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

March 8, 2011

39th Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2011-Mar-08 (PDF)

L091 - Tue 8 Mar 2011 / Mar 8 mar 2011

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Tuesday 8 March 2011 Mardi 8 mars 2011

ORDERS OF THE DAY

STRONG COMMUNITIES THROUGH

AFFORDABLE HOUSING ACT, 2011 /

LOI DE 2011 FAVORISANT

DES COLLECTIVITÉS FORTES

GRÂCE AU LOGEMENT ABORDABLE

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

STATUTE LAW

AMENDMENT ACT, 2011 /

LOI DE 2011 MODIFIANT DES LOIS

EN CE QUI CONCERNE LA SANTÉ

ET LA SÉCURITÉ AU TRAVAIL

INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS

ORAL QUESTIONS

HYDRO RATES

HYDRO RATES

PAY EQUITY

WOMEN’S ISSUES

ENERGY POLICIES

VICTIMS’ SERVICES

AIR QUALITY

CURRICULUM

UNION CERTIFICATION

LIQUOR CONTROL

TENDERING PROCESS

MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES

FARM SAFETY

LANDLORD AND TENANT DISPUTES

PAY EQUITY

FESTIVALS AND EVENTS

DEFERRED VOTES

TORONTO TRANSIT COMMISSION LABOUR DISPUTES RESOLUTION ACT, 2011 /

LOI DE 2011 SUR LE RÈGLEMENT

DES CONFLITS DE TRAVAIL

À LA COMMISSION DE TRANSPORT

DE TORONTO

STRONG COMMUNITIES THROUGH

AFFORDABLE HOUSING ACT, 2011 /

LOI DE 2011 FAVORISANT

DES COLLECTIVITÉS FORTES

GRÂCE AU LOGEMENT ABORDABLE

INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS

MEMBERS’ STATEMENTS

HOWARD NOBLE

BRANT SPORTS COMPLEX

DUCKS UNLIMITED CANADA

IMMIGRANT SERVICES

FOOD BANKS

CANCER TREATMENT

CATHOLIC WOMEN’S LEAGUE

ONTARIO FOOD INDUSTRY

MARIA LUIGINA GRIMALDI

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

1314596 ONTARIO INC. ACT, 2011

INTERNATIONAL WOMEN’S DAY /

JOURNÉE INTERNATIONALE

DE LA FEMME

PETITIONS

ONTARIO PHARMACISTS

OAK RIDGES MORAINE

PARAMEDICS

ASSISTANCE TO FARMERS

REPLACEMENT WORKERS

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

RURAL SCHOOLS

TRAVAILLEURS SUPPLÉANTS

ASSISTANCE TO FARMERS

ELMVALE DISTRICT HIGH SCHOOL

HIGHWAY 15

MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS TREATMENT

MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS TREATMENT

ORDERS OF THE DAY

ONTARIO FOREST TENURE MODERNIZATION ACT, 2011 /

LOI DE 2011 SUR LA MODERNISATION

DU RÉGIME DE TENURE FORESTIÈRE

EN ONTARIO

The House met at 0900.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Good morning. Please remain standing for the Lord’s Prayer, followed by the non-denominational prayer.

Prayers.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

STRONG COMMUNITIES THROUGH

AFFORDABLE HOUSING ACT, 2011 /

LOI DE 2011 FAVORISANT

DES COLLECTIVITÉS FORTES

GRÂCE AU LOGEMENT ABORDABLE

Resuming the debate adjourned on March 3, 2011, on the motion for second reading of Bill 140,

An Act to enact the Housing Services Act, 2011, repeal the Social Housing Reform Act, 2000 and make complementary and other amendments to other Acts / Projet de loi 140, Loi édictant la Loi de 2011 sur les services de logement, abrogeant la Loi de 2000 sur la réforme du logement social et apportant des modifications corrélatives et autres à d’autres lois.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Questions and comments?

Mr. Mike Colle: I’ll just get my tie on, Mr. Speaker.

Just about the long-term affordable housing strategy, one of the things that most of us understand has become very apparent in recent years is that when we talk about housing, and especially the affordable housing strategy, it’s not just the buildings and it’s not just the mechanical, the heating, the air conditioning and, in some cases, the maintenance and repairs that are critically important. Many of our affordable housing units and buildings that are in our ridings—there have to be supportive services in there. That’s what we forget.

People, more and more from all walks of life—rich, poor, young and old—need support. In many cases, it’s people who suffer from perhaps learning disabilities or people who suffer from mental illness. In many cases, these are people who have these hidden disabilities, that is, people who cannot cope on their own. We can build the houses but, along with the housing, what is required are the supports in place to ensure that people are eating properly, that they’re not dealing with all kinds of incredible stress in their lives—medical issues.

Mr. Jeff Leal: Bedbugs.

Mr. Mike Colle: In fact, I know the member from Peterborough mentioned the issue of bedbug infestation, which is a really debilitating issue that has affected a lot of people who, through no fault of their own, have had these issues.

This is part of the incredible investment that we make in housing and that people sometimes don’t understand. You can’t just have the buildings; you have to also have—

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Julia Munro): Thank you. Further comments and questions?

Mr. John O’Toole: I listened carefully some time ago to the member from Beaches–East York. Actually, that’ll be on the record.

But in my own view of this important social topic, I looked into some information from various advocacy groups. What I’ve come up with here is this: “Ontario’s Proposed Affordable Housing Plan Fails to Meet Five Basic Tests Set by Housing Network of Ontario.” The

article goes on to say, “The Ontario government released its much anticipated long-term affordable housing strategy today, but the document failed to provide a plan that meets all five basic tests as set out by the Housing Network of Ontario and its almost 500 supporters across the province.”

It goes on to say, “‘The Ontario government has proposed some new legislation and administrative procedures that are useful and important, but the essential items for a long-term affordable housing plan—targets, timeline and most of all funding over a multi-year period—are missing.’” So this is much ado about nothing.

This is what I find so disheartening: When you look at vulnerable people and housing and how important it is to re-establishing an individual and, indeed, a family in our society, there’s not one nickel in here. It’s very much like the retirement home thing. They’re going to regulate retirement homes. That’s their plan to replace long-term-care homes, but there’s not one nickel in it for people who need the support from the province of Ontario. I am so disappointed.

I don’t know what happened to Premier McGuinty, but somehow or other, he seems to have lost the heart and soul that he once had, and it’s in this very file here, where they promised years ago to have an affordable plan. Something happened here. He’s not paying attention or he doesn’t care—one of those things.

But all I can say is that Bill 140, by all reports, fails to meet five basic tests, as said by the Housing Network of Ontario—

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Julia Munro): Thank you. Further comments and questions? The member from Chatham–Kent–Essex.

Mr. Pat Hoy: Someday, I hope that will be Chatham–Kent–Leamington, but we’ll wait for that.

I’ll make a few comments here. Of course, the long-term affordable housing strategy that we’re discussing is the first of its kind in Ontario. I’ve heard many speakers mention that this is really all about people, and truly, it is. That’s what we’re talking about, people’s lives. What everyone aspires to in life is a home. There are other things that people do aspire to beyond that, but certainly, I’ve met people who come to me and say they want to have a home at some point in their lives. That’s what this is about.

If passed, this proposed legislation will give Ontarians access to a system that does put people first. It will also set a strong foundation for a more efficient, accessible system for those who need it. That’s what we’re looking for and need: efficiency in this matter.

This bill is built upon the more than $2.5 billion that our government has invested in non-profit housing since 2003—so this is just a continuation of the work that our government is doing and has done—and the more than $430 million we provide in housing and homelessness supports annually. This is an ongoing part of our strategy.

I think it’s important for people to understand that, if passed, this will give municipalities the flexibility that they have requested so that they can better allocate resources to meet local needs. That’s very important, because we all understand that the needs of the GTA may not be the same as those in the southwest of Ontario or northern Ontario and all points in between. That flexibility is something that municipalities have asked for and sought, and this bill deals with that.

The proposed Housing Services Act, 2011, would create a new overarching framework for affordable and social housing in Ontario, and I’m very pleased and proud of this bill.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Julia Munro): Further comments and questions?

Mr. Steve Clark: I’m pleased to provide a few comments for the member from Beaches–East York. Because I wasn’t in the Legislature on Thursday, I printed out his speech and read it. So I want to make a few comments directly.

I found it interesting. Obviously, I’m a new member of the Legislature. I was elected a year ago last Friday. I was a mayor like Mr. Prue. I was a mayor of a very small community many years ago. I enjoyed his speech giving a little background about the Beach.

It was an interesting quote, right off his lead-off, where he talked about, “Isn’t that a rich place?” So I particularly appreciated his comments about his own riding, where he talked about places like Crescent Town, Barrington and Lumsden, but I also believe that he made some very good points about wait-lists and the fact that the government, through this legislation, needs to get their head around the fact that there are massive wait-lists for housing in the province.

Just on my own riding of Leeds–Grenville, when I spoke on this housing bill I expressed concern about how the government has been dealing with this file. I know my local service manager, the united counties of Leeds and Grenville, has been very active in trying to reduce the wait-lists, which, granted, compared to the ones that the member for Beaches–East York talked about, are quite small compared to the ones in the city of Toronto. Yet we have made an effort, in my small rural riding, to try to get some government funds.

We’ve been stymied by the government in terms of our plans, so I really hope that, when this bill moves forward, goes to committee and hopefully hearings, we’ll have a chance to deal with issues, especially ones like the member for Beaches–East York spoke about last Thursday.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Julia Munro): The member for Beaches–East York has two minutes to respond.

I have to tell you that this bill is going to do nothing to satisfy the five tests, as set out by the Housing Network, which was the last thing that I had an opportunity to speak about. This is a housing strategy with absolutely no money and a housing strategy which is not going to see any houses actually built. This province and the members opposite ought not to be proud of their role in producing housing in Ontario because Ontario, as in so many other fields, is dead last in the field of housing.

We have the lowest per capita amount of money that is given for housing of any jurisdiction in Canada, and that includes the territories. So for a government to stand there and talk about what they’re doing, knowing that they’re doing almost nothing and that every other province in Canada is spending more money per capita than we are here in Ontario, is not to say very much about this government’s plan.

There could have been many things done within the body of this, just to simply allow municipalities the freedom to zone to allow for affordable housing. It’s not something they’re forced to do, but any municipality that wanted to or could have, should have been there. The backlogs continue to grow.

This bill is not a bad bill, but it’s not going to do what is necessary. It’s a little, tiny tinkering around the edge, which this government is so very adept at.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Julia Munro): Further debate?

On December 2, 2010, Mr. Bartolucci moved second reading of Bill 140,

An Act to enact the Housing Services Act, 2010, repeal the Social Housing Reform Act, 2000 and make complementary and other amendments to other Acts. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry?

All those in favour, say “aye.”

All those opposed, say “nay.”

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

This vote will be deferred until after question period this morning.

Second reading vote deferred.

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

STATUTE LAW

AMENDMENT ACT, 2011 /

LOI DE 2011 MODIFIANT DES LOIS

EN CE QUI CONCERNE LA SANTÉ

ET LA SÉCURITÉ AU TRAVAIL

Mr. Sousa moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 160,

An Act to amend the Occupational Health and Safety Act and the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997 with respect to occupational health and safety and other matters / Projet de loi 160, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la santé et la sécurité au travail et la Loi de 1997 sur la sécurité professionnelle et l’assurance contre les accidents du travail en ce qui concerne la santé et la sécurité au travail et d’autres questions.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Julia Munro): Further debate?

Hon. Charles Sousa: I am sharing my time with the member from Scarborough Southwest.

I am pleased to stand for second reading of the Occupational Health and Safety Statute Law Amendment Act, 2011, Bill 160. As mentioned, I’ll be sharing my time with my parliamentary assistant today, the member from Scarborough Southwest.

This bill represents the first major review and the largest overhaul of Ontario’s occupational health and safety system in 30 years. The bill calls for many changes, but has one goal, and that is to help ensure that working Ontarians go home safe and healthy at the end of their workday.

We are proposing a road map forward for the future so that this province’s working people have a future free of injury and occupational health disease. We are proposing a framework for improved workplace health and safety. Our stakeholders will be consulted as we build on this framework and work to achieve the best implementation of the panel’s recommendations. We are acting to protect our working citizens. That, above all, must be our goal.

I will outline the significant changes the proposed legislation calls for. But first, I would like to recognize some of the many people who worked hard to bring these proposed changes forward. On December 16, 2010, the expert advisory panel, headed by Tony Dean, delivered its final report. As many of you know, Mr. Dean is a former Deputy Minister of Labour and is a professor in the School of Public Policy and Governance at the University of Toronto.

The final recommendations of this expert advisory panel struck a balance between two key factors: a need to provide better protection and support for workers, especially young and new workers and recent immigrants, and a need to improve the way we reach out to and help the business community, particularly small businesses, to comply with our health and safety laws.

Our government accepted the panel’s recommendations. I would like to thank and show my appreciation to the members of the panel for dedicating their time to accomplishing this report. Just as importantly, these representatives of workers, business, health and safety experts reached their recommendations by consensus, knowing how important their undertaking was to the lives of working Ontarians. Their approach made a consensus report possible, and consensus on such a critically important matter is invaluable for success.

As we bring this proposed legislation forward, we would hope it will be considered in the same atmosphere of mutual respect and co-operation that existed on the expert panel and that we constantly remember that we share the common goal of keeping Ontarians safe.

On behalf of my government and the people of the province, I would like to thank the members of the expert advisory panel: Bud Calligan, retired secretary-treasurer of the Carpenters’ District Council of Ontario; Carmine Tiano, director of WSIB advocacy and occupational services of the Provincial Building and Construction Trades Council of Ontario; Vernon Edwards, health and safety director of the Ontario Federation of Labour; Joan Eakin, professor, Dalla Lana School of Public Health; Carolyn Tuohy, senior fellow, School of Public Policy and Governance, University of Toronto; H. Allan Hunt, senior economist, W.E.

Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, in Michigan, United States; Domenic Mattina, vice-president of sales and estimating at Mattina Mechanical Ltd.; Jattinder Dhillon, vice-president of health, safety, wellness and business continuity for corporate human relations at Loblaws Canada; and John A. Macnamara, vice-president of health, safety and environment for Hydro One.

There are many more individuals from many stakeholder organizations who gave invaluable assistance to working groups that provided input to the panel, including working groups on vulnerable workers and on the underground economy. Important for the essential input it provided was the small business subcommittee. I would also like to recognize the hard work that the Ministry of Labour staff put into bringing this legislation forward to us.

As I mentioned, this is a consensus report. There are many consultations that occurred. Overall, the expert panel received more than 400 responses and submissions during consultations and conducted more than 50 meetings with stakeholders. The expert panel held regional meetings in London, Windsor, Ottawa, Sudbury, Thunder Bay and Toronto. As well, the panel’s chair provided two updates to stakeholders during the review—once in June 2010 and again in September 2010. Altogether, that is a lot of consultation with workplace parties.

Our stakeholders played a significant role as key players in building the structure, in assembling the enabling framework, that will help us move forward in prevention. There will also be more opportunities for consultation and input as we continue to work closely with stakeholders to implement the recommendations of the expert panel.

Since this government assumed office in 2003, Ontario’s annual rate of workplace injuries has dropped substantially, by 30%. We have worked hard to make working Ontarians safer, but we know there’s much more to do. There are still workers—family and friends, loved ones—who are not coming home at the end of the work day or are coming home injured. We can do better and we will. We owe this to ourselves and our loved ones; we owe it to the people of this province, whom we represent. Any workplace death or injury is simply one too many. That is why we’re taking action.

It is because we care about the well-being of our province’s workers and want to begin implementing the consensus recommendations of the expert panel. Simply put, it is the right thing to do right now.

We believe our proposed legislation, if passed, will save lives and help prevent injuries as we move forward. Under our proposed amendments, the minister would assume responsibility for prevention. This will help coordinate, align and strengthen our prevention enforcement activities.

A new chief prevention officer, reporting to the Minister of Labour on strategic priorities, would provide day-to-day leadership on the prevention of workplace injury and occupational disease. This change will provide us a new position to provide leadership and focus in preventing workplace death and injury.

The Ministry of Labour would expand its involvement in workplace health and safety education and promotion.

The Minister of Labour would have oversight of the province’s health and safety associations, under the leadership of the chief prevention officer: again, better aligning and coordinating our activities.

A new prevention council with representatives from the worker and employer communities as well as health and safety experts would provide valuable input in the direction that the health and safety system takes with respect to preventing occupational injury and disease. This new prevention council would keep our stakeholder communities engaged and in touch as we move ahead.

The minister would have the authority to establish standards for health and safety training in order to enhance this training and ensure workers are properly trained.

Workers, especially the most vulnerable workers, would have improved protections against reprisals for exercising their rights under the Occupational Health and Safety Act. The legislation would ensure that the framework would be in place to improve the system of health and safety for Ontario’s workplaces.

The major components of these proposed amendments would, if passed, come into effect on or before April 1, 2012. Our amendments will better allow us to create codes of practice that could better provide assistance to employers, especially small businesses, and guide them in complying with our health and safety laws.

As I said, we will continue to consult on the implementation of these changes as we move forward. Consultation and further advice from stakeholders and the interim prevention council will assist the ministry, in the months ahead, to ensure cost-effective and thoughtful implementation of these reforms.

The expert panel heard from stakeholders who said they wanted to better coordinate and align the province’s health and safety prevention activities. We listened, and so the structural changes proposed in our bill would improve the integration of prevention programs and be led by a chief prevention officer accountable to the minister. This is a change that we believe would strengthen and better align our health and safety efforts to the benefit of all.

The expert advisory panel highlighted the need for better alignment of the occupational health and safety system, with greater support for vulnerable workers and for business, especially in helping small business understand how to comply with legislative requirements. The mandate in accountability for prevention under our bill would be transferred from the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board to the Ontario Ministry of Labour. This will not only better align and coordinate our efforts, we believe it will enhance accountability and transparency and offer greater opportunities for stakeholder engagement.

If the prevention function is assumed by the Ministry of Labour, this would mean that funding would come under the same review and approvals process of all provincial government expenditures. For example, the minister would have to seek approval from treasury board and cabinet for prevention-related expenditures. Such spending would also be subject to public scrutiny through the estimates and public accounts process and publications.

Finally, under this bill, the minister is required to publish the chief prevention officer’s annual report.

All of these new requirements will support and, in fact, improve transparency, and so, in addition to helping make workplaces safer and healthier, the new structure would be more accessible to both labour and small business and accountable to them and to the public.

Our bill would provide that the Minister of Labour have oversight of the province’s health and safety associations. These powers can be delegated to the chief prevention officer.

Our changes would mean that the health and safety system is working together effectively and efficiently. This was another key recommendation of the expert panel. Stakeholders asked for enhanced coordination and alignment between the activities of the health and safety agencies, the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board and the Ministry of Labour enforcement and policy priorities.

Under our bill the chief prevention officer, the CPO, would be responsible for establishing a provincial occupational health and safety strategy. This CPO would ensure that this overall provincial health and safety strategy was aligned across all systems partners. The chief prevention officer proposed in our legislation would directly report to and provide an annual report for the Minister of Labour on the statutory mandate and to the Deputy Minister of Labour on administrative public services matters.

It’s important to add that under the proposed new model contained in our bill, health and safety associations would be funded through government transfer payments and would work under the direction of the chief prevention officer. This approach would be fiscally neutral to the government and would not add to employers’ WSIB premiums. The revenue that the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board currently spends on prevention would instead be allocated to the Ministry of Labour for the new prevention organization.

The ministry is currently working with the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board to develop a transition plan that would include the transfer of funds for prevention services to the Ministry of Labour. Employer premiums, which fund the whole of the occupational health and safety system, will not go up as a result of the Ministry of Labour taking on the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board’s current prevention functions.

Under our bill, a new prevention council consisting of both employer and worker representatives would be an important partner in setting the direction for the ministry’s prevention activities and would work closely with the chief prevention officer. This, again, was a key recommendation of the expert panel report.

The involvement of our key stakeholders is a priority for us, moving forward. The prevention council would advise the minister on the appointment of the new chief prevention officer and advise the CPO on the occupational health and safety strategy. And as the CPO contemplates significant new changes to the health and safety system, the prevention council chair would be asked to tell the minister whether he or she endorses that direction of change.

As my ministry and I have announced, our government has appointed an interim prevention council to help improve workplace health and safety in the province. The interim prevention council will help the province implement the key recommendations of the expert advisory panel, including the recruitment of a chief prevention officer. This interim council is led by Paavo Kivisto, retired Deputy Minister of the Environment and former Deputy Minister of Labour. The interim prevention council includes Joan Eakin, Vernon Edwards, John A. Macnamara, Domenic Mattina and Carmine Tiano.

I would like to acknowledge all these individuals and say that I could not be more pleased with the expertise and commitment these leaders are bringing forward to our efforts. Going forward, the permanent prevention council will be established and the chair will be selected by the members of the council.

A key recommendation of the expert safety panel’s report calls for increased health and safety training for our province’s workers, especially in high-risk occupations. The consultations led by the expert panel showed us that many workers are not aware of their basic rights and responsibilities under the Occupational Health and Safety Act.

The panel found that workers were not aware of such basic rights as the right to refuse unsafe work or to receive appropriate information—the right to know, including the right to receive appropriate instruction and supervision—or the right to participate in making workplaces safe through the joint health and safety committees or safety representatives. And so, as recommended in the report, our amendments would empower the Minister of Labour to approve health and safety training standards and programs.

We are proposing that all health and safety representatives in workplaces with six to 19 employees be trained to carry out their health and safety duties. They currently do not require any training, and the expert advisory panel felt that this caused higher risk in small workplaces. Basic health and safety awareness training for workers will improve the knowledge of their rights and responsibilities, and thereby improve their safety and help safeguard their health.

These provisions would come into force on a date yet to be determined to allow for sufficient time to develop the training standards and, importantly, to consult with both business and labour on their effective implementation and to make sure we achieve the best results for the money spent.

Another provision in the bill deals with workplace reprisals. The expert advisory panel concluded that when non-unionized workers are fired or otherwise punished by an employer for exercising their rights under the Occupational Health and Safety Act, there is no quick mechanism for these workers to obtain timely redress. Therefore, our proposed amendments would allow the Ontario Labour Relations Board to deal with such claims in a more timely manner. In addition, inspectors would be given the power to refer the matter to the Ontario Labour Relations Board in certain circumstances if the worker agrees.

Workers, especially those most vulnerable workers, would have improved protections against reprisals.

The panel also recommended that the offices of the worker and employer advisers could, in the future, provide support for both workers and employers in reprisal cases. The proposed amendments include a regulation-making authority to allow for this.

This provision to protect against reprisals, if passed, would preserve the neutrality of the Ministry of Labour inspectors. It would ensure that they couldn’t be called as a witness by one of the parties to reprisal proceedings. It would also ensure that the reprisal proceedings would not be delayed unnecessarily by requests for inspectors to attend at hearings before the Ontario Labour Relations Board.

Such statutory provisions concerning the ability of inspectors to testify in civil and other proceedings are common. Similar provisions also appear in other Ministry of Labour statutes—for example, the Occupational Health and Safety Act and the Employment Standards Act.

We will be setting up a

section 21 committee for vulnerable workers. This will help ensure that the key stakeholders who represent the workplace parties can give needed input and advice on reaching out to and protecting those workers who are often at the greatest risk in the workplace.

The expert panel has recommended, and we will be moving forward with, new and enhanced efforts to reach out to young workers. We will help develop materials and programs to help ensure that teens entering the workforce know their rights and their responsibilities under the Occupational Health and Safety Act. We owe it to our young people, our children, to give them the knowledge and the tools to keep themselves safe as they enter the workforce.

The expert panel recommended, and we will move forward with, strengthening the foundation of our occupational health and safety efforts, and that is the internal responsibility system. This system to ensure that the workplace parties are working together to achieve and improve safe and healthy working conditions comes out of another historic review of our health and safety system: the Ham commission that was chaired by the renowned Dr. James Ham.

In the expert panel’s report, the internal responsibility system was seen as the right approach to assuring that the workplace parties are actively engaged in preventing workplace injury and disease. This, in the words of the report, “is because Ministry of Labour inspectors cannot be in all workplaces at all times.”

Workplace health and safety is everyone’s responsibility. The anti-reprisal provisions of our legislation, as well as the support for small business, will strengthen the internal responsibility system. As part of our support to small business, there will be a new

section 21 committee to address the needs of small business.

We have listened to the expert advisory panel, with its representation from workers, employers and various health and safety experts. We have carefully considered the recommendations of the panel—recommendations based on broad consultations with workplace parties and representatives. We have accepted the recommendations of the expert panel, and thank all those who worked so hard on the panel’s report.

The panel’s report was a call to action, and we are acting by bringing forward this legislation. Our government believes that by working together, we can continue to foster workplaces that are healthy, safe and harmonious, and by doing so also build a strong economy. We believe our bill, over time, can and will save lives and prevent injuries among Ontarians. The working people of this province and those who depend on them deserve no less.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Julia Munro): The member for Scarborough–Southwest.

Mr. Lorenzo Berardinetti: I rise to address the second reading of the Occupational Health and Safety Statue Law Amendment Act, 2011.

This legislation is about our hope for and our commitment to safer and healthier Ontario workplaces. It is about working together, all of us: employees and employers, health and safety stakeholders and experts and the government that represents them. It is about working better, and that means better aligning and coordinating our health and safety systems and our efforts and resources. It is about working to change a system to ensure the well-being of the working people of this province and their ability to come home at the end of the workday safe and sound.

It is about listening to our stakeholders, because our proposed legislation is a direct result of the recommendations of the expert advisory panel, and those recommendations are the direct result of consultation and co-operation. The expert panel reached out to and included input from both key stakeholders and the public. We have emphasized that the panel’s consultation process received more than 400 responses and submissions and conducted more than 50 stakeholder meetings. We talked about the regional meetings for input—meetings that were held in London, Ottawa, Sudbury, Toronto, Thunder Bay and Windsor.

The panel listened, and we have also listened, and have accepted the panel’s recommendations.

Now we are acting to bring forth this legislation. The expert advisory panel report and recommendations reflect and represent the hard work, collaboration and expertise of the panel members, as well as the significant input from stakeholders who gave their best advice in the interests of making workplaces safer. In our proposed legislation, we are embarking on a major change in our province’s occupational health and safety system, the biggest change since the Ontario Occupational Health and Safety Act was adopted over 30 years ago.

We are moving ahead to develop new partnerships, new tools and a new structure that will better serve the needs of our people: a structure that is more responsive, effective and efficient; a structure that will promote a culture of health and safety in Ontario workplaces. At the end of the day, and certainly for the end of the citizens’ workday, the goal is and must be workplaces that are safe and healthy. Our proposals are a road map forward to ensure we are providing a more promising future for working men and women.

This bill is not an end point, but a beginning. Our proposed changes would create a framework for us to build on together.

Many of the panel’s recommendations will be phased in over time to allow for further consultation on detailed proposals. We want to ensure that the workplace parties have an opportunity to become familiar with and prepare for the new duties and responsibilities that will be required.

The implementation of the panel’s recommendations requires not only legislative changes, but also the development of new operational policies and new procedures. This work will go forward in consultation with the interim prevention council, prevention system partners and stakeholders.

Our legislation is a first step in what will be our walk together to protect Ontario’s working people. Our proposals are a foundation for what will be a work in, and for, progress in workplace safety. Progress means safer and healthier workplaces for new and young workers, for recent immigrants and for workers who are at the greatest risk, those who are most vulnerable.

Our bill would enable us to build a more integrated health and safety system, a system where our prevention goals are more closely aligned with policy and enforcement efforts, a prevention system that is more accountable and transparent to the people that it exists to serve.

Also critical to our new system will be training and protection for workers who use that training and exercise their rights under the Occupational Health and Safety Act. That is why we accepted and are proposing to move forward with new mandatory basic health and safety training for workers and supervisors. This training is necessary for our internal responsibility system to work, and our internal responsibility system is key in making our overall prevention system work. And as we’ve underlined, there will be more consultation on training before requirements are put in place.

We have said that Ministry of Labour inspectors cannot be in all the province’s workplaces at all times. That is why we depend on the workplace parties working together in an informed environment and constructively working towards the common goal of increased health and safety.

This only makes sense for our workers and for employers. We know the tremendous cost that workplace injuries inflict: the cost in human suffering, in lost productivity, the cost to the workplace safety and insurance system. The average cost of a workplace injury in Ontario in 2008, according to the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board, was $24,133 in direct costs and $96,532 in indirect costs per lost-time injury. But those numbers do not and cannot include the immeasurable emotional costs borne by the families who have lost a loved one or have a family member who has been injured on the job.

There’s no price that we can attach to human suffering or certainly to the tragic loss of life. That is why we are proposing this legislation; that is why we appointed the expert panel on health and safety; and that is why we have accepted the expert panel’s recommendations, which were based on broad input and consultation.

Bill 160, under

section 2, would add provisions to the Occupational Health and Safety Act to specify that the Minister of Labour is responsible for administering the act and that as part of such administration, the minister’s powers and duties would include the following: the promotion of public awareness of occupational health and safety; the education of employers, workers and others about occupational health and safety; the fostering of commitment to occupational health and safety among employers, workers and others; and making grants to support occupational health and safety, which would include funding research.

Let me say a few words about the prevention council. Our bill adds a number of provisions regarding the creation and operation of a new multi-stakeholder prevention council. Council members would be appointed by the minister and would include representatives of workers and employers as well as experts in occupational health and safety. The council would also select a chair from amongst its members.

The key functions of the council will be to advise the minister on the appointment of the chief prevention officer, or the CPO, and anything else the minister specifies, and advise the chief prevention officer on various matters, including the prevention of work-related injuries and illnesses, the provincial occupational health and safety strategy, an annual report, and proposed changes to the funding and delivery of services to prevent work-related injuries and illnesses.

I would also like to say a few words about the chief prevention officer. Our bill, under

section 8, would add a new

section to the Occupational Health and Safety Act requiring the minister to appoint a chief prevention officer to do the following:

—exercise any duties or powers delegated by the minister;

—develop a provincial occupational health and safety strategy;

—prepare an annual report;

—advise the minister on preventing work-related injuries and illnesses; and

—advise the minister on any proposed changes to the funding and delivery of prevention services.

The creation of the provincial strategy on occupational health and safety called for in our proposals would do some of the following things: It would set goals for occupational health and safety system partners, include performance indicators to measure the progress made toward achieving goals, and be approved and published by the minister.

The chief prevention officer’s annual report to the minister would report on the achievement of the goals set in the provincial strategy and also be published by the minister.

The chief prevention officer, or the CPO, would be required to consult the prevention council and consider its advice in developing the provincial strategy and the annual report. Throughout our proposed changes, there is a lot of provision for accountability and transparency. This is what the stakeholders told the expert panel they wanted. This is what our bill provides.

Under

section 6 of this bill, there would be added a new requirement for employers and constructors to ensure that the health and safety representative is trained to effectively perform the duties of a representative. The minister could set standards for such training.

Under

section 7 of the bill, there are provisions that would enable either co-chair of a joint health and safety committee to make written recommendations to the employer if the committee has failed to agree on a recommendation. The Ministry of Labour has appointed an interim prevention council made up of five members of the expert advisory panel and an interim chair. This council will advise the minister on an interim basis regarding the expert panel’s recommendations, and it will recruit a chief prevention officer. This chief prevention officer is expected to be appointed by June 2011.

The Ministry of Labour has also established an implementation team with staff from the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board, the health and safety agencies and from the ministry itself. This team is setting up a number of working groups with representatives from the health and safety system partners, and others, to look at implementation of the panel’s recommendations.

I’ve outlined some key provisions of our bill and the road forward. But for a moment, I want to talk about what the Ministry of Labour has done and accomplished during our time in government. We have been actively promoting construction safety across the province. We all want our loved ones to come home safe and sound after a hard day’s work. We have done more than any other government to ensure and protect the health and safety of workers on construction sites. The Ministry of Labour now has more than 400 highly trained ministry health and safety professionals supporting enforcement every day.

The lost-time injury rate has decreased by more than 30% since 2003. That’s a reduction of more than 25,000 injuries. That means that just last year alone, our inspectors conducted over 62,000 field visits. Of all these field visits, more than 41,000 were proactive. Within this same time period, over 30,000 workplaces were visited across the province. During these visits, health and safety inspectors issued over 98,000 orders. That’s progress.

We’ve got inspectors out on job sites every day, but more needs to be done and will be done. This bill is about pushing even further to usher in a new era of collaboration to reduce the number of workplace injuries. The expert panel was a true example of workplace parties, of representatives of labour and of business working together. Only through co-operation and working together can we achieve our goals.

Let’s continue this spirit of co-operation. Let’s move forward toward the common goal of safeguarding Ontario’s workers. I know we all share that goal in this Legislature, so this bill should be one that we all support.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Julia Munro): Comments and questions?

Mr. John O’Toole: I’m pleased to listen to a very important bill this morning, Bill 160, amending the Occupational Health and Safety Act, and to the minister’s opening remarks. Our critic is actually in the midst of preparing his remarks to respond to this important bill.

We all want the workplaces in Ontario to be safe. Certainly, a lot has been said and little has been done in terms of the remarks this morning. I think it’s all in the plan.

One of the things that did strike me in listening to it is this new—sort of another bureaucratic forum here, this chief prevention officer, who I guess would be appointed by order in council, which would be political. I was wondering if it would be Pat Dillon, who could easily be the Working Families Coalition. He does work with the trades groups; I understand that. It’s the work he does about putting the videos on the screens that portray persons and others in certain ways that aren’t particularly complimentary.

I think that we need to keep the politics out of it and keep the injured workers at the very front of it. Having worked myself in an industrial work environment and, to a large extent, with WSIB, early return previsions in work and part of the ability of rehabilitation of injured workers, I’ve been quite familiar with that for several years.

It seems to me that, just listening here—and I’ve had an opportunity to read some of the

preamble of the bill. It’s fairly long. There’s a very important

section to amend the part to deal with injury and disease prevention.

The role of this new committee might be to set goals. Now, I would think that the membership of that would be very critical. I hope again that it’s not a political appointment, like we find at the LHINs and other places. We’ll keep an eye on it. Everyone wants to protect workers.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Julia Munro): Further comments and questions?

Mr. Peter Kormos: I’ve been here in the chamber this morning, along with my NDP colleague the member for Beaches–East York. We listened carefully to the comments made by the minister and his parliamentary assistant. While the minister tries to put the best possible impression forward, this bill warrants serious consideration, analysis and indeed, where need be, critique. Our member the member for Hamilton East–Stoney Creek, who is the critic for this matter, will be addressing this bill in due course. I understand, if the week rolls out as we expect, that that will be on Thursday morning. I expect that the Conservative critic’s lead will take place tomorrow morning, Wednesday morning.

If this government and this minister were really serious about worker safety, this government would extend card-based certification to all workers in the province so that all workers could join unions and protect themselves by virtue of collective bargaining and union membership. This government would extend the right to belong to a collective bargaining unit and to negotiate a collective bargaining agreement to agricultural workers, who work in one of the most dangerous workplaces in the province and in Canada. Yet this minister turns his back on agricultural workers.

This minister turns his back on industrial workers in some of the most dangerous workplaces. He turns his back on the poorest—

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Julia Munro): Thank you. Further comments?

Mr. Jeff Leal: This morning I did listen to the Minister of Labour and the parliamentary assistant on Bill 160. I take a very personal interest in this one. In a previous life, before coming here in 2003, I was a health and training officer with the Coyle Packaging Group in Peterborough, which is a corrugate business, and spent a significant amount of time working with WHMIS and other workplace issues and training.

One of the things that we’re looking forward to doing with this bill is to make workplaces safer. We all know that the safer a workplace is, the more productive the workplace is. When we leave in the morning, we say goodbye to a wife, a husband, a partner and loved ones. In the province of Ontario, when you enter your workplace, you should have the expectation that you’re going into a safe workplace. It’s a continuous effort by the employer and the employee to make sure that happens. Having been involved in this field, I know that you get great participation both from employees and employers, because it’s in everybody’s best interest to make sure that the workplace is indeed safe.

I know that from the employer’s perspective, anything that would help them to have a more efficient, streamlined prevention and compliance system would certainly assist them in living up to the obligations and responsibilities they have under the various occupational health and safety statute law provisions in the province of Ontario.

I’ve read some of the work that has been done by the expert panel. I think there are some very good suggestions. As this piece of legislation moves through the House and goes to committee, we’ll—

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Julia Munro): Thank you. Further comments or questions?

The minister has two minutes to respond.

Hon. Charles Sousa: I’d like to thank the member for Durham, the member for Welland and the member for Peterborough for their comments.

Let me stress very loudly: This is not about politics. This is about those who are most vulnerable. It’s about the health and safety of those workers. That is our primary concern. That’s how we’re going to behave, and that’s how we’re going to proceed. As I’ve said many times, there is a consensus report that was developed. I hope, in the end, we’ll have consensus in this House to help those who are most vulnerable. When it comes to those tragedies, one is one too many.

When it comes to farmers, it was this government that trained over 100 inspectors and did 350 inspections for farmers, not the NDP and not the PCs. We do care, and we’ll do our utmost to help those most in need.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Julia Munro): Further debate?

Hon. Monique M. Smith: I move adjournment of the debate at this time.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Julia Munro): The member has moved adjournment at this time. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

Second reading debate adjourned.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Julia Munro): Orders of the day?

Hon. Monique M. Smith: We have no further business this morning.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Julia Munro): This House stands recessed until 10:30 of the clock.

The House recessed from 0959 to 1030.

INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS

M. Phil McNeely: J’aimerais accueillir trois visiteurs d’Ottawa qui sont parmi nous. Ils sont dans la tribune du Président ici : le D r Bernard Leduc, président-directeur général de l’Hôpital Montfort; Gilles Morin, président du conseil administratif de l’Hôpital Montfort, ancien député d’Ottawa–Orléans et vice-président de cette Chambre quand il était ici; et Michel Tremblay, chef de la gouvernance et conseiller exécutif de l’Hôpital Montfort.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: I’m pleased to introduce some people in the members’ gallery from Ducks Unlimited Canada who are here today for their awareness day: Julie Cayley, Michelle Stuckless, Joanne Barbazza, Stephanie Walker, Erling Armson, Cam Thompson, Christie-Lee Hazzard, Greg Weeks and Philip Holst.

Also, I want to mention that this afternoon at 4:30 there’s a reception in the legislative dining room hosted by Ducks Unlimited Canada.

Ms. Cheri DiNovo: It’s my great delight to introduce a number of members of the board and other workers of Victim Services Toronto. We’ve got Bonnie Levine, executive director; Lauri Reesor, board chair; Tricia Bennett and many other members here today on International Women’s Day.

Ms. Helena Jaczek: In the west members’ gallery, please welcome page Brittany McCorriston’s mother, Susan, and sister Melissa.

Mr. Paul Miller: It’s my pleasure to welcome students from McMaster University who are here in the west gallery to learn how our Legislature works: Simon Granat, Kevin Simms, Kaitlin Peters, Josh Wybrow, Santino Marinucci, Alex Weatherill, John-Carlo Di Rosa and Amelia Runchee. Welcome.

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I’d like to welcome back to the Legislature the parents and family of Amanda Belzowski, who’s one of our pages, from Don Valley West. Lisa, Dan and Josh Belzowski are here, along with Amanda Werger and Hannah Shuster-Hyman, who are friends of Amanda joining us today.

Mr. Yasir Naqvi: I want to welcome Stephen Wasteneys, who lives in the neighbourhood of old Ottawa South in the great riding of Ottawa Centre, and is the president of Ducks Unlimited Canada’s Ottawa chapter. Welcome to Queen’s Park, Stephen.

M me France Gélinas: I’d like to welcome to the west gallery somebody who needs no introduction: Smokey Thomas, president of OPSEU. With him is Mr. Al Donaldson, chair of the mental health division of OPSEU, as well as Deborah Gordon, the chair of OPSEU’s children sector. They also have Dan Sidsworth, the chair of corrections for MERC, and Roy Jones, who is one of 28 experienced child and youth workers from Whitby who will lose their jobs in April. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Hon. John Gerretsen: First of all, I’d like to welcome Smokey Thomas, a proud Kingstonian. I’d also like to welcome Mr. Michael Muise, who’s the principal of St. Paul Catholic School and of Sacred Heart School on Wolfe Island. Wolfe Island, of course, is one of the communities that is heavily involved in Hockeyville right now for Hockey Night in Canada. Principal Muise is here with his son Avery Muise, and they’re in the gallery.

Hon. Michael Gravelle: I want to welcome students from the Mattawa Learning Centre in northern Ontario, a high school for older youth. We’ve got representatives from Webequie, Martin Falls, Eabametoong and Neskantaga First Nations. They’re here with their principal, Denise Baxter. Welcome.

Hon. Carol Mitchell: I’m very pleased to introduce a couple of my constituents who are in the House today: Henry and Nelly Baker. They purchased this time in the House to help support our local hospital in Clinton. Welcome and thank you.

Hon. Glen R. Murray: I’d like to introduce a constituent and friend, Patrick Bogden, who lobbied the Ontario government successfully to distribute December ODSP cheques in Ontario before Christmas every year and is back to visit us again. He’s in the visitors’ gallery.

Mr. Kevin Daniel Flynn: I’d like to introduce in the House today the mother and the cousin of page Simon Cook from Oakville. We’ve got Annette Cook here and Mathew Fedsin.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): I’d like to take this opportunity to welcome Alexis Smith from my riding of Elgin–Middlesex–London, who is seated in the Speaker’s gallery today. Alexis, welcome to Queen’s Park.

ORAL QUESTIONS

HYDRO RATES

Mr. Tim Hudak: My question is to the Premier. Premier, every day we learn of a new hit to the pocketbooks of average Ontario families. Hydro One recently released its 2010 year-end financial results, which confirmed that Ontario families continue to pay for the expensive mess that you’re making out of the hydro system. Specifically in this report, we learn that Hydro One now has an unfunded pension liability of $300 million. We anticipate that Hydro One will be coming forward for yet another rate increase to cover for this mismanagement.

Premier, exactly how much higher are hydro rates going to go to pay for your mismanagement?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: I’m pleased to take the question. I know that my honourable colleague is going to want to recognize that the issue of the unfunded pension liability started under their government. I’m sure he’s going to want to recognize that. It’s an ongoing issue; it’s an ongoing concern.

My honourable colleague says that he’s concerned about costs that are being borne by Ontario families. I want to remind my honourable colleague that our plan to move ahead with full-day kindergarten in Ontario, to benefit 247,000 four- and five-year-olds, will save families thousands of dollars in daycare costs every year. So if he’s truly committed to ensuring that we keep costs down for Ontario families, then he’s going to want to take the opportunity right now to commit to full-day kindergarten for all four- and five-year-olds in Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Mr. Tim Hudak: You know, Premier, Ontario families are seeing through your shell game, and they know that they are footing the bill for your inability to get public sector spending under control. Your hydro bureaucracies represent the same kind of bloat we’ve seen from the McGuinty government across the board.

Hydro One’s 2010 financial report goes even further, Premier, and notes that Hydro One added 300 new employees in the last year alone. So instead of getting the relief they need, Ontario families will face yet another rate increase to pay for your bloat in the hydro bureaucracy.

Premier, can you explain to Ontario families why you say you’re going to cut the civil service by 5% on one hand but they’re going to get stuck with a bill for 300 new employees at Hydro One? Why are rates going through the roof?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Stop the clock.

Minister of Energy, I would appreciate being able to hear the question.

Premier?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: There have been more people hired on at the hydro companies. I think my honourable colleague knows that we’re investing billions of dollars in a massive build-out of our electricity system. It’s something that should have been done years ago. It’s something that they chose to set aside, but it’s something that we chose to do. We have some 9,000 megawatts of new generation. We have rehabilitated some 5,000 kilometres of transmission. We’re laying the foundation for a new industry—thousands of new jobs.

My friend mentions in passing that he thinks it’s important that we better manage public service costs, and again, that’s one important reason why he’s determined to eliminate full-day kindergarten from Ontario schools. If he’s committed to ensuring that Ontario families have some help with their costs, then he’s going to want to commit right now to putting in place full-day kindergarten for all four- and five-year-olds.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Final supplementary?

Mr. Tim Hudak: You know, sadly, Premier, you just seem to shrug off this growing bloat in the public sector, and Ontario families are struggling to pay the bills. You don’t respect the fact that Ontario families are stuck with higher hydro bills because of your incredible mismanagement of our energy system.

The unfunded liability at Hydro One is now up to $300 million. That probably implies a rate increase. The number of bureaucrats working there went up 300 employees in one year alone—pressure for a further rate increase. Now we find out that, in the last year alone, the operating costs of Hydro One are up some $67 million.

You claim a victory by saving $5 million with the ORC merger. Premier, you’ve increased that thirteenfold with a nearly $70-million increase in the operating budget.

Premier, when will you rein in the public sector costs? Why do Ontario families always get stuck with the bill for your mismanagement of the energy—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. Premier?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: I expect this will be a recurring theme. My honourable colleague says it’s important to rein in public sector costs. I want to translate that so that Ontarians can better understand what he means by that.

“Public sector costs” means we can’t afford full-day kindergarten for our four- and five-year-olds in Ontario. “Public sector costs” means we can’t afford the smaller classes that we have in our schools. “Public sector costs” means we can’t afford the 11,000 more nurses that we’ve hired in Ontario. “Public sector costs” means we can’t afford—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The members from Renfrew, Simcoe North and Thornhill.

Premier?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: I just want to be clear and to elaborate a little bit more for my honourable colleague when it comes to his plans. He doesn’t want to talk about those, but we get a better understanding every day of what those plans actually are. They represent some dramatic cuts to public services. I think Ontarians have seen that movie, and they don’t want to see it again.

HYDRO RATES

Mr. Tim Hudak: Back to the Premier: Premier, you’ve grown increasingly out of touch after your seven years in office. You seem to have no clue that the hydro bill is no longer just another bill; it is the bill for families in Ontario today. They simply cannot afford it, and they find out about your waste.

Premier, you have now, according to the C.D. Howe Institute, spent a billion dollars exporting Ontario power to Quebec and to the States to give them discount power while Ontario families are stuck with skyrocketing hydro bills. Not only do you charge them an arm and a leg for their own hydro, but you send them a bill to subsidize families in Quebec and New York state as well.

Premier, why are the only families getting any relief in hydro customers in Quebec and New York? Why are you sticking families with the bill?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: I’m not sure there’s any foundation in fact for any part of that question whatsoever. I think it’s a wonderful exercise in fantasy. If my friend were honestly committed to helping Ontarians better manage their hydro costs, then he would support our clean energy benefit, which is taking 10% off our hydro bills for the next five years. It’s a practical, pragmatic way to help families. It’s a specific example. He might want to tell us why it is that he’s against reducing hydro bills by 10%.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Honourable members, I think your leader would like to hear the answer, and the heckling is making it extremely difficult for your leader to hear.

Supplementary?

Mr. Tim Hudak: Premier, you’ve made life increasingly unaffordable for average families and for seniors in our province with your HST tax grab and your skyrocketing hydro bill policy. Premier, many families can’t afford to turn on the lights. If they’re not up late at night washing dishes because of your time-of-use smart meters, they’re up worrying about how they’re going to pay their hydro bill. Instead of giving Ontario families any relief, you spend, according to C.D. Howe, a billion dollars in discounts for families in Quebec and New York state.

Premier, why is it the only families getting a break today are families who live in Montreal and in Buffalo?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: Again, I disagree fundamentally with my colleague’s assertion and with those numbers.

But one thing that’s perfectly clear is that his party refuses to support the clean energy benefit. That is, in fact, now reducing electricity bills by 10% for the next—

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: Give us a PowerPoint.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The member from Simcoe North.

Premier?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: There’s another specific way we’re helping Ontario families. We’ve put in place a new law that is reducing the cost of generic drugs by half a billion dollars. My honourable colleague was given the choice; he had to take a side. He took a side that opposed the interests of Ontario families.

It seems to me that on many occasions now, when presented with specific opportunities to stand up for families, to make sure they have full-day kindergarten, for example, to make sure they have a clean energy benefit or to make sure they have cheaper drugs, he chooses the other side.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Final supplementary?

Mr. Tim Hudak: Premier, you’ve chosen sides all right—you’ve chosen to discount power to Quebec and New York and raise the rates on Ontario families.

How out of touch have you become after seven years in office? You spent the first seven years chasing families out of Ontario to try to find jobs in other provinces. Now you’re spending this year chasing them out of Ontario to try to find affordable hydro across the border. What kind of policy are you running in this province?

Premier, you’ve signed deals that make us get the most expensive power—your pie-in-the-sky schemes for solar and wind—even when we don’t need it, and then you have to discount bills to people in Montreal and Buffalo. Why is it the only way to get relief from the hydro bill is to go across the Peace Bridge into Buffalo, New York?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: As they say, everybody is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts.

Here are the facts: In 2002—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Stop the clock. Members will please come to order.

Premier?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: The facts are our friends. I would encourage my honourable colleague to understand that.

In 2002, under the previous government, $500 million was what we paid for importing power. In 2003, we paid $400 million to import power. Since 2006, as a result of the massive investments we’ve made in new generation and new transmission, we have so far $1.5 billion for net exports. We’re now in the business of exporting and making money off of our systems. We didn’t have enough electricity in the past and we were buying electricity. That’s the difference. Those are the facts.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Members will please come to order. The ministers—Minister of Economic Development, Minister of Infrastructure. Member from Oxford, Minister of Community Safety.

New question.

PAY EQUITY

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My question is to the Premier. It’s been a difficult few years for Ontario families: jobs lost, savings destroyed, economic anxiety. It’s fair to say on International Women’s Day that it’s hit women especially hard. Women who work full-time earn only 71 cents for ever dollar earned by men. Women are nearly twice as likely to earn minimum wage.

What’s the Premier prepared to do to confront the growing inequality that hits working women so hard?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: I’m pleased to take the question, and I know that I join with all members in celebrating a very important day, International Women’s Day.

My colleague will know that when it comes to the minimum wage, we have raised that several times over; it’s now $10.25. That’s a 50% increase since 2003. My understanding is that that is the highest among the 10 provinces.

My honourable colleague will also know that one of the most important initiatives that we are pursuing—and I can tell you that young moms in particular speak to me about this all the time. They keep asking, “When is full-day kindergarten coming to our local schools?” That’s important, not only by means of providing our kids with the best possible start, but it’s an important—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. Supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Some 450,000 Ontarians work in minimum-wage jobs; they are disproportionately women. Women are twice as likely as men to work for the minimum wage and twice as likely to work at jobs that keep their families below the poverty line. After promising not to freeze the minimum wage, why did the Premier do just that?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: Again, we’ve raised the minimum wage six or seven times over. It’s now $10.25 an hour. It’s the highest in Canada. It represents a 50% increase. I think that is significant.

I can tell you something else that makes us hopeful about the future, and that’s how well our students, including our young women, are doing in our schools. I was in a high school this morning, and I’m pleased to report that the graduation rate in Ontario has gone from 68% to 81%. Overwhelmingly, it is young women who are performing better in our schools.

There’s a challenge there. We intend to take that up when it comes to dealing with our boys and our young men. But young women are thriving in our schools today in Ontario, and that bodes very well for our future.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Final supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Without access to adequate income, housing and good jobs, many women and their children are simply trapped. Women are earning less, but the government drags its feet on pay equity. Over half of families headed by single women are living in poverty, but the government freezes the minimum wage. The government brags about full-day learning, but sits on its hands while child care spaces vanish across this province.

I remember, myself, scrambling between child care and jobs, working my way through those hard years of my early life as a young mother, and I see the situation getting much worse for women today. Why does the Premier keep ignoring the growing inequality that’s clearly an issue for working families and women?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: In addition to raising the minimum wage to $10.25, which is the highest in the country, we’ve created 22,000 new licensed child care spaces since 2003. We’ve also—and this is very important to moms as well—developed and increased the Ontario child benefit. It’s now $1,100 per child. Again, that is something else that is at risk from a Conservative government in the province of Ontario.

There’s always more work to be done; I’m more than prepared to acknowledge that. But a number of initiatives we’ve put forward, the NDP have voted against. I would ask for my honourable colleague’s support the next time we bring an initiative into this Legislature to advance the cause of women in Ontario.

WOMEN’S ISSUES

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is to the Premier. The Canadian Council of Chief Executives is led by the former Liberal MP John Manley. Their membership includes nine women and over 150 men. They recently wrote to the Minister of Finance, encouraging him not to give women and their families a break next budget. The CEOs are saying Ontario should “declare war on spending,” the sort of spending that provides long-term care for aging women and child care and helps with the family budget.

Does the Premier find it surprising at all that the only kinds of spending that Canada’s richest corporations support are their own multi-billion dollar tax cuts?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: To the Minister of Finance.

Hon. Dwight Duncan: As part of the pre-budget consultations, we get input from a variety of sources. Last night, we had 11,000 people in Kitchener–Waterloo on a telephone call talking about their concerns. The night before, we had 10,000 people in Thunder Bay. We’ve been doing this across the province.

Mr. Manley and the council of chief executive officers wrote a long letter outlining a number of positions, positions which we have to take seriously, as we do other positions. We don’t always agree with what various groups advocate, but I can assure you that we will bring forward a budget that builds on our success in education, builds on our success in health care, reduces the deficit and builds a brighter and better future for all Ontarians.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Women and their families are struggling to get by. Wendy writes that she’s having a hard time paying her home heating bills and says, “I am still working for the same wages from 2008. But everything has gone up.” Meanwhile, the CEO lobby group, 94% of whom are wealthy men with an average income of about $4 million a year, says “No breaks for families next budget,” and the Premier seems to agree.

Why do Canada’s CEOs get their multi-billion dollar break, but women like Wendy, struggling to pay the bills, are told that there’s nothing at all for them?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: I think what is conveyed by a number of groups is important for us to take into consideration. I think they’re concerned about the level of the province’s deficit and debt, because they recognize that our children will pay for that. I think they’ve advocated in their letter very strongly for continued investments in education and health care, which they see as being important to the future.

That member and her party want to play cheap politics. We want to build a coalition of all Ontarians, Ontarians who are dedicated to the best education system in the world, to the highest-quality public education system in the world and to the tax package that we brought forward, which will create some 600,000 jobs. On this side of the House, we see a better future for our children with the right investments in education and health and the right approach to bringing our budget back into balance.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Final supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Amanda in New Liskeard writes, “Since the HST has come into effect, I have fallen behind on all my household bills. I have had to get a second job just to make ends meet.” Amanda could use a break on her home heating bill, but the Premier and his CEO friends say that a tax break to Canada’s richest corporations, like banks and insurance companies, is much more important.

Why is the Premier putting his rich friends first over the priorities of Amanda and women like her across the province?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: Last week I had the chance to speak to 5,000 Sudburians, with our member from Sudbury, about their views on the budget. I spoke to 7,500 residents of Sault Ste. Marie about their concerns with the budget. They want to see us invest in education and health care. They want a society that embraces all people. They want an approach to getting back to balance that respects the need to have the best education system, that respects the importance of full-day learning for our youngest students and that respects the need for more post-secondary spaces in Ontario and builds on the investments we’ve made in health care.

This province has a bright and brilliant future ahead of it. We’ll work with all Ontarians to build that future, and I look forward to budget day later this month.

ENERGY POLICIES

Mr. John Yakabuski: My question is for the Minister of Energy. Minister, yesterday you got caught again. First you got caught saying you had directed Hydro One to pass on $18 million in legal fees despite the fact that the Electricity Distributors Association is saying Hydro One was never part of the settlement. Then you got caught saying the majority of Ontario families were benefiting from your smart meter tax machines when data clearly shows otherwise: that the majority are not benefiting. In fact, they’re paying more.

How many times do you have to get caught before you’ll finally admit you’re in over your head?

Hon. Brad Duguid: The member is wrong today, like his leader was wrong yesterday.

I cannot believe the bounds of arrogance that these guys want to rise to, when they make false accusations yesterday and then rise in their place today and continue to make those same incorrect accusations. Then yesterday, they sent out a press release that also included those accusations that were patently false—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): I let it go once. I would just ask the honourable member to withdraw the comment, please.

Hon. Brad Duguid: I’ll withdraw that, Mr. Speaker.

The Leader of the Opposition yesterday continued to make accusations that were incorrect. He did not correct the record yesterday. He did not correct the record today. Does this leader not believe that if he says something that’s incorrect in this Legislature he owes the Legislature an apology? That he owes—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. Supplementary?

Mr. John Yakabuski: I cannot believe the arrogance of that minister. I hope we’ll get an answer—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Stop the clock. I’d ask the honourable ministers to please come to order.

Please continue.

Mr. John Yakabuski: I look forward to an answer to this one. We know that Ducks Unlimited are in the building today. They’re having a lobby day here, and a reception. Unfortunately, what people are getting out of this party is unlimited ducking when it comes to question period.

Last week we asked you twice to confirm that you were not going to sole-source a new power plant in Kitchener-Waterloo-Cambridge. You refused to answer both times. Your first action as Minister of Energy was to sign the $7-billion sole-sourced Samsung sweetheart deal. The reason you refused to answer the question last week regarding sole-sourcing the Kitchener-Waterloo-Cambridge power plant is that you are left with two options: either confirming that are you going to sole-source that power plant or getting caught once again—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. Minister?

Hon. Brad Duguid: I think that a Leader of the Opposition has a responsibility in this Legislature in the important role he plays to hold the government accountable. I also believe that he has a responsibility, like all of us, to be very straight-up with the people of Ontario. We’ve made a point on the energy file to be very straight-up on our long-term energy plan, but accusations were made yesterday that were absolutely incorrect. They were followed up with a press release that was issued from the Leader of the Opposition and his party.

That was absolutely incorrect, and he should apologize, and his member should if they want us to treat their questions with credibility here in this place. Their questions should be somewhat in keeping with the facts.

VICTIMS’ SERVICES

Ms. Cheri DiNovo: My question is for the Premier. Recently the government announced its sexual violence action plan. We noticed that in the action plan Victim Services was completely ignored. Victim Services is here today waiting for an answer.

Victim Services is the front-line agency that provides immediate assistance to victims of domestic violence and sexual abuse. Victim Services has not had a cost-of-living increase for two decades. Why is this government endangering its existence by not providing cost-of-living increases to this front-line agency that deals with women at their most vulnerable, as it does for all other agencies?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: To the minister responsible for women’s issues.

Hon. Laurel C. Broten: I’m pleased to have a chance to talk about the province’s sexual violence action plan: Changing Attitudes, Changing Lives. It is a four-year strategy that includes $15 million in funding.

The plan builds upon the progress that we’ve made in the domestic violence action plan, which was launched in 2004, and the solutions that have come to the table come to us from those survivors and front-line workers, 350 of whom we consulted over the last many months. Maria Van Bommel, parliamentary assistant to the minister responsible for women’s issues at the time, conducted those consultations across the province. The voices of the women are reflected in the strategy, and the strategy is supported by investments of $15 million. We’re very proud of the steps that we’re taking. We will change attitudes and change lives with this strategy.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Ms. Cheri DiNovo: Not one penny is going to Victim Services, the front-line agency that goes out with the police, that deals with victims at their most vulnerable. Not only has the government not included Victim Services in the sexual violence action plan and not given a cost-of-living increase for the agency, the government is now looking to cut essential programs, such as the SupportLink program to help victims of sexual abuse. Can the Premier assure us that Victim Services will not face any cuts to their programs?

Hon. Laurel C. Broten: We are very proud to have received support from many women’s organizations, including sexual assault centres, who lead this work across the province, who are receiving $3 million in additional resources as a result of this strategy, a 6% increase in their funding. That will allow them to continue to serve women across the province. These dollars are front-line dollars.

These are the voices that we heard from communities’ sexual assault centres. That organization, the OCRCC, is the organization with whom we worked closely to develop this strategy. This is a strategy that will respond directly to the needs of women in communities across the province. The member opposite, I would think, would embrace and thank the province for leading the sexual violence action plan.

For the first time in this province we’ve talked about this important issue, and this comprehensive strategy has come forward as a result.

AIR QUALITY

Mr. Kevin Daniel Flynn: I have a question today for the Minister of the Environment. Minister, last month you released the 2009 air quality report, and there was much reason to celebrate. It showed decreases in the amounts of carbon dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulphur dioxide and fine particulate matter. These are long-term trends that show the air we breathe in Ontario is getting cleaner.

My constituents in Oakville were pleased to hear that air quality was improving. They’re still concerned, however, about Oakville’s air being considered stressed back in 2006 during smog events. Minister, today, can you confirm that the same air quality improvements seen throughout the province are also occurring in my community of Oakville?

Hon. John Wilkinson: The number one reason that children are admitted to an ER in the province of Ontario is because of asthma, and the number one reason for that asthma is because of poor air quality.

I’m proud that in Oakville, I can report to the member, there has, in the last decade, been a decline of fine particulate matter of some 33%; and nitrogen dioxide decreased by 19%. This member and this party understand that our children’s lungs are more important than that love affair with dirty coal that you have over there. On this side of the House, we are getting rid of dirty coal because our children’s lungs deserve that. That’s why we’re investing in our children with full-day kindergarten: because their minds deserve that.

I want to thank the member from Oakville for being a tireless advocate for his community. We will work closely with the southwest GTA as we work together to improve the air quality because our children deserve it—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. Supplementary?

Mr. Kevin Daniel Flynn: The families in my community and throughout the southwest GTA will be reassured by those reductions.

Dr. David Balsillie was appointed to undertake a study to determine the steps your ministry—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Honourable members please come to order.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The member from Durham should be in his seat, speaking of seats.

Please continue.

Mr. Kevin Daniel Flynn: Dr. David Balsillie was appointed to undertake a study to determine the steps your ministry could take in the province to improve air quality. The comprehensive air management system proposed at the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment aligned well with the task force plan. The hallmark of both approaches is working well; it’s engaging local communities in local air quality issues.

Minister, the residents of my community want to know how they can be involved in the comprehensive air management system.

Hon. John Wilkinson: I want to thank the member because he has been a tireless advocate, understanding that communities have to come together. If we’re going to address the issues of local air quality, then we need to have people who are willing to do what the MPP for Oakville has done, which is to reach out to the community, to activists, to industry and to the municipalities. Because of his leadership and the leadership shown by Minister Sousa, the southwest GTA is seeing improved air quality.

They are very eager to participate in the new national effort that would allow communities to define themselves by way of an air zone and to take actions collectively to improve their air quality, because they understand that it does come down to the very simple question: What is more important, the lungs of our children, or is it more important to have a love affair with dirty coal?

When they were in power, coal production went up 124%. Under this government it has gone down, because our—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. New question.

CURRICULUM

Mr. Jim Wilson: My question is to the Premier. Premier, last week your Minister of Research and Innovation said that Ontario families opposed to teaching sex ed to six-year-olds were homophobes. Yesterday, we asked your Minister of Education if she agreed with Minister Murray’s comments. She refused to answer.

Premier, do you agree with your Minister of Research and Innovation that Ontario families opposed to your sex ed curriculum are homophobes?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: I think that Ontarians are fair, hard-working, honest, decent people. They want to ensure that we have a good-quality curriculum in our schools in all areas of subject matter, and I’m sure that my honourable colleague opposite knows that.

At present, we are taking the time to develop a consultation process so that we can better hear from parents.

I want to remind my honourable colleague that there is in fact sex ed in our schools today. We also have some solid equity policies that have been developed here in Ontario that teach our children that homophobia and racism, for example, are wrong. In fact, in the later grades, we invite students to stand up against those kinds of actions and words, should they ever bear witness to them.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Mr. Jim Wilson: Premier, this isn’t the first time you’ve had to clean up a mess left behind by your Minister of Research and Innovation. The last time, it took days for the minister to finally be forced to apologize for his comments on Twitter around the same topic. Now Minister Murray shows he has no respect for Ontario families and says that those opposed to sex ed being taught to six-year-olds are homophobes. Premier, very clearly, will you now condone the latest comments from Minister Murray?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: I find it passing strange. I’m not sure I’ve received a question from the Leader of the Opposition on education yet. The only time they raise issues related to education are in order to somehow launch some spurious attack against a member of the government.

On behalf of Ontarians, we would like to know what their stance is with respect to full-day kindergarten. What is their stance with respect to smaller classes? What is their stance with respect to no strikes in our schools? What is their stance with respect to higher graduation rates and higher test scores? Where do they stand on education?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The member from Simcoe–Grey. The government House leader.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): This is the final warning for the member from Simcoe North.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Final warning for the Minister of Economic Development and Trade. Order.

New question.

UNION CERTIFICATION

M me France Gélinas: Ma question est pour le premier ministre. As you well know, men make up the majority of construction workers. These men have been given card-based certification, which means that if 55% of them sign a union card, it is done and automatically certified. I’m really pleased that construction workers have those rights, but every worker should have that right.

Women make up the majority of home care workers. These women have been denied card-based certification. On the 100th anniversary of International Women’s Day, why does the McGuinty government still have rules that discriminate against women workers?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: To the Minister of Labour.

Hon. Charles Sousa: I appreciate the question from across the way. I recognize that Smokey is here from the union. Welcome to the House.

We recognize how important it is for us to have labour relations in our province, and we’re very proud of our record. In 99% of the cases, we have had work-related success without work stoppages. Also, we have introduced card-based certification in our construction trade, given the diversity of that trade.

We recognize how important it is to maintain relations. We will continue to work closely with all those involved, including on issues around pay equity and ensuring that those who are most vulnerable get what they need.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

M me France Gélinas: I’m not too sure what he was talking about, but what I’m talking about is card-based certification. Why is it that men get card-based certification and women don’t? The question is as simple as this.

Let me read you the standard card that a construction trade—a man—reads and understands: “Yes, I apply for and accept membership in the ABC union.” Does the minister really think that this is too complicated for a woman to understand, that they cannot sign a card?

Hon. Charles Sousa: This is not a gender issue; this is a sector issue. Card-based certification exists in the construction trade for men or women, and it’s not based on that issue.

What we do believe, and it is in the collective bargaining process—we recognize that in this province over the last number of years we’ve had labour peace, unlike what has occurred in the past through the time of the social contract, when you ripped up some of those ideas. We don’t believe in that case. We believe in strong relationships with our union members and our workers regardless of gender. We will continue to support those who are involved and will continue to be that way.

LIQUOR CONTROL

Mr. Yasir Naqvi: My question is for the Attorney General. With summer fast approaching, my community looks forward to the world-class music festivals held each year in my riding of Ottawa Centre. Ottawa’s festivals attract visitors from all over the province and, indeed, across the globe. These world-class events attract top-tier musicians and offer a friendly and relaxed outdoor environment for people to enjoy the great performances. Yet, unlike festival-goers the world over, people attending outdoor festivals in Ontario cannot in many cases watch a performance while having a beer or a glass of wine.

Minister, along with the Minister of Tourism and Culture, you recently announced the launch of consultations on the modernization of certain parts of Ontario’s liquor laws. Can the Attorney General tell us what these consultations could mean for my community and how Ontarians, Canadians and tourists alike might further enjoy the many great summer festivals Ontario has to offer with the proposed changes to Ontario’s alcohol regulations?

Hon. Christopher Bentley: The member from Ottawa Centre makes a very good point. We have lots of great festivals in the spring, summer, fall and, in fact, in the winter, in the province of Ontario. We’ve heard from lots of Ontarians that they’d like some more opportunity for—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Member from Hamilton East. Final warning for the member from Hamilton East–Stoney Creek. There are now three of you close to a red card.

Minister?

Hon. Christopher Bentley: They’d like some more opportunity for choice; the ability at a festival, for example, if it was okay with the festival owner and the municipality, to be able to walk around a little bit within a defined area with their drink, have greater enjoyment, enjoy the drink while they’re looking at crafts and purchasing crafts. It’s just a question of updating and modernizing some of the really old rules. We’re going to hear from Ontarians and we hope to be able to provide more opportunity for choice in Ontario when it comes to—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Mr. Yasir Naqvi: Many people are glad to hear the government is responding to what many consider outdated restrictions by considering the needs of business, festivals and the public for a more enjoyable experience for Ontarians and tourists.

There is, however, some mixed reaction to this consultation process among police forces in the province. Indeed, the police in my riding have voiced concerns with regulatory changes in relation to liquor laws. They are concerned that enforcement could be affected and that the relaxed outdoor atmosphere which attracts people to festivals may actually be jeopardized by changing the regulations in this area.

Minister, we all agree that police forces throughout the province do valuable work in protecting our communities and need the support of the province to provide them with the tools necessary to do their job. Can the Attorney General please address concerns raised by my chief of police that the potential changes will actually make the job of police more difficult and thereby endanger our communities?

Hon. Christopher Bentley: We really respect the work that our chiefs of police and the police forces do. In fact, I was on the phone yesterday with Chief White of the Ottawa Police Service getting his views and telling him we wanted to hear more. We’re having meetings with the chiefs; we’re going to be having meetings with the policing community.

Part of the proposal involves extra, more strenuous enforcement and more enforcement options. That’s where we want to hit the right balance. We want to provide greater opportunity for Ontarians to enjoy freedom at festivals combined with strong enforcement. We happen to have the toughest drinking and driving laws in North America. We have half the rate of drinking and driving of any other province or territory in Canada. Strong enforcement, more choice; we think we can hit the right balance. Let’s hear from Ontarians on this issue.

TENDERING PROCESS

Mr. Norm Miller: I have a question for the Minister of Economic Development and Trade. Minister, I have here an example that illustrates that your ministry—and in fact, your government—not only fails to promote Ontario businesses, but denies them the opportunity to even compete in the provincial RFP process. The specifications of this tender are tailored to specs for the Boston Whaler/Brunswick boats, effectively ruling out any Ontario company from competing. Apparently, aluminium welded boats need not apply. Minister, why aren’t you interested in supporting Ontario businesses in your government’s own procurement processes?

Hon. Sandra Pupatello: I’m going to have to ask the member opposite for more information related to this specific discussion around an RFP, which my ministry doesn’t do related to boats.

Having said that, I think it’s high time that we started telling people just what we do to promote Ontario business, not just in Ontario but around the world. The Ministry of Economic Development and Trade, on average, has 60 missions a year. We have hosted almost 100 incoming buyer/seller forums in Ontario alone, and that’s just in the last three years. We have hosted Home Depot’s supplier fair and Canadian Tire’s supplier fair. All of this is to drag our SMEs, our small and medium-sized enterprises, to do more business in Ontario, in Canada and in the world.

I look forward to the supplementary.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Mr. Norm Miller: Well, Minister, what about Ontario jobs and Ontario businesses? Minister, the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services led an RFP for a quantity of boats valued at several million dollars. In my own riding, Connor Industries makes vessels used by the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and its Quebec counterpart as well as the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, and yet they and every other Ontario boat builder say this tender expressly excludes them.

The tender closes today. Minister, will you do the right thing, rip up the RFP and start over so that Ontario companies have at least got a chance to compete on this tender?

Hon. Sandra Pupatello: As I said, I’m surprised that he didn’t send materials over, because if a member is serious about going to bat for a company in their hometown, they would provide me with paper, provide me with details. That member knows full well that we follow up on every single inquiry. Every member in this House knows that that happens in our ministry.

So let me say this: We have never been more aggressive on the world front, in taking our companies around the world. There has never been a more active minister or a more active ministry, with 60 missions going to all corners of this globe selling Ontario companies, selling Ontario tax policy, telling people all over the world the benefit of investing in our province, driving more Ontario companies into the supply chain of multinational companies around the world. That’s the record of our ministry and I’m proud of that, and if this member is serious he’s going to table that material so we can get to the bottom to help more companies do more work in this province—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. New question.

MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My question is to the Premier. This morning, OPSEU is at Queen’s Park asking the McGuinty Liberals—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The member from Renfrew. The member from Simcoe–Grey.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: This morning, OPSEU is here at Queen’s Park asking the McGuinty Liberals to walk the talk on mental health. In fact, a page will bring over these postcards to the Premier—thanks very much, Emily.

In communities across Ontario, mental health services are being cut. Children’s Mental Health Ontario is predicting that they will lose the ability to serve 2,000 children across this province this year. The wait time for services is already longer than seven months. Imagine what will happen after this latest round of cuts. Why has the Premier abandoned the pleas of so many mothers and so many families and so many children in need?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: I thank the member for the question. I just want to take the opportunity as well to thank all our mental health workers around the province, who work so hard every day and who have been leading the way—they’ve been working so hard—to take mental health issues out from under the cover of darkness, bring them into the light of day and help all of us understand that mental health is an issue that affects pretty well every Ontario family. They were the inspiration for our 10-year strategy that we are developing now. We are looking to them, in many instances, for guidance. We look forward to releasing that sometime this spring.

There is certainly more work to be done, but I think one sentiment I can certainly share with my honourable colleague opposite and certainly with all members of this House is that we owe a great debt of gratitude to those people who have been working on the front lines in mental health for such a long time now.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: The only thing in darkness is this government’s lack of attention to this particular issue.

In Sarnia, a 14-bed residential facility for girls is set to close its doors at the end of this month. In Whitby, Ontario, the only long-term-care residential mental health program for children and youth is about to cut 28 child and youth counsellors. In Brockville, 80 clinical and support staff positions at the Brockville Mental Health Centre have been put into limbo as acute mental health services are transferred to the Brockville General Hospital.

Time and time again, I have listened to the pleas of mothers and families who are desperate to get adequate care for their children. These cuts are short-sighted, they ignore the advice of the select committee and the minister’s own advisory panel and they hurt families in need. Will the Premier finally put women and their children first and walk the talk on mental health?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: To the Minister of Children and Youth Services.

Hon. Laurel C. Broten: I also welcome Smokey Thomas and the folks from OPSEU here. We continue to have many conversations with them with respect to how we can continue to do the important work in this sector.

I do know that one of the things that was said at the press conference this morning was that, in 17 of the last 19 years, we haven’t seen increases in children’s mental health. I’m proud to be part of the government that’s had two increases in children’s mental health. We provided the first two base increases in over a decade.

We’ve provided more than $64 million to the sector to support and expand services, we’ve invested $5.9 million in the Ontario centre of excellence in children’s mental health, we’ve doubled funding to the Ontario child and youth telepsychiatry program and we are listening to mothers and parents as we work with them to develop a family navigator pilot project with Kinark.

We know there’s a great deal of work to be done, but the Minister of Health and I have our sleeves rolled up, and—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. New question.

FARM SAFETY

Mr. Pat Hoy: My question is for the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. Each year in Canada, there are an average of 115 farm deaths and at least 15,000 farm-related incidents. I believe all members of this House would agree that one accident is one too many.

Everyone has a role to play in ensuring there are viable solutions for keeping safe on the farm. Farms are work sites like any other, and farm workers must be provided with a safe and healthy work environment. For many of my constituents in Chatham–Kent–Essex, farm safety is top of mind. Most tell me it’s an important and essential component of their operation.

Minister, what initiatives are being undertaken by your ministry and our partners in the agricultural sector to promote safe farming practices here in Ontario?

Hon. Carol Mitchell: This government is committed to ensuring that all farm workers are protected and that their health and safety is protected. My ministry has been working with Safe Workplace Promotion Services Ontario, formerly the Farm Safety Association, for over 10 years. Our goal is to reduce the occurrence of workplace injuries and illness on Ontario farm, horticulture and landscape operations.

Canadian Agricultural Safety Week gives us the opportunity to reflect on the work that we have done to improve our safety record. My ministry is very pleased to provide Safe Workplace Promotion Services Ontario with $120,000 annually. Together, in partnership with OMAFRA, they are working on a number of safety initiatives, and those initiatives are: editorials in the Ontario Farmer on safety issues; Safety Days, which are summer camp programs for over 1,800 Ontario children—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. Supplementary?

Mr. Pat Hoy: We all know that our farmers are hard at work to put food on our tables, but there are inherent risks associated with the type of work that occurs on our farms. Many of your constituents are farmers—and so are mine—and face these risks each and every day.

I’ve heard the opposition criticize our government about our health and safety record on farms. Minister, can you provide the House with the facts and tell us what you are doing to ensure farm workers are safe in this province?

Hon. Carol Mitchell: I would like to refer this to the Minister of Labour.

Mr. Charles Sousa: Thank you very much for the question. I’d also like to thank the Minister of Agriculture for her continued support of our province and our agricultural workers.

To the member’s question, let me be clear when I say that there is only one government in this House that is on the side of Ontario farmers and that has actually acted when it comes to protecting our farm workers.

I’ve heard the opposition talk, but it was our government that, in 2006, extended the Occupational Health and Safety Act to cover farm operations. Our government trained 100 of our health and safety inspectors specifically in farm safety, not the NDP and certainly not the PC Party. We’re inspecting over 350 farms a year. When we started, 50 were being inspected. The result: Lost-time injuries have been cut in half.

The parties opposite seem to be interested in pulling people apart, but we’re working together with the Minister of Agriculture and all of our partners. We’re bringing people together for a better—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. New question.

LANDLORD AND TENANT DISPUTES

Mrs. Joyce Savoline: My question is to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Ontario’s rental property owners are calling on your government to modernize the rent dispute process in this province. It typically takes 90 days for a dispute to be resolved, costing landlords about $5,200. That figure doesn’t take into account administrative costs, lost time and productivity.

Your government has put a strain on the rental housing sector, especially the small landlords, and there is a great risk that they will get out of the industry altogether, creating uncertainty for the 1.3 million rental households.

Why have you done nothing to modernize the rent dispute process in order to create a system that is fair, both to tenants and landlords?

Hon. Rick Bartolucci: The member better read her briefing notes, because nothing can be farther from the truth. We made extensive changes to a program that was unfair, to a program that was biased, to a program that had no balance at all to it. We made those changes because those changes were important. They were important to landlords, and they were important to tenants. We are very, very proud of the balance we put in that legislation, unlike the previous government, where the balance was so skewed, so biased and so unfair.

When we formed the government, we decided that there had to be fairness and there had to be balance. We ensured, with the amendments and the changes that we made, that that balance was there and that that fairness was there, because—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. Supplementary?

Mrs. Joyce Savoline: To the minister, the truth speaks for itself. The facts are the facts, and you can’t dispute that many of these cases take up to 90 days to resolve. Minister, no other business is required to provide goods or services without payment, yet landlords must allow tenants to stay, even without payment.

Vince Brescia, the president of the Federation of Rental-housing Providers of Ontario, says that this particularly affects small landlords who must find ways of making up lost costs from rental charged to all tenants, even those who do pay their rent.

Property owners and the majority of tenants are in favour of modernizing the rent dispute process by reducing hearing times from 29 to five days. Will you finally support Ontario families across this province with their request to reduce the existing—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. Minister?

Hon. Rick Bartolucci: This is a fundamentally important question. They know where we stand. I’d like to know where they stand. I know one thing for sure: I have yet to hear the leader of the PC Party, the leader of the official opposition, mention social housing in this House. I have never heard the words “social housing” from the mouth of the PC leader.

Let’s talk about balance. They know where we stand when it comes to protection for landlords and tenants. They understand that we have struck the balance that is good for landlords and good for tenants. I want to know: Where do they stand? What is their position? The people of Ontario, the tenants of Ontario and the landlords of Ontario want to know: What is the PC plan?

PAY EQUITY

Ms. Cheri DiNovo: My question is to the Premier, and it’s a very simple one. Why has the Premier allowed women to earn 29% less than men in the province of Ontario?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: To the minister responsible for women’s issues.

Hon. Laurel C. Broten: I’m so pleased that women’s issues are getting such a good hearing in the Legislature today, because today we celebrate 100 years of International Women’s Day.

We know, as a government, that to have a prosperous Ontario, we need women to be at their best, and that’s why we developed and created the Ontario child benefit. The Ontario child benefit allows mothers in many instances to be able to have support for their child as they make decisions in their own lives about how to move into the workforce and into the education system, and we know that those investments have helped lift mothers out of poverty. That’s why we went to bat for child care in Ontario and we invested, permanently, $63.5 million. Around this time last year, we were talking about this issue.

Those investments were made in the budget. When the federal government stepped away, we stepped in. Unfortunately, the NDP didn’t support that initiative. We look forward to having their support when we continue to—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. Supplementary?

Ms. Cheri DiNovo: And women are still earning 29% less than men in the province of Ontario. For the past seven years, this government has ignored their own pay equity legislation by failing to pay the adjustments owed to working women, and the government has refused to commit to a plan that would finally close this gap. Pay equity is not a privilege. Pay equity is not a frill. Pay equity is a human right; it’s the law.

Why won’t the McGuinty Liberals do the right thing and ensure that women workers are paid wages that are free of gender-based discrimination? Why won’t they make it fair?

Hon. Laurel C. Broten: As I said, our government has demonstrated our commitment to helping women bridge the wage gap by increasing the minimum wage to $10.25, by creating 22,000 new child care spaces, by providing more than $21 million annually to assist child care operators and other agencies to meet their pay equity obligations—$21 million into the sector.

The NDP claim to support and stand up for women, but their record goes against that. They failed to support the Ontario child benefit. They failed to support the creation of 22,000 new affordable child care spaces. They failed to support the raising of minimum wage. They haven’t supported Ontario families following the early learning agreements. We ask them to stand with us, to call upon the federal government to step back in where they have failed Ontario families when it comes to child care, and so far, they have refused. They need to pick up the phone and call Jack Layton.

FESTIVALS AND EVENTS

Mr. Rick Johnson: My question is for the Minister of Tourism and Culture. Minister, Ontario is home to many of the world’s renowned festivals and events. These festivals showcase all that Ontario has to offer. Festivals such as the 4th Line Theatre and the Globus Theatre summer seasons and the Buckhorn Fine Art Festival demonstrate just some of the attractions in my community.

Festivals across Ontario attract millions of people from across Ontario, Canada and the world, contributing $22 billion to the economy and creating thousands of jobs. However, as our economy is recovering from the global financial crisis of 2008-09, we must make strategic investments that will have a significant impact in our communities. My riding of Haliburton–Kawartha Lakes–Brock needs the additional investments to attract tourists, create jobs and ensure sustainability.

How will the minister ensure that these investments are bringing forward the best value for dollar?

Hon. Michael Chan: I want to thank the honourable member for the question.

There are many benefits in investing in festivals and events. Last year, despite the economic crisis, festivals and events generated over 22,000 jobs. This is why on March 1, this year, our government enhanced our support to the sector. Through Celebrate Ontario, we are investing $20 million across the province. This brings our total investment since 2003 to $186 million.

Our investments will support world-class festivals in every corner of the province. Beyond the economic benefits, festivals showcase Ontario’s heritage, diversity and culture and provide children the chance to learn and families the chance of being together. Our government’s Open Ontario plan is attracting tourists and creating jobs.

DEFERRED VOTES

TORONTO TRANSIT COMMISSION LABOUR DISPUTES RESOLUTION ACT, 2011 /

LOI DE 2011 SUR LE RÈGLEMENT

DES CONFLITS DE TRAVAIL

À LA COMMISSION DE TRANSPORT

DE TORONTO

Deferred vote on the motion for second reading of Bill 150,

An Act to provide for the resolution of labour disputes involving the Toronto Transit Commission / Projet de loi 150, Loi prévoyant le règlement des conflits de travail à la Commission de transport de Toronto.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Call in the members. This will be a five-minute bell.

The division bells rang from 1140 to 1145.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): On February 24, 2011, Mr. Sousa moved second reading of Bill 150. All those in favour will rise one at a time and be recorded by the Clerk.

Ayes

Aggelonitis, Sophia

Arnott, Ted

Arthurs, Wayne

Bailey, Robert

Barrett, Toby

Bartolucci, Rick

Bentley, Christopher

Bradley, James J.

Broten, Laurel C.

Cansfield, Donna H.

Caplan, David

Carroll, Aileen

Chan, Michael

Chiarelli, Bob

Chudleigh, Ted

Clark, Steve

Colle, Mike

Crozier, Bruce

Delaney, Bob

Dhillon, Vic

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duguid, Brad

Duncan, Dwight

Dunlop, Garfield

Elliott, Christine

Flynn, Kevin Daniel

Fonseca, Peter

Gerretsen, John

Gravelle, Michael

Hardeman, Ernie

Hoskins, Eric

Hoy, Pat

Hudak, Tim

Jaczek, Helena

Jeffrey, Linda

Johnson, Rick

Jones, Sylvia

Kwinter, Monte

Leal, Jeff

Levac, Dave

Mangat, Amrit

Martiniuk, Gerry

Matthews, Deborah

Mauro, Bill

McGuinty, Dalton

McMeekin, Ted

McNeely, Phil

Meilleur, Madeleine

Miller, Norm

Milloy, John

Mitchell, Carol

Moridi, Reza

Munro, Julia

Murray, Glen R.

O’Toole, John

Orazietti, David

Pendergast, Leeanna

Phillips, Gerry

Pupatello, Sandra

Qaadri, Shafiq

Ramsay, David

Sandals, Liz

Savoline, Joyce

Shurman, Peter

Smith, Monique

Sousa, Charles

Takhar, Harinder S.

Van Bommel, Maria

Wilkinson, John

Wilson, Jim

Witmer, Elizabeth

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Yakabuski, John

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Those opposed?

Nays

Bisson, Gilles

DiNovo, Cheri

Gélinas, France

Hampton, Howard

Horwath, Andrea

Kormos, Peter

Marchese, Rosario

Miller, Paul

Prue, Michael

Tabuns, Peter

The Clerk of the Assembly (Ms. Deborah Deller): The ayes are 73; the nays are 10.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): I declare the motion carried.

Second reading agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Pursuant to the order of the House dated March 3, 2011, this bill is ordered referred to the Standing Committee on General Government.

STRONG COMMUNITIES THROUGH

AFFORDABLE HOUSING ACT, 2011 /

LOI DE 2011 FAVORISANT

DES COLLECTIVITÉS FORTES

GRÂCE AU LOGEMENT ABORDABLE

Deferred vote on the motion for second reading of Bill 140,

An Act to enact the Housing Services Act, 2011, repeal the Social Housing Reform Act, 2000 and make complementary and other amendments to other Acts / Projet de loi 140, Loi édictant la Loi de 2011 sur les services de logement, abrogeant la Loi de 2000 sur la réforme du logement social et apportant des modifications corrélatives et autres à d’autres lois.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Call in the members. This is a five-minute bell.

Interjections: Same vote.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): On December 2, 2010, Mr. Bartolucci moved second reading of Bill 140. All those in favour will rise one at a time and be recorded by the Clerk.

Ayes

Aggelonitis, Sophia

Arnott, Ted

Arthurs, Wayne

Bailey, Robert

Barrett, Toby

Bartolucci, Rick

Bentley, Christopher

Berardinetti, Lorenzo

Bisson, Gilles

Bradley, James J.

Broten, Laurel C.

Cansfield, Donna H.

Caplan, David

Carroll, Aileen

Chan, Michael

Chiarelli, Bob

Chudleigh, Ted

Clark, Steve

Colle, Mike

Crozier, Bruce

Delaney, Bob

Dhillon, Vic

DiNovo, Cheri

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duguid, Brad

Duncan, Dwight

Dunlop, Garfield

Elliott, Christine

Flynn, Kevin Daniel

Fonseca, Peter

Gerretsen, John

Gélinas, France

Gravelle, Michael

Hampton, Howard

Hardeman, Ernie

Horwath, Andrea

Hoskins, Eric

Hoy, Pat

Hudak, Tim

Jaczek, Helena

Jeffrey, Linda

Johnson, Rick

Jones, Sylvia

Kormos, Peter

Kwinter, Monte

Leal, Jeff

Levac, Dave

Mangat, Amrit

Marchese, Rosario

Martiniuk, Gerry

Matthews, Deborah

Mauro, Bill

McGuinty, Dalton

McMeekin, Ted

McNeely, Phil

Meilleur, Madeleine

Miller, Norm

Miller, Paul

Milloy, John

Mitchell, Carol

Moridi, Reza

Munro, Julia

Murray, Glen R.

O’Toole, John

Orazietti, David

Pendergast, Leeanna

Phillips, Gerry

Prue, Michael

Pupatello, Sandra

Qaadri, Shafiq

Ramsay, David

Sandals, Liz

Savoline, Joyce

Shurman, Peter

Smith, Monique

Sousa, Charles

Tabuns, Peter

Takhar, Harinder S.

Van Bommel, Maria

Wilkinson, John

Wilson, Jim

Witmer, Elizabeth

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Yakabuski, John

The Clerk of the Assembly (Ms. Deborah Deller): The ayes are 84; the nays are zero.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): I declare the motion carried.

Second reading agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Shall the bill be ordered for third reading?

Hon. Rick Bartolucci: I would ask that the bill be referred to the Standing Committee on Justice Policy.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): So ordered.

There being no further deferred votes, this House stands recessed until 3 p.m. this afternoon.

The House recessed from 1152 to 1500.

INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS

Mr. Mario Sergio: I am pleased and honoured to have a delegation from the sunniest island in the Mediterranean, Sicily, with us here today. They are on a trade mission with the Sicilian association in Ontario.

We have Dr. Luciano Luciani, president of Istituto Italiano Fernando Santi, and Dr. Pippo Cipriani, a member of Parliament from Sicily. We have Mrs. Maria Rita Di Micele, together with the member from the Sicilian government, Dr. Cipriani. We have the president of the Associazione Trapanesi Emigrati nel Mondo, Mr. Domenic Renda. I know that another member is late. We have Dr. Frank Perricone, who is the ATEM ambassador from Toronto to Sicily. I welcome them.

Remarks in Italian.

Mr. John O’Toole: I’d like to introduce a constituent of mine from the riding of Durham, Mr. Greg Weeks, who’s a director with Ducks Unlimited. He’s very supportive of the outdoors community.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): I’d like to take this opportunity, on behalf of the member from Vaughan and page Holly Rose Lorenzon, to welcome her mother, Josie Lorenzon, to the Legislature today.

I noted in the members’ gallery, also with Ducks Unlimited, a constituent of mine from Aylmer, Ontario: Herb Kebbel. Welcome to Queen’s Park today, Herb.

MEMBERS’ STATEMENTS

HOWARD NOBLE

Mr. Jim Wilson: I rise today to pay tribute to a respected businessman, a loving great-grandfather and true gentleman. Howard Noble was a great friend who passed away on February 8 at the age of 92.

I was privileged to know both sides of Howard. As the founder of Noble Insurance, I respected him as an honest, hard-working businessman who always knew what his customers wanted. In private, I admired him as a generous man who cared deeply for his community and even more for his family. He is survived by his son, Wayne; granddaughter, Anne; and two great-granddaug