

I ask you again, why are public schools subjected to a testing mania but your private school friends can organize it any which way they want? Why the double

standard?

Hon Mr Eves: Talking about double standards, the leader of the third party is against testing students in the first place, and now he's there

arguing that everybody should have the same test.

MEMBER FOR MISSISSAUGA WEST

Mr Sean G. Conway (Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke): My question is to the Premier, the leader of the government. Mr Premier, it is widely reported

in today's press that you are expected to have had, or to have, a meeting with Mr John Snobelen, MPP for Mississauga West, today to discuss how he intends to discharge his public responsibilities,

for which he is paid, as all members of the Legislature are, $82,757.

Can you indicate to this Legislature, Mr Premier, whether or not you have had that meeting, and if the meeting has occurred, whether or not you intend -- and

have accepted his resignation?

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Whom I choose to meet with during the course of a day, especially if it's

with a member of my own caucus, quite frankly is none of your business.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Supplementary?

Mr Conway: Well, a supplementary --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Come to order. The Premier had quiet for his answer. The member?

Mr Conway: Mr Premier, I'm trying to imagine taxpayers in Orangeville or Parry Sound or Pembroke reading the papers today and faced with this

situation, particularly from a Conservative government led by Ernie Eves, late of the Common Sense Revolution, which was all about taxpayer responsibility and accountability and citizens'

responsibility. We've got a situation, apparently, where a Conservative member of the Legislature, who is being paid $82,757 a year, wants to spend his time in a foreign country while accepting

$82,000 of public money from the people of Ontario. If Mr Snobelen wants to be in Oklahoma, the people in Orangeville, Parry Sound and Pembroke would say, "Let him resign and go to Oklahoma." But

you, as the leader of his party and leader of the government, surely must do one of two things: ask for and accept his resignation, or demand a work plan from our friend the member from Mississauga

West which would justify the people of Ontario paying $82,757 for his salary.

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of the Environment, Government House Leader): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I would just ask if you --

The Speaker: If I had, I would have jumped up, but he didn't talk about his attendance in the House.

Premier?

Hon Mr Eves: Mr Speaker --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Thank you very much. I will make the decisions. We don't need any comments on it. Whoever yelled it out, I would

appreciate it if you wouldn't do that. We're going to have a good debate between two fine members here. People want to hear the Premier. We've got a member asking a good question. They don't want

to hear the rest of you; they want to hear the two people who are asking the questions.

Premier?

Hon Mr Eves: Mr Speaker, there are many members of the Legislature who are absent at various times for various reasons, including the

honourable member himself, I might add, from time to time, and including myself. All of us have various reasons why from time to time we are not in our chairs during question period or while the

Legislature is sitting.

Talking about a double standard, the way our system of government works is that people in each constituency elect who they think is the appropriate

representative in each election or by-election, as the case may be. There's an appropriate accounting for that, of course, when that individual comes up for re-election from time to time.

But I would urge the members of the official opposition to tread kind of lightly before they start going down this path, because their leader of course

introduced a mandatory two-thirds-attendance-for-question-period plan, and according to the records we've been keeping, about 30% of your members don't meet your own qualifications.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. The member for Scarborough Centre now has the floor.

VICTIMS OF CRIME

Ms Marilyn Mushinski (Scarborough Centre): My question today is for the Attorney General. It's about an issue of very serious concern to my

constituents in Scarborough Centre. There's been a great deal of media coverage recently about the Internet and the exploitation of children. In particular, there have been very disturbing stories

about how the Internet has led to an increased prevalence of child pornography.

Clearly, protecting children from exploitation is one of our most important responsibilities in this House, and a major priority of mine, as you know. I'm very

pleased our government has put record investments toward child protection and toughened the laws around abuse and neglect, but certainly we must do more. Last week you made an announcement with

regard to Internet child pornography. I'm wondering if you could tell this House how this action will help to combat the tide of child pornography on the Internet and protect children from sexual

exploitation.

Hon David Young (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs): I would like to thank the member, not only for the question but

for the fact that she has been a tireless worker in relation to protecting victims across this province. In relation to this particular initiative, which she spoke about a moment ago, I want to say

that this has happened largely because of her work. She has come forward and has advocated on behalf of victims across the province, in this case, some of the youngest and most vulnerable

people.

We live in a time where technology is causing our society to change, in many respects in very positive ways, but there are some greater challenges for law

enforcement now. That's why I was so pleased to step forward on behalf of the Ernie Eves government, with representatives of the Toronto Police Service, and talk about a new initiative, an

innovative measure that will allow for the purchase of additional computers, will allow for the hiring of additional officers. It's to stop those who are using the Internet to lure children and to

engage in activities that are, frankly, disgusting.

Ms Mushinski: Thank you for that response. It's certainly a welcome step that more resources are being directed toward protecting children

from sexual exploitation. I've heard very strongly from my constituents that we must always be mindful that the voice of the victims always be heard. Our justice system must always work to balance

the rights of the accused with the interests of the innocent victims. I know that one way the government has worked to achieve this goal is through the victims' justice fund. Minister, I wonder if

you can tell me what investments you have made recently from the victims' justice fund, and also explain the range of people for whom these services will provide much-needed help.

Hon Mr Young: This government has moved forward on a number of different fronts in relation to protecting victims across this province. The

domestic violence strategy that we announced very recently has supplemented the government's rather substantial spending in this area with a further $12.6 million to help police and crowns better

understand this very challenging area.

We've also come forward with an elder abuse strategy that exists nowhere else in the world, one that has been applauded internationally, one that will likely

serve to end the abuse of many of our senior citizens across this province, abuse that sometimes involves financial matters, sometimes emotional, sometimes physical. We have a victims' support line

in place, and victim/witness assistance programs throughout the province. We're very proud of that, and the Ernie Eves government will continue to work to protect victims wherever and whenever we

can.

TORONTO WATERFRONT

Mr Gerry Phillips (Scarborough-Agincourt): My question is to the Premier and has to do with the Minister of Finance memo that became public

yesterday. I might add, it looks a little bad on you. Five months after you became Premier, it's pretty clear that cabinet didn't know who was responsible for the waterfront file. In the memo it

points out that while Minister Hodgson thought he was in charge of it -- and this was in the middle of September, five months after you became Premier -- he wasn't going to do anything until he got

some written confirmation of that. In fact, the Ministry of Finance said they have several letters that were supposed to be being signed on this, important matters that weren't being dealt

with.

My question is this: it seems strange that not only were decisions not being made, you hadn't even appointed the person to make the decisions. What was going

on here? Why couldn't you at least have made the decision on which cabinet minister you wanted to be in charge of the waterfront file?

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): First of all, it's not a Minister of Finance memo. It's an opinion of a staff

member and some suggestions of a staff member to a minister.

Members on all sides of the House will know that all the time that I was Minister of Finance under the Mike Harris government, I was in charge of the

waterfront file. Minister Flaherty, when he was Minister of Finance, was in charge of the waterfront file. Minister Ecker, since she's been Minister of Finance, is in charge of the waterfront file.

Nothing has changed. Our commitment is there in the $500 million for regeneration of the waterfront, and there's $500 million from the federal government and $500 million from the municipal

government.

Mr Phillips: The problem with that is that the problem is you. The memo points out that "We need confirmation ASAP" on who's the lead on the

waterfront. There are letters that need to be signed on this. The board could be moving ahead. It points out that nothing's happening on it. A decision was urgently needed by you, and you couldn't

seem to make up your mind who was in charge of it.

Unless you're saying this memo is just simply incorrect, the question is, what in the world were you doing? You've been Premier for five months. The waterfront

is a huge issue for the city of Toronto and you couldn't even seem to make up your mind who you wanted to be in charge of it. Can you give us some hint of what was holding you up for five months in

making the simple decision, signing the letter and at least letting some minister get on with making decisions? Why couldn't you make that decision after five months?

Hon Mr Eves: There is no letter required by me to do any of this stuff. If that's somebody's opinion, then unfortunately that's their opinion,

but that has nothing to do with the fact. The fact is, it was the Minister of Finance while I was Minister of Finance for six years and for the year-plus that Mr Flaherty was Minister of Finance,

and while Minister Ecker's been the Minister of Finance she has been in charge of the waterfront file.

SMALL BUSINESS

Mr Bert Johnson (Perth-Middlesex): My question is for the hard-working, energetic and highly effective Minister of Enterprise, Opportunity and

Innovation from Whitby-Ajax. Minister, our province's economy and my riding's economy rely heavily on the success of small business. To recognize Small Business Week, the Community Futures

Development Corp of Middlesex county has been running seminars in Komoka on such topics as advertising, employee retention and exporting for small business operators, each and every day this week,

starting at 7:30 o'clock in the morning.

I'm concerned that the small business owners attending these seminars face too many obstacles to running a profitable operation. Can you tell me what the

Ontario government is doing to ensure that our small businesses are strong and profitable?

Hon Jim Flaherty (Minister of Enterprise, Opportunity and Innovation): I thank the honourable member for Perth-Middlesex for his incisive and

thoughtful question.

This is Small Business Month in Ontario. It's Small Business Week this week across most of the province. I had the pleasure earlier this week of speaking with

the Whitby Chamber of Commerce and earlier this month with the Canadian Chamber of Commerce in London, Ontario.

Small business is big business in Ontario. Almost half the jobs that have been created in Ontario since 1995 have been created by small business, that is,

businesses with fewer than 50 employees in the province, and that's half of almost one million net new jobs in the province in the past seven years.

More than 90% of Ontario's businesses are in fact small businesses. They ask for a solid foundation. They ask for reductions in taxes, they ask for less red

tape -- and we've reduced the regulatory burden by more than 1,900 regulations in the province -- balanced budgets, and a welcoming attitude toward investment and entrepreneurship.

There is help available. We have 41 small business centres across Ontario --

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): I'm afraid the minister's time is up. Supplementary.

Mr Johnson: Thank you very much, Minister. I know this government's efforts to remove barriers to business are appreciated by my constituents.

I want to remind everyone here and you, of course, that I consider most of the thousands of farms in Perth-Middlesex as small businesses.

Minister, I understand that small business in Ontario accounts for nearly half of the 987,000 jobs created since 1995. As a matter of fact, you and I both

remember the opposition benches shouting, "Where are the jobs? Where are the jobs?" starting in September 1995 and continuing for a year or more. I haven't heard that chant lately, because it was

estimated in the Common Sense Revolution document that we would help businesses create 750,000 jobs.

Entrepreneurship is obviously a driving force in our economy. What is our government doing to promote skills training that will encourage entrepreneurship?

Hon Mr Flaherty: We have a wonderful strategy in Ontario called the young entrepreneurs strategy, which applies not only to urban Ontario but

of course to rural Ontario and to the strong rural community represented by the honourable member for Perth-Middlesex.

This includes future entrepreneurs, a program for young people in grades 7 and 8 which is being assisted by the excellent teachers who are helping us and the

mentors in the community, so that young people in grades 7 and 8 who are bright-eyed and have great ideas can see that that's a viable career option, that it's a choice for them to be

entrepreneurial, to put their ideas into action in Ontario. Then, as teenagers, through the Summer Company program, there is assistance of $1,500, mentoring by entrepreneurs in the community so

they can create their own summer businesses.

There are many success stories across the province. There is yet another program for young people 18 to 29 years of age where they can also get government

assistance to get their own entrepreneurial businesses going. It's a great success story in Ontario.

SOCIAL ASSISTANCE

Mr Tony Martin (Sault Ste Marie): My question is for the Premier. Premier, can you tell me how anyone can be expected to live on $520 a

month?

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): We all have people who are in difficult situations in Ontario and I believe

it is incumbent upon all of us in society to do what we can to help the most unfortunate.

Mr Martin: Premier, my question was clear and precise: how can anyone live on $520 a month?

I just came back from the Kimberly Rogers inquest. Kimberly is just one example of many people who end up needing social assistance to get through a bad time,

for whatever reason. That assistance should cover what a person needs to survive, but it doesn't even come close.

Your government has cut social assistance so much that no one can live on it and, then, if they mess up, you cut them off completely. Your welfare policies

forced a pregnant woman to stay locked in her house without any income. This is beyond inhumane.

Premier, will you raise social assistance rates to cover the minimum cost of living and at the very least will you end your government's inhumane lifetime

ban?

Hon Mr Eves: I do not feel it is appropriate to be talking about an inquest that is ongoing in Ontario. I think you should let the inquest do

it's job, and we certainly will be very cognizant of any recommendations that come out of it.

SUPPLY TEACHERS

Mr Dominic Agostino (Hamilton East): My question is to the Minister of Education. Minister, on Monday night in Hamilton, your hand-picked,

appointed supervisor cut 40% of the budget for supply teachers from the Hamilton board of education as compared to last year. Not only did he unilaterally make these cuts, he also tried to hide

these cuts. He tried to keep them out of the public domain. In a memo to the chair of the board, he said, "Remove the topic from both agendas. I do not want it discussed by the trustees at this

time." He goes on to say, "My decision stands. If you want to make an issue of it ... that is your choice.... It certainly is not as big an issue for the public domain as you make it out to

be."

This is a 40% cut in supply teachers. This is going to impact kids in the classroom every day. This is going to impact the ability of kids to grow and

function. This is going to impact the value and quality of education. Do you think it is appropriate, Minister, for your hand-picked supervisor to make these decisions and then make an effort to

keep this from the public?

Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Deputy Premier, Minister of Education): I think it's really important to keep in mind that the supervisor in Hamilton is

making decisions after a tremendous amount of consultation with parents and staff. You need to recognize that the recommendations coming forward are recommendations that have been very carefully

considered by the staff. Certainly, all that is happening is in the best interests, in order to continue to provide stability and enable the students to achieve success within the system.

Mr Agostino: Minister, you didn't answer the question in regard to why he went about it the way he did.

I want to ask you about the cuts specifically. This is now 40% fewer classroom teachers when it comes to replacement, when it comes to teachers who are absent,

when it comes to teachers who are ill and you need someone in the classroom. According to the board report, this is going to impact things such as in-school activities, inter-scholastic programs,

school trip coverage and literacy programs. This means that as a result of these cuts, the kids who are in special literacy programs for reading and writing will not be given a supply teacher when

their teacher is away.

This is the harsh reality of decisions you have made. It's not your supervisor, Minister. You appointed Mr Murray and you appointed yourself chair of the

board. Now you have to be held accountable for the fact that kids in Hamilton are going to go without classroom teachers when their teacher is sick or off on a school trip with other kids or in

some other activity they are required to do.

Minister, explain to me: do you agree with this and do you guarantee to every single child in Hamilton that when their teacher is away, there will be a

replacement teacher in the classroom that day?

Hon Mrs Witmer: It's important that the member opposite take a look at what really happened. Maybe I'll share some facts with you.

In 2001-02, the use of supply teachers in the Hamilton-Wentworth DSB was considerably higher than expected. In fact, the actual cost increased by 50% compared

to what the board had budgeted for. So the supervisor took a look at the problem. He asked the staff for recommendations, and the recommendations include proposing to increase, by the way, the

supply teacher budget by about 26% over 2001-02, to better reflect the actual cost of supply teachers. Second, he wants to take a look at a program that can help reduce the demand for supply

teachers. So he wants to address the issue and he's providing 26% more money this year than last year.

URBAN STRATEGY

Mr Raminder Gill (Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale): My question is for the Associate Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing responsible for

urban issues. Coming from the predominantly urban riding of Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale, I am pleased to hear the dialogue coming from this government concerning the vitality of urban centres

across this province. I believe it is important for those who live in urban areas to be assured that we, the Conservative government, have invested in strong municipalities and that we remain

globally competitive in the 21st century.

This government has demonstrated its commitment to cities through its responsible funding decisions and sound policy initiatives. Minister, please tell the

House specifically what we are doing to ensure our cities are a place where the people of Ontario will be able to live, work and raise their families.

Hon Tina R. Molinari (Associate Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): I want to thank the member from Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale,

who works very hard for his community, for the question. This is an important issue to address and I'm pleased to have the opportunity to address it here, not only for the member's riding but also

for the province of Ontario.

This year at the AMO conference, Premier Eves emphasized the need to respond to the challenges facing cities across this province in urban centres. He

highlighted how we are addressing these challenges through a number of initiatives, including Smart Growth and the memorandum of understanding.

Our government has also taken a number of steps to strengthen the municipal sector: the new Municipal Act, local services realignment, and the brownfields

legislation. These are all intended to give municipalities new flexible tools to encourage local economic development and improve municipal revenues.

My colleague the Minister of Finance stated during the budget speech that we are willing to join --

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): I'm afraid the minister's time is up.

Mr Gill: Minister, I'm happy to hear that you are personally visiting other municipalities to better understand this issue. I'm very happy to

hear that our government's commitments have been followed by action.

Recently the federal government laid out its plan for Canadian municipalities in its throne speech. I must say that I was encouraged by the direction that was

taken to ensure that our cities remain globally competitive. Minister, you have been meeting with people across the province. Tell me, are they encouraged by the federal throne speech and the

federal Liberal promises, or are they just like other federal Liberal promises, for example, eliminating the GST?

Hon Mrs Molinari: We are encouraged by the direction the federal government has given in the throne speech. Our government agrees that

continued competitiveness for its urban centres is crucial, very important. We are pleased that the feds have also clearly recognized what we the province have been saying all along, and that is

that the feds have to take a significant long-term responsibility in helping municipalities to deal with their infrastructure challenges.

We will continue to demand that the federal government play a greater role as a full partner to help fund infrastructure

needs that are coordinated and to co-operate with the provincial government and the municipalities. Our government looks forward to working in partnership with the federal government once they make

that long-term funding guarantee to the municipalities.

At this point we cannot overlook the need to address the fiscal imbalance between the provinces and the feds. Any new deal for cities requires a new deal

between the federal government and Ontario to restore the balance between revenue and funding responsibilities at all levels of government.

EDUCATION FUNDING

Mr Gerard Kennedy (Parkdale-High Park): I have a question for the Premier. I want to ask you about things you've said over and over again in

the Legislature and elsewhere about all the problems in education. You've been hiding behind the Rozanski commission every time you've been asked about a variety of issues confronting students. Yet

we find out that the Premier has already given direction, has already predetermined how much money he's prepared to put into any needs in education this year.

Premier, I want to ask you very simply, how can we believe you when it comes to education when you've already decided ahead of time that there's only a certain

amount of money you're prepared to put into education, before Dr Rozanski has even reported about the problems that exist in education? Can you tell us that?

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Nothing could be further from the truth. First of all, I have been consistent

in acknowledging throughout our party's leadership campaign -- about a year ago now that started -- that we had to have an immediate review of the funding formula, which is ongoing, which Dr

Rozanski is doing.

We understood that there were some pressures in the system that had to be addressed, and we addressed them, I think very substantially, by putting an

additional $557 million in the system this year.

We await Dr Rozanski's report and we'll see what he suggests and recommends, because somebody is musing that we might continue increasing year over year the

education budget by half a billion dollars a year. Would that everybody had the money to do that. That, to me, would indicate a very substantial commitment to public education in this province as

we go forward, and much larger than your leader is suggesting, I might add.

Mr Kennedy: The Premier may think that shows a substantive commitment. But he knows, and his Minister of Finance and the Minister of Education

should know, that the money they're talking about is enough for inflation and enrolment. It doesn't touch the $2.2 billion you've allowed to come out of the education system in the cuts you've

made.

All around the province and here in this House on September 26 you said you're waiting for Dr Rozanski's report to make "a further commitment." You said you'll

take "further action" at that time. It's clear from that memo and your statement just now that you intend to only give base amounts to education, that you have no money put aside to actually deal

with the problems that you've created.

Out there are parents who have been hoping against hope that the Harris-Eves governments might be in for a bit of a change. Premier, you have a way to prove

this differently. Today, commit to making changes in-year. Dr Rozanski recommends, as many parents are demanding, changes right now. Tell us that you'll fund those appropriately.

Hon Mr Eves: First of all, on this side of the House we have increased commitment and funding to public education from $12.9 billion to $14.36

billion. I know that Liberals are not very good with math; we saw that with the massive deficits and debts that you left behind. I will tell you this: the musing that was in that memo is far, far

in excess of what your leader is committing in his little plan. His little plan is $1.6 billion over the next five years. We are talking over here about $556 million for this commitment. He's

talking about a commitment that's between $300 million and $400 million a year. How can you stand in your place and suggest that we have not put substantial money into the public education system?

We have asked Dr Rozanski --

Interjection.

Hon Mr Eves: Enrolment went up this year by 0.8%.

POLANYI AWARDS

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): My question is to the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities. Minister, as you know, a university's first

function is to educate their undergraduate students. Yet another very important contribution that universities make is indeed in research. Researchers, as you know, are working today to make

discoveries to ensure our quality of life and to improve the future for our young people.

Minister, you will soon be honouring the recipients of the 2002 Polanyi awards, prizes to recognize outstanding research. Can you tell the House and share with

those listening today about these awards and how they recognize outstanding young researchers' work in Ontario universities?

Hon Dianne Cunningham (Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities, minister responsible for women's issues): It's always a pleasure to

answer the questions from the member from Durham, who cares so much about young people.

This is a special prize in Ontario. John Polanyi prizes are awarded every year in recognition of the achievement of Dr John Charles Polanyi, our Nobel

laureate, University of Toronto winner of the 1986 Nobel prize in chemistry for his work in reaction dynamics.

These prizes are worth $15,000, and they're awarded every year to exceptional young researchers in the early stages of their career who are currently working

at an Ontario university. They're awarded in the same fields as the Nobel prizes -- medicine, economics, physics, literature and chemistry -- and we'll be honouring our recipients on November 13 at

Massey College at the University of Toronto.

Mr O'Toole: I'd like to thank the hard-working minister for her answer. Minister, by recognizing Ontario's best and brightest young

researchers we are indeed recognizing the future of all Ontario. At this point it's important to mention that I want to thank you personally for the work you've done in moving forward with creating

for all Ontario the University of Ontario Institute of Technology in Durham. This is further evidence of your commitment to improving the lives of all Ontarians.

I understand that the winners of this year's Polanyi prizes have already been chosen. Can you tell the House -- this might be inappropriate to ask and to name

-- the researchers who are going to receive these awards and be recognized next month?

Hon Mrs Cunningham: It is an honour for me to do so. We are pleased to inform the House that the winners of the 2002 Polanyi prizes are Jeremy

Yethon, from McMaster University, in medicine; Thomas Crossley, again from McMaster University, in economic science; Alison Sills, again from McMaster University -- they're doing a great job;

they've got enough money to get all these people in the Nobel laureate category here; Alex Adronov, again from McMaster University, who won the award for chemistry; Juan-Luis Suarez, from the

University of Western Ontario, who won the award for literature for his study of baroque Spanish drama.

These young researchers who we're so proud of have been encouraged by our own challenge fund, which is $800 million, leveraging over $2 billion in our

universities; the Ontario Innovation Trust, over $1 billion; and finally, our Premier's Research Excellence Awards, $85 million over 10 years. It's never been better --

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Thank you, Minister.

FOREST INDUSTRY

Mr Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): My question is to the Minister of Natural Resources. Minister, you'll know that for the past number of

weeks I've been working to try to do something about the terrible job losses that are going to happen in Kirkland Lake as a result of the Tembec mill closure that's announced because of the

decision by your ministry.

You know that for that community, that particular mill going down is akin to a community like Timmins losing its major employer such as Falconbridge. I think

you'll agree with me, as all members of this House do, that to lose those 80 jobs is a piece of news that Kirkland Lake just can't afford.

You know we've set up a number of meetings. You'll be meeting with IWA representatives this afternoon. We'll be meeting again tomorrow with representatives

from the community of Kirkland Lake. They're coming forward with some proposals to look at how we can avert these massive layoffs we're going to see in the community of Kirkland Lake.

My question is a very simple one: are you prepared as minister to review the decision of the Ministry of Natural Resources and to take seriously the proposals

that the IWA reps and the community will bring forward to you today and tomorrow?

Hon Jerry J. Ouellette (Minister of Natural Resources): I know very well that the member has been very active on this file. As a result of

yesterday's question, we have received a number of inquiries regarding the fibre in that area. Quite frankly, as all members know, any job loss at this sort of level in communities such as Kirkland

Lake are very significant.

The ministry will look at the best interests of the workers, both in the forest and in the mill, the community, and the best interests of the forest itself,

and will review all proposals that we receive regarding that fibre.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Supplementary?

Mr Bisson: I just want to thank the minister.

The Speaker: Very good.

LAND DEVELOPMENT

Mr Mike Colle (Eglinton-Lawrence): A question to the Minister of Municipal Affairs. You promised the people of Ontario that you would not

allow the building of homes on the most sensitive areas of the moraine. As you know, this summer you passed a secret ministerial order that gave the unfettered right to developers to build over

8,000 homes in the middle of the moraine. Not only did you compensate them with the 8,000 homes, now you're going to compensate them with more land in Seaton that could be worth maybe $500 million

to these developers.

Mr Minister, will you table before this House the terms of this development deal that you made with these developers to give them the right for 8,000 homes and

to give them public land in Seaton? Would you table that deal with this Legislature?

Hon Chris Hodgson (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): To the member opposite, he's got a good reputation, but quite clearly he's

totally confused on this issue. If you're not aware of what you voted for, what the Crombie accord entailed, I can try to arrange a meeting with David Crombie and yourself so you can get educated

on the information if you so wish.

Mr Colle: It's about a deal you made secretly to give developers, for the first time in the history of this province, the unfettered right to

build in the middle of the moraine 8,000 homes. You signed a deal also to give them even more land, which is public, in Seaton.

We representing the public have the right to know what you gave up and how much you paid for it. We told you to make this public when we discussed this

legislation. You instead have made a secret deal. Why not put the deal on the table and let us see if the taxpayer got value for money? Let's see how much per acre you gave them, what it's worth to

them. Put it on the table, or even give it to the Provincial Auditor.

Why are you afraid to make the deal public? Is it a bad deal? Is it a good deal? Make it public. That's all I ask.

Hon Mr Hodgson: Let's be clear here. This Legislature passed it, and you moved second and third reading. This creates the largest urban park

on the Oak Ridges moraine, right in the prime corridor of Richmond Hill. We couldn't find an on-site solution. In that accord that Crombie negotiated was an exchange of lands.

Your numbers are wrong. I've offered to get you educated by Crombie, who set up the accord. I know you walked all across the moraine. You supported the

extension of the Keele Valley landfill site, which is located right on the moraine. You probably supported the selling of the jailhouse property for extra dollars so it could be developed on the

Oak Ridges moraine. And now you question the whole thing you voted for in here.

The deal is transparent. Crombie's out holding public hearings. You've attended one; you know that. You're just playing cheap politics. I'm offering you an

opportunity to sit down with David Crombie and get the facts so you can stop misleading the people of Ontario.

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I'd like to clarify the record. I said

earlier in response to a question from the member for Parkdale-High Park that enrolment in the public education system went up by 0.8% this year. I am informed by the Minister of Education that the

projected enrolment will only be 0.4% this year.

Hon Mr Hodgson: On a point of personal privilege, Mr Speaker: I'll withdraw that inappropriate comment about misleading the people of Ontario,

but I still hold that I will offer a briefing with David Crombie for the member.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): I thank the member for that. I didn't hear it, but I thank him for his generous --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Come to order, please. Petitions.

PETITIONS

NATURAL GAS RATES

Mr Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North): Our public is still very angry about the Ontario Energy Board approval for Union Gas of a

$120 retroactive charge. The petitions keep coming in. I'd like to read some more:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Ontario Energy Board has consented to allow Union Gas to retroactively charge $40 per month for a three-month period to recover additional system

operation costs that occurred during the winter of 2000-01, totalling approximately $150 million;

"Whereas Union Gas will recover accrued costs over the peak heating season, causing undue hardship;

"Whereas this retroactive charge will affect all customers who receive Union Gas, including new homeowners and new customers to Union Gas;

"Therefore, we demand that the Ernie Eves government issue a policy directive under

section 27.1 of the Ontario Energy Board Act disallowing the retroactive

rate hike granted to Union Gas; and we further demand that the Legislature examine the Ontario Energy Board, its processes and its resources, and make changes that will protect consumers from

further retroactive rate increases."

Hundreds have come in. This is from Myles Penny in Thunder Bay. I am very grateful and I will add my name to this petition.

CUSTODIAL CARE

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

"The regional council of Niagara have presented to the social services minister the following recommended changes to the legislation:

"

(1) That the province of Ontario amend the Child and Family Services Act to recognize custodial care by extended family members as a legitimate intervention

and that the related funding to support these care arrangements be made available;

"

(2) That the temporary care allowance rate pursuant to the Ontario Works Act be altered to reflect established rates for similar care by foster parents;

"

(3) That the regional municipality of Niagara along with the Niagara Family and Children's Services train their respective staff on the program options

available to extended family members wishing to care for children;

"

(4) That the region of Niagara along with Family and Children's Services advocate for the recommended changes with the Ministry of Community and Social

Services as well as relevant associations, such as the Ontario Association of Children's Aid Societies;

"

(5) That other consolidated municipal services managers be informed of this issue through circulation of this committee report;

"

(6) That the province of Ontario be encouraged to consider a legislative change to permit open adoptions;

"

(7) That the regional chair correspond with the Minister of Community and Social Services to advise the minister of these recommendations;

"We, the undersigned support these recommended changes to the legislation."

I have affixed my signature as well in full support.

PHYSIOTHERAPY SERVICES

Mr Richard Patten (Ottawa Centre): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly:

basis that does not impede or preclude reasonable access to those services; and

"Whereas such hospital services include out-patient services where medically necessary to maintain health, prevent disease or diagnose or treat an illness or

disability, including physiotherapy facilities; and

"Whereas the province of Ontario has recently funnelled $60 million in federal health care funds to private health care providers, but has not reinvested the

$17 million taken from G-code clinic budgets and supposedly allocated for essential hospital based and publicly accessible physiotherapy services; and....

"Whereas this has resulted in the closing of out-patient physiotherapy clinics, which leaves the few remaining facilities with such unmanageable waiting lists

that reasonable access no longer exists; and

"Whereas the only alternative for many individuals is to pay directly for treatment in privately-owned physiotherapy clinics; and

"Whereas for many Ontario citizens, this is not an affordable option;

"We, the undersigned citizens of Ottawa, where the average waiting list time for physiotherapy at ... hospital-based outpatient clinics is 6.8 months for all

but the most urgent cases," want the Legislature and the government to "correct this situation by designating adequate funding for hospital-based and community health centre outpatient

physiotherapy services so that waiting lists never exceed a reasonable period of four weeks."

I have the names of hundreds of citizens from Ottawa on this petition. I sign my signature as well.

CHILD CARE

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I have a petition that has been sent to me by Little Ark Day Care in Oshawa. It reads as follows:

"Whereas 70% of Ontario women with children under age 12 are in the paid workforce;

"Whereas high-quality, safe, affordable child care is critical to them and their families;

"Whereas the Early Years Study done for the Conservative government by Dr Fraser Mustard and the Honourable Margaret McCain concluded quality child care

enhances early childhood development;

"Whereas this government has cut funding for regulated child care instead of supporting Ontario families by investing in early learning and care;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that the Ontario government adopt the NDP's $10-a-day child care plan and begin implementation by reducing full child care fees to

$10 a day for children aged two to five currently enrolled in regulated child care by providing capital funds to expand existing child care centres and build new ones, by funding pay equity for

staff, and by creating new $10-a-day child care spaces in the province."

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

CENTRES D'ACCÈS

AUX SOINS COMMUNAUTAIRES

M. Jean-Marc Lalonde (Glengarry-Prescott-Russell): « Pétition à l'Assemblée législative de l'Ontario :

« Attendu que dans la Révolution du bon sens de 1995, Mike Harris a promis d'instituer des pratiques budgétaires axées sur les

patients dans le secteur des soins de santé;

« Attendu que les centres d'accès aux soins communautaires doivent maintenant collectivement faire face à un manque à gagner de 175

millions de dollars en raison d'un gel de leur financement par le gouvernement provincial;

« Attendu qu'en raison de ce manque à gagner dans leur financement, les CASC ont dû réduire les services de soins à domicile, ce

qui a des répercussions sur bon nombre d'Ontariens et d'Ontariennes malades et âgés; et

« Attendu que ces réductions dans les services ont principalement été effectuées dans les services d'auxiliaires familiales, ce

qui oblige les Ontariens et Ontariennes à recourir à des établissements de soins de longue durée plus coûteux ou à retourner à l'hôpital,

« Nous, soussignés, demandons à l'Assemblée législative de l'Ontario d'instituer immédiatement des pratiques

budgétaires réellement axées sur les patients dans le domaine des soins de santé, et cela inclut les soins à domicile, de telle sorte que les familles de travailleurs et

travailleuses en Ontario puissent avoir accès aux services de soins de santé dont ils ont besoin. »

OPTOMETRISTS

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

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

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

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

problems; and

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

exclusive domain for prescribing TPAs to optometry patients; and

"Whereas the bill introduced by New Democrat Peter Kormos (MPP, Niagara Centre) will ensure that patients receive prompt, timely, one-stop care where

appropriate;

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

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

I've affixed my signature as well.

AUDIOLOGY SERVICES

Mr Ted McMeekin (Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Aldershot): Although we've asked for petitions to stop coming in on this issue, they continue to

come. This is a petition on audiology.

"Listen: Our Hearing is Important!

"Whereas services delisted by this government now exceed $100 million in total;

"Whereas Ontarians depend on audiologists for the provision of qualified hearing assessments and hearing aid prescriptions;

"Whereas new government policy will virtually eliminate access to publicly funded audiology assessments across vast regions of Ontario;

"Whereas this new government policy is virtually impossible to implement in underserviced areas across Ontario;

"Whereas this policy has lengthened waiting lists for patients and therefore had a detrimental effect on the health of these Ontarians;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, petition the Ontario Legislature to demand this government move immediately to permanently fund

audiologists directly for the provision of audiology services."

I, of course, once again affix my signature to this.

CHILD CARE

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): I have a petition provided to me by A Child's World on Elm Street in Port Colborne. It's a petition to the

Ontario Legislature.

"Whereas 70% of Ontario women with children under age 12 are in the paid workforce;

"Whereas high-quality, safe, affordable child care is critical to them and their families;

"Whereas the Early Years Study done for the Conservative government by Dr Fraser Mustard and the Honourable Margaret McCain concluded quality child care

enhances early childhood development; and

"Whereas this government has cut funding for regulated child care instead of supporting Ontario families by investing in early learning and care;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that the Ontario government adopt the NDP's $10-a-day child care plan and begin implementation by reducing full child care fees to

$10 a day for children aged two to five currently enrolled in regulated child care by providing capital funds to expand existing child care centres and build new ones, by funding pay equity for

staff and by creating new $10-a-day child care spaces in the province."

I'm affixing my signature and giving this to the page, Hin-Hey, from Markham.

LONG-TERM CARE

Mr Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North): A petition again containing comments related to the massive increase to residents of

long-term-care facilities.

"Whereas the Eves government has increased the fees paid for by seniors and the most vulnerable living in long-term-care facilities by 15% or $7.02 per diem

effective August 1, 2002; and

"Whereas this fee increase will cost seniors and our most vulnerable more than $200 a month; and

"Whereas this increase is 11.1% above the rent increase guidelines for tenants in the province of Ontario; and

"Whereas the increase in the government's own contribution to raise the level of long-term-care services this year is less than $2 per resident per day;

and

"Whereas according to the government's own funded study, Ontario ranks last amongst comparable jurisdictions in the amount of time provided to a resident for

nursing and personal care; and

"Whereas the long-term-care funding partnership has been based on government accepting the responsibility to fund the care and services that residents need;

and

"Whereas government needs to increase long-term-care operating funding by $750 million over the next three years to raise the level of service for Ontario's

long-term-care residents to those in Saskatchewan in 1999; and

"Whereas this province has been built by seniors who should be able to live out their lives with dignity, respect and in comfort in this province;

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

"We demand that Premier Eves reduce the 15% fee increase on seniors and the most vulnerable living in long-term-care facilities and increase provincial

government support for nursing, support services, programming and personal care to adequate levels."

I'm very grateful again that these are coming in and I'm very happy to add my name to the petition.

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

Mr David Caplan (Don Valley East): I have quite an old petition that's recently come in. It's entitled Fair Rent Increases Now.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the number of tenants receiving above-guideline rent increases is growing exponentially, and;

"Whereas many of these increases are for increases in utility costs, many of which have gone down since; and

"Whereas tenants should not have to pay for improvements forever, even when the costs have been realized by these rent increases; and

"Whereas the Tenant Protection Act" -- so-called -- "does not give a tenant relief due to the costs being realized or a drop in utility costs; and

"Whereas tenants should not be receiving rent increases where there are work orders issued for the building;

"Therefore

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, petition the Ontario Legislature to immediately pass MPP David Caplan's Bill 134 entitled the Fair Rent

Increases Act at the earliest possible opportunity so that tenants can get relief from above-guideline increases once the bills have been paid."

I agree wholeheartedly with this petition and I have affixed my signature to it.

CHILDREN'S HEALTH SERVICES

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): This petition has come in to me from S. Carcedo of Ottawa. It reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Ontario government is shutting down the heart surgery unit at the Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario; and

"Whereas every year the Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario treats 140 cases of seriously ill children close to home; and

"Whereas centralization of children's heart surgery in Toronto would force patients and their families to travel 400 to 600 kilometres away from home at a

traumatic time; and

"Whereas there is a waiting list for cardiac surgery in Toronto but not at the Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario; and

"Whereas the people of eastern Ontario demand accessible, quality health care for their children;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to immediately override the government's decision to close this life-saving program and to

ensure that top-quality accessible health care remains available to every child in eastern Ontario."

I have affixed my signature to this.

LONG-TERM CARE

Ms Caroline Di Cocco (Sarnia-Lambton): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Eves government has increased the fees paid by seniors, the most vulnerable living in long-term-care homes, by 15% over three years, or $3.02 per

diem in the first year and $2 in the second year and $2 in the third year, effective September 1, 2002; and

"Whereas this increase will cost seniors and our most vulnerable more than $200 a month after three years; and

"Whereas this increase is above the rent increase guidelines for tenants in the province of Ontario for the year 2002; and

"Whereas, according to the government's own funded study, Ontario still ranks last among comparable jurisdictions in the amount of time provided to a resident

for nursing and personal care; and

"Whereas the long-term-care funding partnership has been based on government accepting the responsibility to fund the care and services that residents need;

and

"Whereas the government needs to increase long-term-care operating funds by $750 million over the next three years; and

"Whereas this province has been built by seniors;

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

"Demand that Premier Eves reduce the 15% increase over three years in accommodation costs to no more than the cost-of-living increase annually."

I affix my signature to this petition and the page is going to take my petition to the Clerk.

OPPOSITION DAY

KYOTO PROTOCOL

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): I move the following:

The Legislative Assembly endorses the ratification of the United Nations Kyoto Protocol in Canada.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Mr Bradley has moved opposition day number 2. The member for St Catharines.

Mr Bradley: As I said earlier today in a statement in the House, I think this is a somewhat historic day for Ontario because this assembly

will have an opportunity today to vote on the endorsement of the Kyoto accord, which was signed by some 83 countries in 1997 under the auspices of the United Nations.

The reason I say it is a historic occasion is that as I look down the history of the province, Ontario, its Premier, its cabinet and its Legislative Assembly

have traditionally taken the lead in a positive sense on environmental issues. Whether this was the old government of Premier Robarts or Premier Davis or the Liberal government of Premier Peterson

or the NDP government of Premier Rae, it was always expected at federal-provincial conferences that Ontario would take the lead to ensure that progressive measures were passed across the country.

Our role at the federal-provincial conference was to cajole, encourage, persuade and, yes, sometimes even pressure other provinces to work with the federal government to bring about positive

environmental change.

One example I think of as a classic was the federal Conservative government under Brian Mulroney, which was trying to bring about an accord with the United

States on acid rain and in doing so to enlist support across this country for measures which would significantly reduce acid rain, and that would be through reducing sulphur dioxide. Ontario, under

the Peterson government of the day, was part of that accord. Ontario worked hard with the federal government, minister to minister, Premier to Prime Minister, officials to officials, to ensure that

we would have an agreement that first of all would protect Canada, a pretty radical, pretty drastic, pretty comprehensive agreement to significantly reduce acid rain. At the same time we would be

dealing with our American friends with what we call clean hands, that is, with a record and with plans and programs and proposals which were designed to persuade our American friends to follow

suit.

That is what I would like to see happen with the Kyoto accord. That is what I am worried about when I see the Premier today meeting -- and I don't deny him the

opportunity to meet with Premier Ralph Klein, but Premier Klein was speaking to the Empire Club today and, as always, was in effect defending the economic and financial interests of the oil

industry and the gas industry and the coal industry in Alberta. Now, you may say that's the Premier's job. I disagree with Ralph Klein on environmental issues, I disagree with him on the issue of

the Kyoto Protocol, but I do understand what his position has been over the years in terms of defending the oil patch, the oil industry. He has received tremendous support from them financially and

otherwise over the years. He recognized it as a significant economic engine in his own province.

What I would be concerned about is Ontario in this case lining up with Alberta to block a national initiative which I believe can have a profound positive

effect on the health and the environment and, yes, even the new economy of Canada, of Ontario and its various provinces, and ultimately of course a positive effect on the world in terms of global

warming and climate change issues. A side-effect, nevertheless a significant effect, in some of these measures -- not all of them, but some -- is to bring about clean air in Ontario, or at least

cleaner air in Ontario.

Premier Klein today trotted out all of the tired old arguments of the group that was here the other day down in the Legislative Assembly dining room trying to

cajole and persuade members of the lack of desirability in dealing in a positive way with the Kyoto accord. The same arguments were put out there.

I was looking instead for arguments that might be found in our own Ministry of the Environment, in the 411 pages that the Minister of the Environment has yet

to release to the opposition, to the news media and to the public of Ontario which deal specifically with the Kyoto Protocol. You will recall that I requested that through a formal request, through

what we call the freedom-of-information procedure almost seven months ago. The ministry admitted it has the 411 pages; it has still not released those to the public of Ontario. I think that would

have been useful material to have for this debate and for the public debate that is going on concerning the Kyoto accord.

There was an outstanding book, among many books that were published, called 2030: Confronting Thermageddon in Our Lifetime, by Robert Hunter, a well-known

environmentalist. Countless scientists across the world have spoken out passionately about the issue of global warming and climate change. You go right across country after country and you will see

that they have.

Now, there have been three or four who have not, the ones who are in the pockets of the oil industry or the industries who are there to hire them to say why we

shouldn't take environmental action. There are a few of those. But by and large in the world -- and I ask the minister not to dismiss these people. Frankly, I am myself surprised at the consensus

developed, because it's difficult to develop that kind of consensus. But there are many, many scientists, dozens upon dozens of scientists, who have expressed grave concern about the problem and

have called upon all of us across the world to take action.

Canada and Ontario can show leadership in this regard or we can simply follow the likes of Ralph Klein and the industries who are opposed to this, the

so-called coalition for what they would call responsible environmental change.

We have a danger of the melting of the ice cap. That is not some theory. That is something that can definitely happen and would have dire consequences for all

the low-lying areas in Canada and elsewhere in the world. We can have massive flooding. We can have disruption of our oceans. We can have disruption of our climate to such an extent that we have

prolonged droughts in some areas, and perhaps far more precipitation than they ever anticipated in others. In other words, it could be turned around completely. By the year 2030, most scientists

will say that that kind of climate change will be virtually irreversible, that almost no matter what action the world were to take, it would be difficult to reverse that.

That's why I think it's important for Ontario to assume this mantle of leadership today. If you had said to me -- and you will say I'm being political and I'll

tell you I'm not, and you can make your own judgment. If Premier Harris had been Premier today, despite what I've heard him say in a positive sense about it, I would have anticipated this

resolution would be defeated, that the government would take a hard line against the Kyoto accord. I would have thought, with the elevation of Ernie Eves to that office, that we would see a

different approach to it, that Mr Eves, unlike Mr Harris -- and I respect both individuals, but I disagree with them on some occasions and agree on other occasions. I would have thought Mr Eves

would have taken a different approach, what I call the Robarts-type approach or the Davis-type approach, where they are the nation-builders, the people who take the positive national leadership.

Instead of simply looking for a fight with whatever federal government is there, or defending the interests of those who have mocked people in the environmental movement, I would have thought they

would have shown this kind of leadership.

So Ontario has that opportunity to put forward its program. It's already trying to make a beginning at that. The select committee on alternative fuels came

forward with a wonderful report which could provide an outstanding basis for many of the measures that would be needed to implement the Kyoto accord. The Ontario Liberal Party has put forward a

number of proposals which we believe would be of great benefit in achieving not only cleaner air in Ontario, which is a goal that we have -- eliminating smog -- but which also would have the effect

of dealing with the issue of climate change and global warming.

I am on the side of the Ontario Medical Association, the Canadian Medical Association and the Society of Alberta Medical Officers of Health, who are calling

upon all governments to work together to either reach or exceed the goals that are set out in the Kyoto accord. It was most unfortunate that Dr David Swann, who was a medical officer of health for

the Palliser Health Authority, was fired in a message which was delivered by the local Progressive Conservative riding association president, Len Mitzel, who is the president of the association

where the environment minister of Alberta, Mr Taylor, is the member. That sends out a chill in our world. It sends out a chill, certainly, in the province of Alberta, when you find that people are

being fired because they're expressing genuine concerns and support for something they consider to be very important.

I hope this afternoon that members of this Legislature will in fact support this resolution, and unanimously, and we can go forward in a positive,

constructive, encouraging sense from this assembly to others across the country, to bring them along, to work with the federal government, to work out the details, yes; but for Ontario once again

to assume its mantle of leadership in the environmental field rather than following behind the blocking pattern of Premier Klein and members of his Conservative government in Alberta and others who

are negative about what I consider to be very positive environmental improvement that will improve public health, the public environment and the new economy in our province.

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): It's a pleasure for me to participate in the debates this afternoon. I should say at the outset that the bulk

of our time will be taken up by comments that will be made by our environment critic, Ms Churley. It will be an important contribution, so I'm going to make sure that I leave her lots of time.

I am health critic for this party and I just wanted to get on the record from our perspective, from a health point of view, if nothing else. Marilyn will speak

to the environmental point of view and jobs point of view. Of course, all of these are connected. We really need to be doing something very serious.

We would do whatever we could at this point to urge this government to ratify the Kyoto accord -- no more delay, no more excuses. Let us take a leadership

role, frankly, a leadership role that I hope the federal government will demonstrate soon and stop the delay as well, so that we can ensure that we are starting to do something significant,

something serious, something concrete with respect to greenhouse gases, with respect to smog and with respect to the impact that those are having on the health not only of Ontarians but of people

right across this country.

If you look at polling that has been done even most recently, it's very clear that people want this deal to be ratified. The polling numbers coming out of

Ipsos-Reid September 7, 2001, put the support for Ontario for ratification at about 81%. That's even higher than the Canadian average, which is at about 74%.

If you look at Decima's polling, that poll showed that 76.7% of Ontarians said we should endorse Kyoto, and that was just a little bit higher than the Canadian

average at 76.3%; 9% said no; 2% said "it depends," and 11% don't know. That question, as posed to people who were being surveyed, was, "Do you think Canada should endorse Kyoto at

Johannesburg?"

I think that clearly people are aware of the issue. People are aware of the implications of not proceeding. People not only in this province but right across

the country have said, "It's time now to show a leadership role and take a positive step with respect to doing something about this very serious issue."

From the point of view of health, the Ontario Medical Association has been very clear with respect to its estimates, its work done on smog. The OMA itself has

estimates that they use frequently and consistently, and those are that about 1,900 Ontarians die prematurely from smog. They also state, and they do this very consistently and very regularly, that

about 9,800 people are admitted to Ontario hospitals and 13,000 people make emergency room visits because of the effects of air pollution in Ontario. They began using that statistic in 2000 and

have consistently used it from that point till now.

Anyone who has to live through some of the summers in Toronto that people in this city have had to live through will know that we have a serious environmental

problem. We have a serious air quality problem, and that is driving a very serious health problem, which frankly in the short term is ridiculous and in the long term is just going to increase the

costs to the health care system about something that we can do something concrete about.

If you look at our population aging and our population increasing -- because both of those things are happening -- the OMA also estimates that the number of

people who will be affected by air pollution is also going to increase. For example, the number of people dying from air pollution is expected to rise to about 2,600 people in the year 2015.

The OMA again estimates that air pollution itself costs Ontario more than $1 billion a year, and that stems from the cost of hospital admissions, the cost of

emergency room visits and the cost to the economy of absenteeism from those people who are so dramatically affected and who then have to access health care in order to deal with that very negative

effect.

The OMA has also said that when pain and suffering and loss of life from polluted air are added into these costs -- and those are effects that it's very hard

to put a definite financial figure on -- the total annual economic loss from polluted air was estimated at $10 billion a year. It will increase to $12 billion in the year 2015.

Again, this goes back to figures that the OMA first released in 2000 and have consistently been using to make the case since then. That is an enormous cost. It

is an enormous cost in terms of human suffering of those who are affected, of those who can't breathe in this city and many others on many hot days, not only during the summer but this year it was

well into the beginning of May when we started to have the first smog alerts in this city and in many others. When you think about the human suffering, it's enormous. People are literally choking

to death trying to walk to work, trying to get to the subway, trying to get to any number of appointments they're supposed to be at. The magnitude of the people who are affected in that way is

really overwhelming. It should not only cause us a great deal of concern; it should be a motivator to action.

I'm particularly worried about the impact on kids. The numbers of children, for example, who are contracting asthma are growing by leaps and bounds. I'm sure

that having to deal with second-hand smoke in some of their homes might be a cause of part of that. But I do not think that we can underestimate that particular epidemic among children and not

understand that what we do or don't do with respect to smog is having a really serious impact on kids as well. Those problems are only going to increase, given that we are seeing that epidemic in

the child population now.

If you look at the cost in terms of absenteeism, there's a huge cost, over $1 billion alone associated with absenteeism, hospital admissions and emergency room

visits. This is a cost that we should be doing something about, that we can be doing something about. It's a cost that we could avoid if we started to get really serious, first as a province and

second as a nation, about dealing with greenhouse gases and their effects, and then the impact on smog over and above that. Frankly, I think we could spend that $1 billion we are now spending on

all those Ontarians who have to seek help because they can't breathe on something a whole heck of a lot better.

What's important to note is that not only are we spending those costs on hospital admissions and visits to emergency rooms and absenteeism, people are dying.

They are dying prematurely from smog, and 1,900 of them are dying every year in this province. If that isn't a reason to be motivated to action, I don't know what else is. These aren't people who

contract a terminal disease that we don't have a cure for, such as many types of cancer. These aren't people who are killed in automobile accidents, boating accidents, skiing accidents or anything

else. These are people who are dramatically affected by the state of our air quality and who die as a result. That's something we can do something about and that's something we should be doing

something about.

I endorse what the member for St Catharines has said today in terms of bringing forward a resolution that says that this assembly should endorse the

ratification of the Kyoto Protocol in this country. My concern, however, is the dilly-dallying, the delay, the excuses that I'm seeing not only in this chamber from this government but at the

federal level too. It is high time that Prime Minister Jean Chrétien showed some real leadership, stopped the delay, and brought this accord forward for a vote and got on with the important

business of implementation. We cannot afford to delay any more.

When I look at what Ralph Klein is doing, and I see that the Conservatives have dragged Peter Lougheed out of retirement, or wherever he has been dragged from,

to mouth the industry line in Alberta, I've just got to shake my head. I was even more frustrated a number of weeks ago to hear the Alliance leader actually question the legitimacy of the link

between greenhouse gases and medical problems. I couldn't understand where he was coming from except to say that he too must be so deep into the pockets of the oil and the gas industry in Alberta

that he would ignore every bit of environmental, medical and scientific piece of evidence to show all of these links, and try to suggest, as he did -- I'm not sure if it was in the House of Commons

or outside -- that he really didn't think there was a link between all these things, between greenhouses gases and medical effects, between what the industry is pumping into the air and the

negative effects on the environment.

We've got to get beyond those people who are deep, deep, into the pockets of the oil and gas industry. We have to get beyond what they're saying, which is

effectively to trash this deal and to find a Canadian solution which will be voluntary. I can tell you that if it's going to be voluntary, it's not going to happen; it's not going to get done. The

industry will look for every excuse, legitimate or not, to not do the right thing. This is a group of folks that have a lot of money, that have very deep pockets financially, that can put a lot of

ads into the media, on television, on radio, and do a lot of work to convince people of the reasons why we shouldn't.

Thankfully, I think most Canadians still agree, this is a protocol we should be signing. If you look at the most recent figures from October 7, at least those

in Ontario are overwhelmingly in support. I hope it stays that way. I think the provincial and federal governments should look at those polls and move now on the ratification.

As I said when I started, there are environmental issues, they will be dealt with by my colleague for Toronto-Danforth, but as the health critic, I just

clearly believe that we cannot afford to delay any more -- not for the cost on our health care system, not for the cost on our economic system because of absenteeism, and not, especially, for the

cost on the families who are losing loved ones prematurely because of smog, which is directly related back to this whole issue.

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of the Environment, Government House Leader): I appreciate the opportunity to speak today to the members

assembled with respect to the Kyoto Protocol. The opposition position on this issue is to endorse, sign, ratify the agreement immediately.

There are some fatal flaws in the rationale that they're using to actually move forward to sign the accord. I guess the first question you have to ask

yourself, I say to the member opposite for St Catharines who spoke, and the other for I think it's Nickel Belt -- Sudbury, anyway -- what are you signing? What exactly are you signing?

Ms Caroline Di Cocco (Sarnia-Lambton): Targets.

Hon Mr Stockwell: The member for Sarnia says "targets." OK. What are those targets?

Ms Di Cocco: Sixty per cent to 70%.

Hon Mr Stockwell: And how are you going to get there?

Mr Raminder Gill (Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale): Nobody knows.

Hon Mr Stockwell: Nobody knows. What we have is a situation where we have two opposition parties asking to sign a protocol that they have no

knowledge of how they're going to achieve the end.

Let me ask this -- and these are questions that I put out to the public at large, the opposition members too: what are the credits that we get with respect to

the Kyoto Protocol? What are the credits that the world has given us in reducing greenhouse gas emissions? The answer is, we don't know. Why don't we know? Because the federal government is still

trying to negotiate those credits. So you're going to sign a protocol that you don't know what credits you have. By not knowing the credits, you know what else you don't know? You've no knowledge,

no idea whatsoever, of the megaton reduction that you are being asked to make, between 1990 and on, at 6%, and what that megaton reduction is.

The opposition parties say, "Let's sign this accord; let's sign this protocol," but they have no idea what they're signing, they have no idea what they're

agreeing to, they have no economic plan at the cost of signing, and they have no idea how they're going to achieve these goals.

Let's get something straight off the top: the Kyoto Protocol, from a Canadian perspective, hasn't got any flesh on the bones. Nothing. You'll be signing a pig

in a poke. You'll be signing something that really doesn't exist. You say, "That's your opinion." Look, why is the federal government not moving on this? The federal government isn't releasing

their plan, not telling us the credits and not letting us know what the megaton reduction is because they don't know. They're now going to the European communities, those that have signed the

accord, asking for credits for planting trees in other countries. That's what they're asking. They want credits for planting trees in other countries. They're asking for credits for clean energy

exports. So if you export nuclear or hydro power to the United States, they're asking the other countries that signed on, signatories to the accord, to give them a credit for that. So far, nobody

is giving them any of those credits. Nobody has agreed to give them those credits. So what is the number we're being asked to reduce? We haven't got the whole number.

It goes even further. What is further about it? We don't have the numbers of reduction targets for provincial governments. We're not told what our megaton

reduction, by province, is.

Mr Richard Patten (Ottawa Centre): Your ministry has it.

Hon Mr Stockwell: No. Nobody has told us how we meet the Kyoto Protocol, because that protocol says, "If you sign it and you don't meet those

targets, you're faced with very heavy and stiff penalties and fines."

So we have clearly established one thing that the federal government agrees with: we don't have the information, the plan, the credits for the megaton

reductions that we have to meet.

Now let's look at it from the other side. They ask us to sign this Kyoto Protocol today. What is the economic loss of this Kyoto Protocol? Is there an economic

impact? Maybe that's a fairer question: is there an economic impact? Well, if you don't know the credits and you don't know the megaton reductions you're asked to approve, how can you possibly know

whether or not there's an economic impact? You can't. Why can't we know that? Because you don't know what you're being asked to do.

The federal government has been promising for about a year or two to provide us with this information. It isn't just Ontario that's saying, "We need this

information before we can commit to Kyoto"; it's Alberta, it's British Columbia, it's Ontario, it's Saskatchewan, it's Nova Scotia, and now it's Quebec. They're also saying the same thing.

Ms Di Cocco: They have no leadership.

Hon Mr Stockwell: And I hear the heckle from the deep thinker from Sarnia saying, "Well, they have no leadership." Apparently there's a void

in leadership in every single province in this country. The only true leaders, their thinking is, the only two people who would sign this, would be Howie and Dalton, but everybody else is crazy;

they've got no leadership in any other province or any other party. The reason is the economic impact.

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): Don't forget Gary Doer in Manitoba.

Hon Mr Stockwell: Gary Doer, the NDP leader in Manitoba, who has no -- minimal, minimal -- commitment to the Kyoto Protocol, who's hardly

impacted at all, signed on. That's the only guy. And his impact is practically negligible. He's the only one who's signed on. Those provinces that are affected, the manufacturing associations say

-- potentially up to 450,000 jobs, 3% to 4% drag in your GDP, billions and billions of economic dollars, prosperity and investment. Those are the kinds of numbers we're hearing. They would like to

know what the deal is.

Mr Patten: How do they know that?

Hon Mr Stockwell: I'll tell you how they know. They know it. If you sit still, I'll tell you. Here's how they know: because, according to the

agreement signed, there's a whole number at the top of the list that we have to reduce by right across Canada. They're taking that whole number. They're presuming no credits, and they're applying

that number to all of Canada. Have they applied that number to individual provinces? No. They're saying the Canadian economy would suffer 450,000 lost jobs, a 3.7% GDP drag, and billions of dollars

of lost investment.

Mr Dwight Duncan (Windsor-St Clair): So they're assuming.

Hon Mr Stockwell: No, the only thing you can't assume about this is the total number. But those numbers --

Mr Garry J. Guzzo (Ottawa West-Nepean): They should have read it.

Hon Mr Stockwell: You should have read it, actually.

Those numbers aren't assigned yet. No province knows what their share of that whole number is, and they don't know the sectors it's going to impact.

We know one thing: the energy sector is impacted. Why is Alberta opposed? Because they've got a huge energy sector. Do you know who else is impacted?

Manufacturing. Who's got the manufacturing sector? Ontario. Ontario's got the manufacturing sector.

Interjection: Right, not Manitoba.

Hon Mr Stockwell: Not Manitoba, exactly; not PEI -- Ontario.

Who's got the resource sector? British Columbia. Why do you think they're -- because they're the ones who are going to have to make the commitment for jobs,

lost investment, lost prosperity.

Let's get something on the record. We are all in favour of greenhouse gas emission reductions. We're all in favour.

Interjection.

Hon Mr Stockwell: We've done lots about it. We have done lots about it, I say to my friend from Sarnia, the deep thinker from Sarnia. I will

say to her, there have been a number of initiatives this government has taken to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Consider Drive Clean. Vehicles account for 29% of all greenhouse gases. This is the

government that instituted Drive Clean to reduce that.

Hon David Young (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs): They were against it.

Hon Mr Stockwell: I don't know if they voted against it, but there were certain people out there who were against it.

The electricity market, by openin