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

May 22, 2002

37th Parliament, 3rd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2002-May-22 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Wednesday 22 May 2002 Mercredi 22 mai 2002

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY

CHINESE FREEMASONS

CANADA SOUTHERN RAILWAY

HOLY TRINITY

CATHOLIC HIGH SCHOOL

DEVELOPMENT OF

AGRICULTURAL LAND

NORTHERN UNIVERSITY FUNDING

QUILT PROJECT IN STRATFORD

AMBULANCE SERVICES

RICHARD LOVEKIN

VISITORS

WORLD CUP CELEBRATIONS

VISITORS

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON REGULATIONS AND PRIVATE BILLS

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS EMPLOYMENT PROTECTION ACT, 2002 /

LOI DE 2002 SUR LA PROTECTION

DE L'EMPLOI DES POMPIERS VOLONTAIRES

SCHOOL BUS DRIVER

APPRECIATION WEEK ACT, 2002 /

LOI DE 2002 SUR LA SEMAINE

DE RECONNAISSANCE

ENVERS LES CONDUCTEURS

D'AUTOBUS SCOLAIRES

ELECTRICITY AMENDMENT ACT

(CONSUMER PROTECTION), 2002 /

LOI DE 2002 MODIFIANT

LA

LOI SUR L'ÉLECTRICITÉ

(PROTECTION DU CONSOMMATEUR)

GENOCIDE MEMORIAL WEEK ACT, 2002 /

LOI DE 2002 SUR LA SEMAINE

COMMÉMORATIVE DES GÉNOCIDES

MOTIONS

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

VISITORS

WALKERTON TRAGEDY

ORAL QUESTIONS

ONTARIO SECURITY

SCHOOL SAFETY

PRIVATIZATION OF PUBLIC SERVICES

ONTARIO BUDGET

ALCOHOL AND GAMING CONTROL

MUNICIPAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

HYDRO CORRIDOR LANDS

ONTARIO SUMMER JOBS PROGRAM

SAFE DRINKING WATER LEGISLATION

LONG-TERM CARE

SMART GROWTH

HYDRO ONE

NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT

RAPPORT DE L'ENQUÊTE

SUR WALKERTON /

WALKERTON INQUIRY REPORT

MINISTERIAL CONDUCT

PROBATION AND PAROLE SERVICES

PETITIONS

LONG-TERM-CARE FACILITIES

SAFE DRINKING WATER LEGISLATION

COMMUNITY HEALTH CARE CENTRE

HYDRO ONE

COMPETITIVE ELECTRICITY MARKET

HYDRO ONE

ONTARIO DISABILITY

SUPPORT PROGRAM

COMPETITIVE ELECTRICITY MARKET

CHILD CARE

COMMUNITY HEALTH CARE CENTRE

COMPETITIVE ELECTRICITY MARKET

PROVINCE OF ONTARIO

SAVINGS OFFICE

ORDERS OF THE DAY

THRONE SPEECH DEBATE

Wednesday 22 May 2002 Mercredi 22 mai 2002

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY

Mr Monte Kwinter (York Centre): The Minister of Enterprise, Opportunity and Innovation is today convening a round table to address problems

facing the automobile industry in attracting new investments in Ontario's automotive sector.

This meeting is being held in an environment of several plant closings, the loss of 15,000 well-paid jobs and the reality that in 1999 Canada ranked fourth in

world auto production. In 2001, we had dropped to seventh place, and it is estimated that by 2005 we will fall to ninth place.

Of 16 new assembly plants built or announced in North America since 1990, Ontario received just one. This is a concern because new assembly plants create jobs as

well as support the many automotive parts companies. The auto sector employs one in six people in Ontario, and a major determinant for attracting automotive investment is support for infrastructure

and skills development.

Shortly after the government assumed office in 1995, the then Minister of Economic Development and Trade stated that it is not his government's role to provide

assistance to particular industries. During estimates committee in November 2001, the then minister spent 30 minutes in an opening statement about his ministry and never once mentioned the

automotive sector.

With evidence of such indifference, how can we have any assurance that the round-table discussions will be little more than a public relations exercise with no

real, tangible commitment to the sector that provides the engine that drives the economy of Ontario?

CHINESE FREEMASONS

Mr Bob Wood (London West): I rise today to inform all members of the House that the 82nd anniversary of the London

chapter of the Chinese

Freemasons and the 21st anniversary of the Dart Coon Club, which was incorporated to hold the properties of the Chinese Freemasons, will be celebrated in London on May 26 with an anniversary dinner

and dragon dance.

Last year, the London

chapter hosted the 32nd National Convention of Chinese Freemasons in Canada, with representatives of the Zhi Gong political party from

China in attendance.

Chinese Freemasons have been in Canada for 140 years. Because immigration laws discriminated against Chinese and prevented families from joining husbands and

fathers, the Freemasons provided financial and social support for the men. Today, the Freemasons have 10,000 members in 19 branches.

The spirit, traditions and values of the Chinese Freemasons are constant. Their goals are to support their motherland, to participate in social services in their

adopted country and to assist the Chinese communities in Canada.

The organization shares roots with the better-known Masons in Canada. They have a logo, handshake and some ceremonies in common. An important difference is that

the Chinese Freemasons have regular memberships for women.

I know all members of the House will join me in wishing the Chinese Freemasons a very successful 82nd anniversary in London.

CANADA SOUTHERN RAILWAY

Mr Steve Peters (Elgin-Middlesex-London): I rise in the House today to bring attention to an issue of great importance: the future of the Canada

Southern Railway. This is a railway that spans 220 miles from Windsor to Fort Erie. Canadian National and Canadian Pacific, the owners, are abandoning the stretch of line from St Thomas east to the

Niagara Peninsula. Understandably, municipalities from Elgin and Oxford, St Thomas and Tillsonburg, and Haldimand and Norfolk are very concerned about the future of this important transportation

corridor. A number of meetings have taken place in an effort to find a way to preserve the corridor and allow the municipalities to purchase the line.

In 1998, this province spent $2 million in partnership with Barrie to acquire a CN line; $2 million also went to assist in purchasing the Orangeville line.

I was very pleased to hear the encouraging comments made by the Minister of Transportation last week, demonstrating his recognition of the railway's importance.

The minister said, "I only wish that we had, over a longer period of time, kept more of the railway corridors so that in the future we would have the opportunity to bring forward many of the

transit options for the future."

With these words in mind, and on behalf of all those municipal representatives and politicians who have worked so hard to preserve this corridor, I am today

formally requesting that the Minister of Transportation meet with these officials in order to preserve CASO's future. I'd be very pleased to participate in any co-operative efforts between the

ministry and those municipal officials with the goal in mind of preserving the Canada Southern Railway.

HOLY TRINITY

CATHOLIC HIGH SCHOOL

Mr Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): For the first time, students in Haldimand and Norfolk counties are being given the opportunity to

access a Catholic secondary education in their home community. Holy Trinity Catholic High School opened its doors in Simcoe this past September, giving Catholic teens in our area a real choice for

their secondary education. Previously, students from our area would have to be bused into Brantford if they wanted to attend a Catholic high school. Students and parents deserve the right to

choose. Holy Trinity gives parents in Norfolk and Haldimand choice and provides a nearby, close-to-home Catholic high school without sentencing students to a bus ride to the city.

I was fortunate enough to be given the opportunity recently to attend the blessing and the official opening of Holy Trinity. The bishop of London, His Excellency

John Michael Sherlock, officiated at this momentous occasion. He arrived and was escorted by the Knights of Columbus. The evening was the culmination of years of hard work and planning by the

board, director Joe Rapai, principal Floyd Kennedy, staff, parents, volunteers and other members of the community.

After getting a first-hand look at this impressive facility, I'm happy to say that we have a wonderful new state-of-the-art learning institution that's

positioned to serve Catholic secondary education needs in our area for many years to come.

DEVELOPMENT OF

AGRICULTURAL LAND

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): While thousands of acres of prime agricultural land are gobbled up by development each month in Ontario,

and the number of farms and farmers shrinks every day, the Conservative government of Ernie Eves stands on the sidelines, failing to take action to halt the loss of an irreplaceable agricultural

asset which has permitted our province to grow much of its own food. The most recent agricultural census results show that there are now 27.6% fewer farms in Ontario than 20 years ago, and we have

lost 11.5% of those in the last five years alone.

Bowing to pressure from developers who have poured millions of dollars into Conservative campaign coffers, and to some municipal politicians who will not be

satisfied until they have paved every last square inch of the land in their jurisdiction, this government weakened those provisions of the act that would put the brakes on ill-conceived,

unjustified and unwise development of agricultural and environmentally sensitive lands.

Pressure to put asphalt and cement on the remaining fruitlands of Niagara is building, with severances granted without justification and farmland taken for

development, aided and abetted by the Ontario Municipal Board.

On November 16, 2000, the Legislative Assembly passed by a margin of 51 to 8 a resolution that I presented to this House stating "that this House requests that

the provincial government, through provincial policy, provide long-term protection for the unique agricultural areas both within the Niagara Peninsula and throughout the province."

It is time the government of Ernie Eves heeded that resolution.

NORTHERN UNIVERSITY FUNDING

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): The Ontario Confederation of University Faculty Associations has released a report showing northern

universities get less provincial funding than southern universities. This means Algoma, Nipissing, Lakehead and Laurentian are trying to cope by placing more demands for revenue on the backs of

their students. All but one have higher tuition and fee revenue than the system average of 41.4%, which itself is already higher than the 35% the Conservative government deems acceptable.

This discrimination adds to the crisis facing these universities as they try to find money to prepare for the double cohort. If the government thinks northern

universities are in a position to do even more to meet enrolment needs, this government had better think again. In Sudbury, Laurentian University is already facing a 17.7% increase in enrolment for

September 2002. At Cambrian College, applications are up 16.7% from last year, and at Collège Boréal, 18.9%. Northern universities and colleges can't look to fee and tuition increases to

have the operating funds necessary to meet increased student enrolment.

The throne speech did nothing to ease student and faculty concerns about access and space. The vague statement that the government will provide the resources

necessary to meet the double cohort, without announcing what these will be, doesn't solve this serious problem. The government must quickly announce that it will cover the financial needs of

colleges and universities to meet the double cohort. The government must stop discriminating against northern universities, so that northern students don't suffer an added financial burden while

trying to get a university education.

QUILT PROJECT IN STRATFORD

Mr Bert Johnson (Perth-Middlesex): I rise to promote The Quilt, a breast cancer support project in Stratford. The Quilt was started by Carol

Miller, the project's founder and executive director. Carol is a breast cancer survivor herself. In 1997, she began quilting as a way to keep her mind active and her hands busy. Carol and her

support group created the first quilt project and requested donations from across the country. She was hoping to receive 35 quilts for her first year, but ended up receiving 134.

The Quilt project continues to grow. Last Thursday marked the launch of the 2002 exhibition of hundreds of quilts that have been donated from across Canada. One

hundred per cent of the money raised goes directly to the Canadian Cancer Society. Carol Miller and her support group are to be commended for their passion and their commitment to this noble

cause.

I also want to recognize The Quilt's honorary chair, Loreena McKennitt, the board of directors, the patrons and the many sponsors of this exhibition.

I'm pleased that the recent throne speech indicated that our government will build on the reputation that Ontario has as a global leader in cancer research and

that it will launch a concerted effort to eradicate this disease.

I would encourage all members to visit the exhibition in Stratford all this summer or the exhibition at Casa Loma in Toronto from September 6 to October 27.

AMBULANCE SERVICES

Mr Dominic Agostino (Hamilton East): Last Wednesday in this House, the member for St Catharines, Jim Bradley, and myself raised an issue

regarding ambulance dispatch service in Hamilton, Niagara, Brant and Haldimand-Norfolk, this service being run out of Hamilton. This was the result of a report which was an absolute indictment of

this government's performance in dealing with this dispatch service and their staffing, low morale, high staff turnover and lack of training. The minister, in response, said, "All the positions

have been filled."

The reality is that I have a staff list from the Hamilton dispatch office. In reality, only 29 of the 44 recommended positions have been filled. The minister

intentionally stood up and gave this House wrong information in regard to this.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Order. You can't say "intentionally stood up and gave wrong information." You're going to have to withdraw

that.

Mr Agostino: I withdraw that. The minister gave wrong information to this House on a very serious issue, one where seconds in dispatch could

mean life and death, one where there are two deaths in St Catharines being investigated as a result of problems with the dispatch system. This minister, instead of fixing the problem, sat on the

report for six months and then came into this House and told us he had filled these 44 positions, when the staff list very clearly indicates only 29 full-time positions have been filled.

This minister is more interested in public relations, damage control, than looking after the health and well-being of people in this area. It is a disgrace. This

minister has to come clean with this House, fill those positions and stop playing games with people's lives in the province of Ontario.

RICHARD LOVEKIN

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): I rise in the House today to pay tribute to a distinguished citizen from my riding of Durham, Judge Richard Lovekin.

Sadly, he passed away on May 15.

Richard Lovekin lived a life devoted to his country, his profession of law, his community and his family. He was an officer in the RCAF in World War II. He

served the legal profession with distinction and was appointed in 1977 as judge on the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, retiring in 1992.

The Lovekins have been part of the Newcastle community since 1796, when they were one of the first two families to establish farms in Clarke township. Richard

Lovekin was the beloved husband of Lynn and father of Kathy Ewert, Carol Little, Rick and Janet. He was stepfather to Susan Davis and Michael Housley. He was a proud grandfather of 12 and

great-grandfather of two. He was a loyal friend to his former law partner, Sam Cureatz, who was the MPP for my riding as well.

His many friends will remember his service to countless community organizations. Judge Lovekin was a member and past president of the Newcastle Lions Club and

past president of the Durham Central Fair board. He was an active member of St George's Anglican Church in Newcastle and a director of the Newcastle Village and District Historical Society. Those

are just a few ways Richard Lovekin served his community. Just last year the Lovekins' farm, Kilcolman, was one of the settings for a very successful exhibit of Massey farm equipment in

Newcastle.

At the memorial service on Monday, Charles Ewert gave a fitting eulogy to Richard Lovekin's leadership in his community and family which sets an example for all.

It is only fitting that I pay tribute to Judge Lovekin, and I extend condolences to the Lovekin family.

VISITORS

Mr David Caplan (Don Valley East): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: We have some very special guests up in the Speaker's gallery today,

residents of Leisure World from Don Valley East. I'd like to introduce Anne Skelly, Samantha Hamid, Kate Turvey and Ese Atiyota, who are here with residents Olive Gray, Bett Brockelbank, Terri

McInnis, Mary Lepard, Mary Tyrrell, Robert Giles, Anthony Fernandez and Laura Lee Hodgins. Welcome to you all.

WORLD CUP CELEBRATIONS

Mr Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I'm asking for unanimous consent from the members -- and I'm going to do

this as quickly as I can:

"Whereas soccer is an Ontario sport enjoyed by millions of people right here in Ontario; and

"Whereas soccer fans around the world and indeed in Toronto, Ontario, are gearing up for soccer's biggest event, the World Cup, which begins on May 31;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that the Legislative Assembly of Ontario will take all the necessary steps to make sure the province's soccer fans enjoy the best

World Cup celebrations Ontario has ever seen -- for example, by supporting the opening and staffing of SkyDome so fans like me can view and cheer all the live televised broadcasts of World Cup

games during this highlight in soccer history."

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Is there consent? I'm afraid I heard some noes.

VISITORS

Mr Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: We have with us in the members' gallery west --

Interjections.

Mr Bisson: If I can get the attention of the Liberal caucus for just one second, I'd like to introduce to the Legislative Assembly Chief Mike

Metatawabin and his son, Meshen, who are here from Fort Albany, and I wish them well in all the work they do in that fine community.

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON REGULATIONS AND PRIVATE BILLS

Mr Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): I beg leave to present a report from the standing committee on regulations and private bills and move its

adoption.

Clerk at the Table (Mr Todd Decker): Your committee begs to report the following bill without amendment:

Bill Pr1,

An Act respecting the Tilbury Area Public School and the William J. Miller Trust.

Your committee begs to report the following bill as amended:

Bill Pr2,

An Act respecting Wycliffe College.

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

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS EMPLOYMENT PROTECTION ACT, 2002 /

LOI DE 2002 SUR LA PROTECTION

DE L'EMPLOI DES POMPIERS VOLONTAIRES

Mr Arnott moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 30,

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

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

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

The member for a short statement?

Mr Ted Arnott (Waterloo-Wellington): I am very privileged to rise on behalf of my constituents in Waterloo-Wellington to introduce this bill

to the House. This bill would protect salaried firefighters who also work as volunteer firefighters. They may not be disciplined by an association of firefighters or dismissed by a fire department

for holding both positions if this bill is passed into law. It's my understanding and my hope that this bill will be debated at second reading on June 6.

SCHOOL BUS DRIVER

APPRECIATION WEEK ACT, 2002 /

LOI DE 2002 SUR LA SEMAINE

DE RECONNAISSANCE

ENVERS LES CONDUCTEURS

D'AUTOBUS SCOLAIRES

Mr Parsons moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 45,

An Act to make the first week in September school bus driver appreciation week / Projet de loi 45, Loi faisant de la première semaine de

septembre la Semaine de reconnaissance envers les conducteurs d'autobus scolaires.

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

The member for a short statement?

Mr Ernie Parsons (Prince Edward-Hastings): School bus drivers in Ontario are truly unsung heroes. We call upon them to drive a large vehicle

with over 70 students in it, at times at highway speeds, maintaining discipline on the bus, also ensuring students can get off and on the bus safely, also serving as counsellors and advisors --

just a tremendous range of roles for what is really a part-time occupation. This bill is an opportunity for the people of Ontario to recognize their contribution to the province and to our children

and to say thank you on an annual basis.

ELECTRICITY AMENDMENT ACT

(CONSUMER PROTECTION), 2002 /

LOI DE 2002 MODIFIANT

LA

LOI SUR L'ÉLECTRICITÉ

(PROTECTION DU CONSOMMATEUR)

Mr Hampton moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 55,

An Act to amend the Electricity Act, 1998 to protect consumers / Projet de loi 55, Loi modifiant la Loi de 1998 sur l'électricité afin de

protéger les consommateurs.

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

The member for a short statement?

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): The bill amends the Electricity Act, 1998, to provide that only distributors may sell electricity to

consumers. Contracts for the sale of electricity to consumers by other retailers are without effect if made after the bill receives royal assent and voidable by the consumer if made before that

time. The Minister of Environment and Energy is required to advertise the amendments to bring them to public attention.

GENOCIDE MEMORIAL WEEK ACT, 2002 /

LOI DE 2002 SUR LA SEMAINE

COMMÉMORATIVE DES GÉNOCIDES

Mr Wood moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 56,

An Act to proclaim Genocide Memorial Week in Ontario / Projet de loi 56, Loi proclamant la Semaine commémorative des génocides.

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

The member for a short statement?

Mr Bob Wood (London West): This bill proposes to observe an annual Genocide Memorial Week in Ontario beginning in late March. The response to

my earlier bills on this subject indicated a consensus in favour of the observance of such a week. I hope this bill will assist in determining whether there is a consensus around when such a week

would be observed.

MOTIONS

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of Environment and Energy, Government House Leader): I seek unanimous consent to put forward a motion without

notice regarding private members' public business.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Is there unanimous consent? Agreed.

Hon Mr Stockwell: I move that notwithstanding standing order 96(d), the following changes be made to the ballot list for private members'

public business: Mr Kwinter and Mr Brown exchange places in order of precedence; and Madame Boyer and Mr Arnott exchange places in order of precedence.

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

VISITORS

Mr Steve Peters (Elgin-Middlesex-London): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: As we've all welcomed the new pages to the Legislature and Travis

Weagant from my riding is a page, I'd just like to take this opportunity to welcome Travis's mom, his grandmother, his aunt and his two sisters. So if everybody would welcome them, please.

WALKERTON TRAGEDY

Mr Dwight Duncan (Windsor-St Clair): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: Recognizing that the second anniversary of Walkerton is upon us, I would

seek unanimous consent to put a motion that next Monday, the leaders of the three parties in the House be invited to reflect on what happened at Walkerton, and that at that time the House have a

chance to hear from all three leaders for up to five minutes each.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Is there unanimous consent? Is it agreed? I'm afraid I heard some noes.

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of Environment and Energy, Government House Leader): Mr Speaker, I have no difficulty if that's to be brought to

the table at the House leaders' meeting. Any kind of notice would have been helpful, but when you do it that way, it becomes very difficult for me to make a snap decision on the spot. We have a

meeting tomorrow at 10 o'clock; let's talk about it.

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): On the same point of order, Mr Speaker: What we're asking for is that the three parties have the

opportunity to commemorate the second anniversary of the tragedy at Walkerton. So what I'm asking for from the government House leader is simply -- and you can discuss the details tomorrow at the

House leaders' meeting -- an undertaking that it will happen.

The Speaker: What we'll do, members, is give the government House leader a point of order and then we'll wrap it up very quickly. You're going

to have your government House leaders' meeting. We do that in private, not in the Ontario Legislature.

Hon Mr Stockwell: Mr Speaker, I appreciate the point you made. That's exactly the point. But when they start saying, "What we're asking for,"

it's fairly apparent that they've had conversations about this, excluding me.

Interjections.

The Speaker: That's why I'm glad I'm the Speaker and not a House leader.

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): Further to that point of order, Speaker, let me assure the government House leader that we would never

exclude you, Mr Stockwell.

The Speaker: We'll be here all day if everybody tries to get the last word in.

The member for Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound did advise me that he wanted to do a point of order prior to this, so the member for Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound on a point of

order.

Mr Bill Murdoch (Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound): Thank you, Mr Speaker, and yes, I did advise you. I thought it would only be appropriate today, since

it is the second anniversary, that we do have a moment of silence for the people who suffered in the tragedy in Walkerton.

The Speaker: The member is asking for a moment of silence regarding Walkerton. Is there unanimous consent? Agreed.

Would all members and our friends in the gallery please join with us in a moment's silence.

The House observed a moment's silence.

ORAL QUESTIONS

ONTARIO SECURITY

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): My first set of questions today is for the Minister of Public Safety and Security. Ontarians

will rightly be very concerned by the information you provided to them just a short while ago. You told us that there are terrorist organizations in Ontario and you told us just recently that an

al-Qaeda sleeper cell was here in Ontario. Minister, having raised these concerns, what assurances can you now give Ontarians that these terrorist organizations are being rooted out and do not pose

a threat to us?

Hon Robert W. Runciman (Minister of Public Safety and Security): I think the view of the OPP and other law enforcement agencies in the

province and in the country is to give prevention the priority in terms of dealing with any perceived threat to this country or this continent. The indication that I was given yesterday during a

security briefing is that the officials in this country, in this province specifically, have had some success not only in identifying a number of organizations within Ontario, within Canada, but

with having a very direct and positive impact in discouraging the continued existence of one particular organization in the province. So I can indicate to members in the House that our law

enforcement officials are doing an outstanding job in identifying and effectively ensuring that these kinds of groups, organizations and individuals do not inflict damage on this province or

country.

Mr McGuinty: Minister, having raised these concerns, of course, you have a responsibility now to allay fears. You told us today that a sleeper

cell of al-Qaeda terrorists -- and that is your language, not mine -- was located here in Ontario. That cell was under police observation until it left the province. You told us that you do not

know where these terrorists went. If, as you tell us, these people were in fact terrorists in Ontario under police observation, why were these terrorists not arrested?

Hon Mr Runciman: These individuals were under observation, as are other individuals, organizations and groups within the country and within

the province of Ontario. Until they break the law, or plan to break the laws of this country, they can walk the streets of Canada as you and I can. They were under very clear and close scrutiny and

surveillance and were discouraged from continuing their operations in this province. I think this is a good-news story in terms of the law enforcement agencies in the country and we should be

applauding them.

Mr McGuinty: Minister, you tell us that there was an al-Qaeda sleeper cell in Ontario. You tell us that the members of this cell were and are

terrorists. Surely the question I put to you is the one that would be weighing on the minds of Ontarians: if we had these people here in Ontario, if they are terrorists as you describe them and if

they were in fact under police observation, how could you let them slip away? Why would you not arrest those people before they become terrorists? You called them terrorists. Surely there's a law

in Canada against terrorism. You called these people terrorists, Minister. You raised this matter. Why did you allow these people to slip away and why were they not arrested?

Hon Mr Runciman: These are recognized international terrorist organizations. They are recognized around the world as such.

We do have the rule of law in this country, and the police cannot act unless there is some reason to do so.

One of my concerns -- and it was a concern in my previous portfolio as well -- is complacency in this country with respect to any threat to our security. This

is not an American problem; this is a continental problem. We have to address it. We are addressing it very effectively in Ontario, and we should be proud of that.

SCHOOL SAFETY

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): This question is to the Minister of Education. On Thursday last, in fact in the morning, two

teenage girls were attacked and sexually assaulted in Hamilton. At the time, these young girls were in school. They were in their study hall at the high school.

I believe -- and I am sure that you would support this, Minister -- that our children have the right to go to school in a safe and secure environment, and I am

sure you would also agree that Ontario parents have the right to know that their kids are safe when they are at school.

As you know, Minister, I've laid out a safe schools plan just recently. One of the things it calls for is an investment in surveillance cameras, video cameras.

That is a matter that is optional for individual schools and individual school boards, and it would be up to those boards and those schools to make a determination as to whether or not it would in

fact serve their purposes and meet their needs.

Madam Minister, my question to you is, do you support my plan and will you make video surveillance cameras available to those schools that wish to have

them?

Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Deputy Premier, Minister of Education): I certainly share the concern of the Leader of the Opposition about the safety

and security of the students and staff in the schools throughout the province of Ontario. Upon becoming Minister of Education, I had instructed the deputy and the staff at the ministry to take a

look at a review of the Safe Schools Act in order that we can take a look at what we're already doing. In fact, that's legislation that was introduced by our government because we recognized a long

time ago the need to keep our students and our staff safe and secure within our schools. We are going to be reviewing the legislation, and I can tell you that certainly the use of video cameras --

and obviously whatever other means are necessary we are prepared to consider.

I just wish that when we had first raised this as an issue, you and your members had taken this issue seriously at that time.

Mr McGuinty: Madam Minister, I'm hoping that at some point in time you will truly recognize how serious a matter this is, move beyond the

political rhetoric and make an important decision on behalf of Ontario children.

In March, a grade 2 student was molested by an intruder hiding in a washroom at Holy Name Catholic elementary school here in Toronto. A month later, a

13-year-old girl was confronted by a man in a washroom at Don Mills Middle School. Also, in April, two female students discovered a man lurking in a washroom at the St Lawrence elementary school. I

wish these incidents were not escalating, but the fact is that certainly more are being reported.

Madam Minister, what I'm asking you to do is to consider a proposal I have put forward. I put it forward with a spirit of genuine commitment to ensuring that

our schools are safer. I'm not talking about an expensive program. Principals and school board representatives are now saying that this is a good idea. I think it is inappropriate and unacceptable

for you to say the matter is under review. I think you have to make a decision now. Will you or will you not fund video surveillance cameras for those schools which wish to make use of them?

Hon Mrs Witmer: I think if the leader had listened to my response -- I'm quite prepared to discuss and include the issue of surveillance

cameras with school boards and those who are concerned about the safety and security of our staff and our students. We are moving forward. I believe there is far more that we will need to do,

because I would agree with you: the incidents of violence are increasing, and certainly the safety and security of our students and staff must be paramount in all of the decisions we make. So I can

assure you I will certainly take this under consideration and I will discuss this with the school boards.

Mr McGuinty: The superintendent of education in Hamilton, Jim Wibberley, said that all schools in his board would choose video surveillance,

but they can't afford it.

The principal of Delta Secondary School, Mr Dave Hutton, echoes my call for cameras. Chris Murray, the chair of the parent council at Delta, the same high

school where those two girls were assaulted last week, agrees that cameras are needed for security.

I respectfully suggest to you, Madam Minister, that the time for consideration is over. The time for action is here. I've put a plan on the table. It is very

inexpensive, all things considered. What you should do in your capacity as minister is make video surveillance cameras available to schools today in Ontario to protect our kids. Will you do

that?

Hon Mrs Witmer: I would just again emphasize the fact that our government in 2000 did introduce the Safe Schools Act, which did establish the

Ontario --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Order. We've had our little yell back and forth. It doesn't matter to me; we'll sit here and there will be no

question period. The minister gets to prepare the answer and listen more, so if you want to yell, she can prepare more to answer. It's fine by me.

Sorry for the interruption, Minister.

Hon Mrs Witmer: Again, I would just say that we have taken steps in the past. I've mentioned the Safe Schools Act in 2000. Let's also take a

look at the access-to-school-premises regulation on September 1, 2001, which did give principals the authority to regulate who was allowed on school property.

Having said that, I agree with you: more needs to be done. I already have under consideration a review of the Safe Schools Act, and certainly the whole issue

of surveillance cameras, which are already being used in some of our schools today, is an issue which I am prepared to discuss with our school boards.

PRIVATIZATION OF PUBLIC SERVICES

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Premier. The people of Ontario want to know you aren't going to pull a fast one

when it comes to privatizing public services. You've repeatedly said you intend to bring in a bill allowing you to privatize Hydro One. We think that's wrong. In court, your lawyers argued that

your government could sell off any public entity or asset it chose. The judge, however, disagreed.

Premier, we don't want you to privatize Hydro One. Moreover, we want a guarantee that you are not going to introduce legislation that would allow you to

privatize Hydro One and a number of other public agencies as well. Would you make that guarantee now?

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): The Minister of Energy is preparing legislation that would clarify the

province's rights that it thought it had inherently with respect to the ownership of certain assets and property. He'll have to wait until he sees that legislation, and then he can tell me whether

he agrees with the fact that the province of Ontario has those inherent ownership rights or whether it does not.

Mr Hampton: Premier, it was a simple question. I'm asking that you guarantee that you will not be introducing an omnibus privatization bill,

that after your statements that you're going to consult the people of Ontario, we're not going to see legislation that in effect would allow your government to privatize Ontario Power Generation,

the Ontario Clean Water Agency, TVOntario or the Liquor Control Board of Ontario. It's precisely that kind of arrogant attitude that Justice Gans ruled against, and it would be a disaster for the

quality of life in this province.

I'm asking you again, will you rule out here and now that your government intends to introduce legislation that would amount to an omnibus privatization

bill?

Hon Mr Eves: I know of no plans that the government has for an omnibus privatization bill.

Mr Hampton: Then I take it the Premier would also agree that if he's going to introduce legislation with respect to Hydro One, there will be

public hearings held throughout the province. After all, Premier, it was you who said you wanted to consult with the people of Ontario and you wanted to listen to the people of Ontario. I'm asking

you now: whatever legislation you introduce with respect to Hydro One only, will there be public hearings across the province so that the people of Ontario can truly be consulted?

Hon Mr Eves: First of all, the Minister of Energy of course has visited several communities, but any legislation would be referred to a

committee of the Legislature, and that committee of the Legislature would determine what hearings were held and where they were held.

ONTARIO BUDGET

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): Another question for the Premier: the people of Ontario have been waiting patiently for your

government's first budget. Many are even hopeful that, for example, school and education budgets will get an honest hearing in a budget, that hospitals and municipalities will have some of their

issues addressed. The problem, though, is that we're hearing that your government may in fact not be willing to bring forward a budget this spring session. I'm asking you for a guarantee. Will you

bring forward a budget this spring session?

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): If that's the case, the Minister of Finance has been wasting her time

recently.

Mr Hampton: Then let's get to the root of the issue. Will you tell us today on what date this spring you intend to bring down your budget?

There are schools, hospitals, municipalities and a number of other public bodies in this province that want to know what their budget situation will be, what amounts of money they will have to look

after the children in our schools, the patients in our hospitals and to address a number of services that you've downloaded on to municipalities. Would you have the decency and the respect to

announce here today to all of those hospitals, schools and municipalities on what specific day this spring your government will be bringing down its budget?

Hon Mr Eves: The Minister of Finance will be announcing in due course the date of her budget.

However, having said that, the date of the budget doesn't necessarily tell anybody when people will know what their transfer payments are. I can recall your

Minister of Finance in the Bob Rae government making a great production out of rolling out transfer payments to schools one day, hospitals another day and municipalities another day, and it wasn't

done on budget day.

I would say with all due respect that you should be the last party to be talking about wanting to know when budget day is, to know what the transfer payments

are. If you were paying attention, you would know that school boards across the province found out that they have an extra $440 million for educational budgets this year. They found that out last

Friday, thanks to the Minister of Education.

ALCOHOL AND GAMING CONTROL

Mr Mike Colle (Eglinton-Lawrence): A question for the Premier: your Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario has turned down the city of

Toronto's unanimous request for extending bar, café and restaurant hours during this year's World Cup of soccer. As you know, this year the World Cup is in Japan and Korea and there's a

23-hour difference, so a couple of the games occur at very unusual hours.

The World Cup, as you know, is one of the most popular sporting events in the world, celebrated by nations and cultures, especially in Toronto, which is

usually the most active focal point for World Cup celebrations. I have written your minister of consumer affairs and asked him to sit down with the gaming commission officials to see if they can

accommodate this request and work out a situation where this celebration can take place in our great city.

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I do appreciate the concerns that have been raised by some members in the

community, especially in the city of Toronto. However, the Alcohol and Gaming Commission is a quasi-judicial independent body. They are charged with making these decisions, and I am sure that if

the government interfered with any quasi-judicial body and tried to tell them what to do with respect to any decision, your party would be the first that would jump up and complain about us

interfering.

Mr Colle: It's disappointing to see the Premier hide behind another unaccountable body. I think what the people of Toronto are asking the

Premier is to perhaps stand up and say that he will encourage his minister to sit down with the gaming commission to accommodate this very modest request. All it is for is two games on a Friday and

Saturday night, and I don't think it's too much for the hundreds and thousands of people who have called Toronto home and who love soccer to ask you to at least ask your gaming commission to talk

to the city officials to see if they can accommodate something. Just talk to them. We ask you to at least talk to them.

Hon Mr Eves: It's my understanding that the only times exceptions have been made to the extension of hours are where there have been specific

events held in specific communities, and the events were held in Ontario, where they took place. And I would say to the honourable member that it's my understanding that the Toronto Police Service

had some very specific concerns with respect to this request, and the Alcohol and Gaming Commission, a quasi-judicial body, has made an independent decision as to what they think is best in this

particular circumstance.

MUNICIPAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Mr Joseph Spina (Brampton Centre): My question is for the Associate Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing for urban issues, as opposed to

my friend for rural issues. The continued competitiveness of our urban centres is really important. From a city of 300,000, we know that it's essential that these urban centres continue to be

strong and healthy. You recognize, Minister, that well-administered, economically healthy municipalities are a significant part of Ontario's competitive edge and we must continue to introduce

initiatives that achieve prosperity for residents and for our province. I'd be interested in knowing what your direction is to strengthen this municipal sector.

Hon Tina R. Molinari (Associate Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): I thank the member from Brampton Centre for his question. I know

he is a strong voice for economic growth in his community and for his constituents.

Our government has taken a number of steps to strengthen and give flexibility to the municipal sector. The new Municipal Act, the memorandum of understanding

with the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, which is supported by all of the municipalities, brownfields legislation and the government's Smart Growth initiative, for example, are all

intended to give municipalities new, flexible tools to encourage local economic development and improve municipal revenues.

Our government recognizes that to maintain Ontario's competitive edge, we need an appropriate legislative environment, an environment that provides

municipalities with the tools they require, simultaneously protecting public health and safety without creating red tape. This is necessary in order to sustain and improve the competitive edge in

our municipalities and for our economy.

Mr Spina: Thank you, Minister. Brampton is the third-fastest-growing city in Canada. Currently at 325,000, we're going to hit half a million

very soon. We're choking on gridlock. Highway 410 has been dragging its heels in terms of development for the last four or five years. What we need is a government committed to a stronger, more

mature provincial-municipal relationship, a relationship that can take municipalities into the 21st century. How is this government fulfilling its commitment to helping municipalities deal with

their infrastructure challenges like Highway 410, like public transit, to get in and out of Toronto?

Hon Mrs Molinari: Certainly the member from Brampton Centre is very concerned with a number of issues, and transportation is one of them, and

the gridlock.

I want to say that Ontario has recently announced a 10-year, $9-billion transit plan designed to reduce gridlock and to maintain economic competitiveness and

environmental quality. This money is in addition to Ontario's initiatives to improve highways with a minimum of $10 billion in private sector and government investment over 10 years. Other examples

include the Toronto waterfront redevelopment project and recent cultural funding announcements.

We have continued to build upon provincial-municipal relationships with the expansion of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing to include the focus on

both rural and urban issues. Also, our Smart Growth panels will be coming forward with some recommendations.

HYDRO CORRIDOR LANDS

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): My question is to the Premier. Hydro One owns 55,000 acres of land. That land is absolutely

invaluable in terms of meeting future public transportation needs as well as providing a continuing opportunity for recreation and enjoyment of green space. Premier, will you guarantee that hydro

transmission corridors will remain public lands for public uses like transit and recreation?

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Absolutely, and I've asked the Minister of Energy to make sure that any

legislation he brings in would do exactly that.

Mr McGuinty: Premier, I appreciate and thank you for that response.

Further to that, immediately upon the conclusion of question period today I will be moving a motion seeking immediate third reading for Bill 13, which received

unanimous support in this Legislature a short while ago, a bill put forward by my caucus colleague, Mr Mario Sergio. Will you provide your support for third reading passage of this bill immediately

after question period today, Premier?

Hon Mr Eves: There are many pieces of legislation that are very important that should proceed with third reading immediately, such as the farm

nutrient management bill, for example, in Ontario.

There are many pieces of legislation that should be passed immediately. This particular situation is going to be dealt with in any bill that the Minister of

Energy brings forward, and the honourable member and his colleagues will have an opportunity to vote for it in the Legislature.

ONTARIO SUMMER JOBS PROGRAM

Mr Doug Galt (Northumberland): My question is directed to the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities. Minister, today you announced

the launch of the Ontario summer jobs 2002 program. Since the creation of this program, we have helped thousands of young people gain employment and valuable training within the Ontario workforce.

That's a workforce that has gained some 850,000 net new jobs since we took office back in 1995.

Minister, as this program begins another year, could you please explain to the people of my great riding of Northumberland what changes have taken place in the

Ontario summer jobs program and how these changes will ensure that the young people of Ontario have the best possible opportunity for a good job this summer?

Hon Dianne Cunningham (Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities, minister responsible for women's issues): In response to my

hard-working, great representative from Northumberland -- like all of us in this House -- this announcement this morning is about our students; it's about the summer job program. All of you should

remember 1-888-JOBGROW for your constituency youngsters who call.

We kicked off the program this year, and the difference is that we have a program called Job Connect which just used to operate in the summer -- young people

leaving school looking for work. We have an 80% success rate in this program; it's one we're very proud of. Today, Mr Member from Northumberland, we announced that this program is all year round.

Students have changed. Young people now are going to semesters in school. They're looking for jobs, looking for work experience. The response to the real question is that this program is all year

and this is different from in the past.

Mr Galt: It's great to get that kind of report from one of the best ministers in the Eves government. It's certainly good news for Ontarians,

especially young people in my great riding of Northumberland. Young people deserve the benefit of work experience. A summer job is a great way to learn about different careers and helps our young

people focus on their goals. For example, a second-year Queen's student, Sally Harris, is just doing a fabulous job in my office and I really appreciate it.

In today's economy the need for skilled workers is growing strongly, yet apart from this need for a skilled labour force, there's a growing market for the

self-employed. Minister, can you please tell my constituents in Northumberland how many youth are projected to be helped by the Ontario summer jobs program this year, and does this program only

help those people who want to gain employment within a company?

Hon Mrs Cunningham: We're looking at 57,000 students who took advantage of this program last year. We're looking for a slight increase this

year. It's going to cost us $53.1 million. In raw data, in 1995 it was one half the number of students for $7 million more, so we're getting twice the number of students for half the money.

I will say it is about efficiency and effectiveness. I wish my Liberal colleagues across the floor from me would speak to the federal government so that we

could do these kinds of training programs together, which means we need a labour market training agreement.

Interjection.

Hon Mrs Cunningham: It doesn't matter what you say, the facts are there. Every province has it and we don't. We could be doing this every

single day, for young people and unemployed people, if we worked together.

Mr Dominic Agostino (Hamilton East): Have you signed the deal, Dianne?

Hon Mrs Cunningham: Yes, we offered to sign the deal, actually. An announcement -- we made an offer to sign the deal four months ago and the

federal government rejected it.

SAFE DRINKING WATER LEGISLATION

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): My question is for the Minister of the Environment. Tomorrow is the second anniversary of the beginning

of the Walkerton tragedy, the day the first of seven victims died from the tainted water. Last year your government refused to allow all-party statements in recognition of that anniversary and I

was pleased to hear you say today that you will consider allowing that tomorrow.

Beyond the realm of symbols, there's an extremely important substantial step that we could take here in the Legislature to honour the people of Walkerton: we

could pass the Safe Drinking Water Act, to ensure we do everything we can in Ontario to make sure this never happens again. I'm asking you, when will you bring Bill 3, the Safe Drinking Water

Act, before the House for third and final reading?

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of Environment and Energy, Government House Leader): First and foremost, it was a terrible tragedy in Walkerton.

I think we all can understand the devastating impact on the community.

When discussing whether or not to speak to the moment in this Legislature, I consulted with the local member. The local member is Mr Murdoch. Mr Murdoch

requested on behalf of his constituents that they would feel more comfortable having a moment of silence. That's the direction he brought to our caucus last year and that's the direction he brought

to our caucus this year. I can think of no better thing than to go to the local member and ask him how he feels the constituents in that community would best be honoured, thought about and

remembered. Mr Murdoch brought that request forward again this year and I accepted that request. I think we all in this House would not play politics with such an issue as this. I respect the

member's view, I respect his view of his constituents and I'm following the request of Mr Murdoch to handle it in the same way this year.

Ms Churley: I thought the minister said, in response to an earlier question, that the request would be looked at in the House leaders' meeting

tomorrow. I do hope that's still an opportunity, because I too talked to some citizens from Walkerton, and I know they would like us to have that opportunity.

But I asked you a specific question about Bill 3, the Safe Drinking Water Act. I've been fighting for this legislation, Minister, in this House since June

2000, just after the Walkerton tragedy hit. The bill would recognize that we have a right to clean and safe drinking water. It would take the necessary steps to make sure that this doesn't happen.

It would be enshrined in legislation. It was approved in principle in this House on September 28, 2000, but then your government killed it in committee. I brought the same legislation back as Bill

3, and it again passed second reading last October 11.

So this is a real test of your government's intentions on the environment. Will you block this bill, approved twice by all of the members in this House, or

will you commit now to speedy passage to honour the people of Walkerton?

Hon Mr Stockwell: Once again, the point is not that I will not discuss the issue. The point I was making today is that we had discussions with

the local member about honouring the people of Walkerton. I informed the opposition members an hour before the House sat that this was the approach we were taking. I had no knowledge that the

members opposite were going to stand up and ask for this action. So that's the situation as it is.

Mr Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): What about the Safe Drinking Water Act?

Hon Mr Stockwell: With respect to the Safe Drinking Water Act, I think the new Premier has been as clear as you can be. He's looking forward

to introducing legislation for Ontario's clean water legacy trust and creating a clean water centre of excellence in Walkerton. We are dealing with the issues. Those initiatives in the ministry

have strengthened the annual inspections, doubling the number of inspectors, continuing annual inspections and ensuring one out of three annual inspections will be unannounced, introducing more

comprehensive training, having follow-up inspections in case of non-compliance.

I'm not going to stand here and start arguing about the implementation and necessities. We believe, as a government, that we have taken this situation very,

very seriously and acted in a very admirable, forthright fashion. We have tried our best to deal with the issues as they are before us. We know that was a tragedy that should never happen again.

The undertaking for this government is to implement Walkerton report 1. We're going to get Walkerton report 2. We should read it and move on from there. But as a government, we have never taken any

issue that has faced this government more seriously.

LONG-TERM CARE

Mr John Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands): My question is to the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. Members on all sides of the House

have received over 55,000 cards from Ontarians all over this province urging the government to increase the operating funding for long-term-care facilities. As a matter of fact, these cards are

here. I will have one of the pages deliver them to you shortly. These cards have been signed by residents and their families who are pleading with you to provide additional operating funds to our

long-term-care facilities.

Minister, you noted in your own independently funded study, completed last summer, that Ontario ranked last in meeting the needs of our seniors in nursing

homes and homes for the aged. Our residents received the least amount of registered nursing care and personal support care. Current levels allow the staff of the homes only four minutes to assist

residents with getting up, washed, dressed and to the dining room daily; 10 minutes to assist residents with eating; 15 minutes of programming per day; and only one bath a week for the

residents.

Minister, when are you going to increase funding so that our seniors can live out their lives with dignity and respect and with as much comfort as

possible?

Hon Tony Clement (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I thank the honourable member for the question. I would say to the honourable member

for Kingston and the Islands that we have increased funding. We have increased spending. I, as minister, as part of a government, increased the operating funding, the per diem funding, just last

year. So in answer to the honourable member's question, the answer is yes, we have done that. Of course, we wait for this year's budget.

But I would tell the honourable member I'm quite happy to accept these cards. In fact, I will also pass a note along to the federal Minister of Health, who

contributes exactly zero dollars and zero cents to the issues that he is so concerned about.

Mr Gerretsen: Minister, you have not increased any of the funding for the personal care and nursing care for our seniors. This government over

the last five to six years has underappreciated, underrated and underfunded the plans for the seniors throughout this province. As a matter of fact, the health care needs of our seniors weren't

even mentioned in your recent throne speech.

You know that our residents receive only two hours of nursing care per day, the lowest of all the jurisdictions. As a matter of fact, in Mississippi they get

twice the amount of nursing care on a daily basis as here in Ontario.

Ontarians living in long-term-care facilities are older, frailer and sicker than ever before and they require a higher level of palliative care than at any

time in history. There is a widening gap between the needs and the care required for our seniors. The impact on our grandparents, parents and relatives has widened and deepened.

Minister, when are you going to do the right thing? Stand up to your cabinet colleagues around the cabinet table and demand additional operating funding so

that our seniors, who have contributed so much to the welfare of this province, can continue to live out their lives with comfort, dignity and respect. Over 55,000 residents and families in Ontario

demand that you take action on this today.

Hon Mr Clement: I don't need any lectures from the honourable member or from the party opposite. The fact of the matter is, we are very

generous with our long-term-care residents. Compare us to other provinces. Compare us to the public health care system that we have in Canada. I'd be happy to compare what residents in Mississippi

get when it comes to publicly funded health care with what we get in Ontario.

The fact of the matter is, we have been there for long-term-care residents after a 10-year hiatus, which this party contributed to. When it came to the

moratorium on building new long-term-care residences, we didn't just have the rhetoric; we acted: 20,000 new spaces for our long-term-care residents. We are planning for the future. We are there

for our long-term-care residents. We have a plan for the future. They don't. They don't know what they're talking about, and this is another piece of evidence of that very point.

We in fact will be there for our residents. We in fact have been there for our residents. This party on the other side talks about rhetoric. When they get into

government, they don't act, because they don't care.

SMART GROWTH

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): My question is to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. About one year ago this government introduced the

Smart Growth initiative. Indeed, it was just a year ago, in fact last June, that we had a very successful community consultation in Durham region to discuss your initiative.

Last June, some of the stakeholders invited from my riding included Robert and Philip Brown of the Kedron Dells golf course, Ron Hooper from the BIA -- the

Business Improvement Area -- Hans Verkruisen from the Newcastle chamber of commerce and Roy Moore from Goodyear, just to name a few. Others included Wayne Clark, president of the Durham Region Home

Builders' Association, Bob Malcolmson, general manager of the Greater Oshawa Chamber of Commerce, Brett Puckrin as well as Sue Larsh of the Durham Environmental Network.

There were representatives not only from business but also from municipal leaders, major employers, the agriculture sector, health care, education and the

environment. Each group had valuable insights into how we can encourage smart patterns of growth, not just in Durham but indeed in the whole GTA.

Minister, could you give us an update in the Legislature on the Smart Growth initiative and how it will benefit the people of Ontario?

Hon Chris Hodgson (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): To the hard-working member from Durham, the Smart Growth initiative for Ontario

was laid out about a year ago, and since that time I'm pleased to update the House that we've had two major series and rounds of consultation, which have led to the creation of five regional panels

to be established. Three are established and two are to be set up.

We are doing what we set out to do. Components have already been established with the brownfields legislation to allow for the cleanup of contaminated sites in

our urban cores and in the downtown areas of our small communities throughout Ontario; and the Oak Ridges moraine act, which I know all members of this House supported, which says that certain

areas should be protected and passed on as a legacy to future generations.

Going forward, we plan to have these panels up and running and come out with concrete suggestions on how to manage and promote growth in this province.

Mr O'Toole: Thank you very much for that update, Minister. I know the Smart Growth panel does include membership that certainly recognizes

Durham. Mayor Marcel Brunelle, the mayor of Whitby, is certainly one of the members I'm aware of. I'm confident the panels will address not just the urban issues and the expansion of growth but

also the rural issues, the quality-of-life issues, and that's because the Smart Growth concept will benefit all of Ontario.

Could you tell us what the role of the panel is in planning in the province of Ontario?

Hon Mr Hodgson: The panels were set up because it was suggested that one-size-fits-all wouldn't work for a province as vast as Ontario, with

differing needs in different regions. Second, people didn't want to see another level of government; they wanted to see a coordination of government decisions within the province and across

municipal boundaries, and hopefully get the federal government engaged as well.

We want to have a strong economy, so we need more growth. We also want to have strong communities and a healthy, clean environment.

The province of Ontario has grown by over two million people in the last 15 years. It's projected conservatively that it will grow another two million to three

million. Where these people settle and where the jobs are located and the infrastructure to support these communities is very important.

I hope to have the central Ontario panel reporting back on how to solve gridlock, come up with better options for solid waste management for municipalities and

have a strategic framework of where growth should take place in this province in the next 20 to 30 years.

HYDRO ONE

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the Minister of Energy. You have been assigned the responsibility to review

the pay packages, compensation packages, for Hydro One executives. You've had about a week now to look into that. Can you tell us specifically, the $175,000 allotted to the president and CEO of

Hydro One -- that was a car allowance. What was that $175,000 used for?

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of Environment and Energy, Government House Leader): I requested the chair of the board of directors of Hydro

One to provide the information for how they arrived at the decision. They hired an outside consultant -- I believe it was Hay consultants -- to reach the conclusions they reached. They're getting

that information and providing it to me so that we may review the compensation packages for the senior staff at Hydro One. When I receive that information and go through it and am informed of how

they arrived at those decisions, I'll be able to answer in a more fulsome way. But the fact of the matter remains that they have arrived at it through an associate, through a contract that they

hired an outside consultant. That is a very broad report, very voluminous, and as we work our way through it we'll be happy to respond to the questions.

Mr McGuinty: I guess I missed the funeral of Chris Stockwell, the man who used to stand on this side of the House and who would be swinging

from those chandeliers today if he learned that the head of a public company was getting $175,000 for a car. What happened to that Chris Stockwell? Boy, do we miss him now.

In part, Minister, you and your government have to take responsibility for this mess because you pulled the shades down on Hydro One and OPG and you exempted

them from the ambit of the freedom of information act. So we can't get access to that information.

Here's an undertaking I want from you now, Minister: will you agree to review not only the pay packages at Hydro One but also at OPG? Will you also agree to

restore the freedom of information act so that it applies to Hydro One and OPG?

Mr Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): Where is that Stockwell?

Hon Mr Stockwell: I can take heckling, but it's difficult to take it from Mr Ruprecht.

The fact is simply this: I'm ahead of you by one step. I've requested the same information from the board of directors at OPG. As a matter of fact, I met this

morning with --

Interjection.

Hon Chris Hodgson (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): Maybe it's two steps, then.

Hon Mr Stockwell: Yes, maybe it's two or three steps.

I met this morning with those involved at OPG and requested the exact same information from those people as well. Yes, I've done that already. Yes, when I

receive the report and work through it we'll have a decision to take. We will provide that information to the public; we'll provide it to this Legislature. Obviously the situation is that we need

to go through the facts. Before we finish going through the facts, it would not be acceptable to start commenting on what the deal is until we understand it completely.

Yes, I requested the information from Hydro One. Yes, I'm ahead of you on the OPG and requested that information as well. So now, today, you're two for two.

You asked about the Hydro lands and the Premier said, "Already doing it." You're asking about OPG; we're already doing it. That's why we're in government and that's why you're over there.

NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT

Mr Bert Johnson (Perth-Middlesex): My question is for the Minister of Agriculture and Food, the hard-working, efficient, effective member for

Huron-Bruce. I want to revisit the comments made by the member for Glengarry-Prescott-Russell Monday evening last. The member opposite commented on the hypothetical proximity of a hog farm to the

arena in which the Ottawa Senators and the Toronto Maple Leafs were playing their playoff series. He said, "Imagine if the water they used to flood the ice ... were taken from a creek or river

where there is a hog farm in the vicinity. The ice wouldn't be white; it would be brown." He went on to say that hog farms are omitted from the Nutrient Management Act.

Considering the vast number of hog farms in my riding, I was shocked to hear this. Minister, will the Nutrient Management Act not address these important

issues concerning hog farms, large and small?

Hon Helen Johns (Minister of Agriculture and Food): I'd like to thank the member for the question. I would like to say that the member from

Glengarry-Prescott-Russell also predicted that the Ottawa Senators would win that series. He's wrong -- wrong on his ability to predict hockey games and wrong on his ability to be able to read the

nutrient management bill when it comes to hog farms.

The government is indeed committed to preserving Ontario's clean waterways and groundwater system. The bill creates a comprehensive framework of regulation and

best management standards to be included so that manure produced by hog farms will be spread effectively. These regulations will be clear requirements about what hog producers and other farmers

across the province have to do.

We all know that farmers across Ontario are great environmental stewards. They're stewards of their land. They want safe, sustainable growth. I can tell you

that the Ontario pork producers will be very upset to hear of the comments from the member opposite because --

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

Mr Johnson: Thank you, Minister, for clarifying that point. The member for Glengarry-Prescott-Russell was mistaken about hog farms and he was

offside with his Leafs-Senators prediction.

I'm sure my constituents are concerned about the environmental impact of the hog farms in my riding and they'll be happy to hear that, as I'm sure will your

constituents who also share their communities with large hog farms.

The opposition has been critical of the amount of time it has taken to make this piece of legislation a reality in Ontario, as have many farm organizations.

Could you please explain to the members of this House and Ontario farmers why it's taking so long, and when you expect it will be passed?

Hon Mrs Johns: I'd like to thank the member from Perth-Middlesex. I would like to say once again that the Ontario pork producers publicly

stated that they embrace the principles of the Nutrient Management Act and they in effect ask everyone in this House to move forward, get going and pass this bill. This bill has had more

consultations -- several public meetings were held across the province, there were initial consultations with approximately 130 presenters, and 200 written submissions. It went out after first

reading and was consulted on. It's out again after second reading to be consulted on. What we need to do is pass the bill and get started. We happen to be blocked again because the opposition

members won't put it to third reading. Come on, give the farmers a break.

RAPPORT DE L'ENQUÊTE

SUR WALKERTON /

WALKERTON INQUIRY REPORT

M. Gilles Bisson (Timmins-Baie James): Ma question, si le premier ministre voudrait prendre son écouteur, s'il vous plaît -- on sait

Vous savez, monsieur le premier ministre, que le 14 janvier de cette année votre gouvernement a déposé le rapport de Walkerton, et le 18

janvier, avec cette information-là, le rapport en question a été donné au public avec accès à travers l'Internet, à n'importe qui veut l'avoir. Une petite

J'ai soulevé, avec mon chef, M. Hampton, cette question en janvier et février : « Pour quelle raison n'avez-vous pas

cette date ?

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I'd ask the Minister of Environment and Energy to answer this question.

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of Environment and Energy, Government House Leader): The member's quite right. It's very unacceptable. I spoke

with Ministry of the Environment officials and asked them to do it immediately. The second report will come out. I will give you my undertaking that it will be out as quickly as humanly possible.

There's no excuse.

MINISTERIAL CONDUCT

Mr David Ramsay (Timiskaming-Cochrane): I have a question to the Minister of Environment and Energy. Minister, following your public-expense

pub crawls and your mishandling of the Hydro One consultations, it would appear that you're not comfortable with or willing to play by the rules of proper procedure.

As you know, last Thursday you met with the mayor of Kirkland Lake down here to discuss a PCB incinerator proposal for Kirkland Lake, the mayor being a very

strong proponent of this facility. As you know, Bennett Environmental is yet two weeks away from submitting their environmental assessment information and we haven't had the public consultation

period yet, nor have your received the recommendations from your ministry before you would make a decision.

Minister, don't you see that holding a meeting like this really destroys the perception that you're an independent arbiter of this decision-making process?

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of Environment and Energy, Government House Leader): I take some exception to the original part of the question.

I've already responded to those. As I said again, it was a mistake. We apologize and we've paid it back.

With respect to the second part, my door is open. If a mayor of any community in this province would like to speak to me, I don't vet them and organize them on

what it is I'm going to speak to them about. They come down and talk to me about the issues that are germane to their constituents and themselves. I would expect that to be a good thing. I always

thought that if you folks across the floor wanted me to meet with local municipal representatives because there are issues they feel are important, and I agree to do that, I would expect you people

to say, "Gee, that's good. I'm glad he's an accessible minister who's open to hearing from people around the province." To the member opposite, if you're saying to me that I shouldn't meet with

officials in your riding without the consent of yourself and others, that's very difficult for me, because they are elected and they have local issues.

I heard their concerns and I didn't question his agenda. There was nothing done that was inappropriate. A simple request for a meeting was made. I accommodated

your mayor, the mayor of Kirkland Lake. I would think that's a good thing.

Mr Ramsay: I've been in your position and I know a minister doesn't accept an appointment without knowing fully what's to be discussed on that

agenda. Don't tell me that people come in and have surprise meetings in your thing.

Minister, what I'm talking about is that the legitimacy of the procedure is what you've negated here. You know this has to be independent. The mayor, the

ministry and the EA rules say that politics shouldn't be entering into an environmental assessment. These decisions must be made based on science, and before all the science is gathered, you are

allowing yourself to be lobbied by one of the key proponents.

When you were in Kirkland Lake just two months ago, you said there are a lot of jobs and opportunities that you can create in Kirkland Lake, and you can create

a waste disposal mecca where you can deal with incineration and landfilling. Your mind is already made up, and we haven't seen the science. As you know, the siting of this PCB incinerator breaks

the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment siting regulations on setback from habitation, schools and homes. It does that in a very grave manner. You've got to ask somebody else on the

executive council to make this decision, because you've prejudiced the outcome of this.

Hon Mr Stockwell: I take great exception to that, great exception. That is just cutting at the integrity of what I stand for as Minister of

Environment. I was requested by the mayor of Kirkland Lake to have a meeting. No, I didn't vet every subject. He wanted to meet with me about issues of concern. Never in that meeting, nor would it

ever happen, would I ever compromise the existence of the Environmental Assessment Act, nor would I discuss it. To make the allegation without one shred of evidence is not only dishonourable but

demeans you and me in this House. If you have any evidence of the fact that I spoke to him about the environmental assessment process, then table it. I did not speak to him about that. I never

spoke to him about that. He asked me questions to take into consideration, and I committed to nothing.

Mr Ramsay: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: In today's Northern Daily News clip, the mayor outlines the full discussion --

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Order. That's not a point of order.

PROBATION AND PAROLE SERVICES

Ms Marilyn Mushinski (Scarborough Centre): My question is for the minister -- I've forgotten his new title -- for community safety.

Interjection: Just call him Bob. Just ask Bob.

Ms Mushinski: Actually, he's Brother Bob. He's one of my favourite ministers, and he will forgive me if I've forgotten his title. I understand

that he's the minister responsible for public safety.

Interjection: Who's that?

Ms Mushinski: Mr Runciman.

Minister, during the OPSEU strike, many of your front-line parole and probation staff complained that their caseloads were too high and that many serious

offenders were being left unsupervised. In my riding of Scarborough Centre, I know that the community is unaware of what types of supervision community-sentenced offenders actually receive. I

wonder if you could please reassure my constituents that community-sentenced offenders are appropriately supervised.

Hon Robert W. Runciman (Minister of Public Safety and Security): I want to reassure the member and all members of the House that the

government is taking valuable steps toward improving the caseload numbers for front-line staff. We announced two years ago that we would hire an additional 165 new parole and probation staff and

I'm proud to say that we've accomplished that goal.

The federal Liberal government seems to think that at least half of the entire offender population belongs in the community, and since they're the ones that

write the legislation, that leaves us with few choices.

That being said, the ministry is in the middle of a procurement process where we're trying to find private sector partners to help us expand our electronic

surveillance program. We're looking for a variety of tools that front-line parole and probation staff can use to enhance supervision capabilities. These tools will ensure that any

community-sentenced offender will have an adequate level of supervision, both by the parole and probation officers and by this advanced technology.

Mr Dwight Duncan (Windsor-St Clair): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: In light of the Premier's comments today, I would seek unanimous consent

to make a motion to grant third reading to Bill 13,

An Act to amend the Electricity Act, 1998, as introduced by Mr Sergio.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Is there unanimous consent? I'm afraid I heard some noes.

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of Environment and Energy, Government House Leader): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I would just like to read

into the record the quote in this thing that was attributed to me in this comment: "Stockwell said the assessment -- "

The Speaker: Order. Will the member take his seat, please.

PETITIONS

LONG-TERM-CARE FACILITIES

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): A very timely petition from the people of St Catharines to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, and it

reads as follows:

"Whereas there are over 525 long-term-care facilities across the province of Ontario housing over 60,000 Ontarians;

"Whereas over 60% of individuals living in long-term-care facilities suffer from" some form of "dementia, 90% need assistance to eat and get dressed, and 56%

have circulatory disease;

"Whereas government funding of long-term-care facilities by the government of Ontario has failed to keep pace with the growing needs of individuals in

long-term-care facilities;

"Whereas government funding currently allows for only four minutes per day of assistance in washing and dressing long-term-care facility residents;

"Whereas government funding currently allows for only 10 minutes of assistance with eating per day and 15 minutes of programming per week;

"Therefore, we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to provide additional funding to Ontario's 525 long-term-care facilities to

ensure adequate staffing and service for long-term-care facility residents and appropriate levels of care such that Ontario's thousands of long-term-care users can enjoy their later years in

comfort and contentment."

I affix my signature. I am in complete agreement with the sentiments of this petition.

Hon John R. Baird (Associate Minister of Francophone Affairs): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I'd like to note the presence in the gallery

of the only member of this House who has 100% attendance, the member for Nipissing, and he hasn't even taken his seat yet. Congratulations to Al McDonald.

SAFE DRINKING WATER LEGISLATION

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): This is a petition about safe drinking water. It reads:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the people of Ontario have the right to receive clean and safe drinking water; and

"Whereas clean, safe drinking water is a basic human entitlement and essential for the protection of public health; and

"Whereas the people of Ontario have the right to receive accurate and immediate information about the quality of water; and

"Whereas Mike Harris and the government of Ontario have failed to protect the quality of drinking water in Ontario" -- these were done in the intersession --

"and

"Whereas Mike Harris and the government of Ontario have failed to provide the necessary financial resources to the Ministry of the Environment; and

"Whereas the policies of Mike Harris and the government of Ontario have endangered the environment and the health of the citizens of Ontario;

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

"Immediately restore adequate funding and staffing to the Ministry of the Environment; and

"Immediately pass into law Bill 3, the Safe Drinking Water Act, 2001."

I will affix my signature to this petition.

COMMUNITY HEALTH CARE CENTRE

Mr Marcel Beaubien (Lambton-Kent-Middlesex): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario and it reads as follows:

"Whereas Sarnia-Point Edward and area is experiencing a crisis in a shortage of health care professionals, specifically doctors; and

"Whereas the community health care centres are a proven primary health care system that can attract professionals and deliver primary health care in a

cost-effective, efficient manner;

"Be it resolved that the Legislative Assembly of Ontario approve a community health care centre for Sarnia-Point Edward and area as soon as possible."

I will affix my signature to that.

HYDRO ONE

Mr Pat Hoy (Chatham-Kent Essex): "To the Ontario Legislature:

"Whereas the Conservative government plans to sell off Hydro One and Ontario's electricity transmission grid -- the central nervous system of Ontario's

economy;

"Whereas the government never campaigned on selling off this vital $5-billion public asset and never consulted the people of Ontario on this plan;

"Whereas Ontario families want affordable, reliable electricity -- they know that the sale of the grid that carries electricity to their homes is a disaster

for consumers;

"Whereas selling the grid will not benefit consumers -- the only Ontarians who will benefit are Bay Street brokers and Hydro One executives;

"Whereas selling Hydro One and the grid is like selling every 400-series highway in the province to private interests -- selling the grid means the public

sector will no longer be responsible for its security and protection;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, petition the Ontario Legislature as follows:

"To demand the Conservative government halt the sale of Hydro One until the government has a clear mandate from the owners of Hydro One -- the people of

Ontario."

It's signed by a number of concerned citizens from Blenheim, Ridgetown, Morpeth and Chatham, and I too sign this petition.

COMPETITIVE ELECTRICITY MARKET

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

"Whereas electricity rates in deregulated, private, for-profit markets such as Alberta and California fluctuate wildly in price and supply and are much

higher-priced than in comparable public power systems;

"Whereas deregulation in California caused more blackouts than Ontario has suffered from ice storms or other natural disasters while public power has protected

us from market fluctuations in supply as well as price;

"Whereas at-cost electricity has helped build and support Ontario's economy, while deregulation would destabilize the economy, with soaring rates, reduced

reliability and increased production costs leading to plant closures, job loss and economic decline;

"Whereas soaring electricity rates would put a significant burden on school boards, hospitals, public transit and other public services which cannot afford to

pay double for their electricity;

"Whereas seniors and other members of our communities on fixed incomes would be hard hit by increasing rates, and the living standards of millions of Ontarians

will be harmed;

"Whereas privatization will trigger NAFTA provisions, making it practically impossible to reverse this dangerous experiment and would cost us Canadian control

over electricity;

"Whereas privatization, deregulation and loss of sovereignty would close the door on public accountability of the industry in regard to environmental safety

and energy security concerns; and

"Whereas an alternative exists in the form of a truly accountable, transparent and affordable publicly owned and controlled system operated at cost for the

benefit of all Ontarians;

"Therefore, we demand that the Ontario government immediately halt the planned privatization, sell-off and deregulation of the public electricity system."

This has been signed by a number of constituents in my riding. I agree with them and I've affixed my signature to it.

Mr Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): I have a number of names on petition to the Legislature Assembly. These have been forwarded to the

Honourable Helen Johns, Minister of Agriculture, and I wish to present them as parliamentary assistant to the minister.

"Whereas electrical energy is an essential service used by 100% of all Ontario citizens; and

"Whereas the experience in deregulating and privatizing the generation and retailing of electrical energy in other jurisdictions has led to enormous problems,

including huge increases in hydroelectricity rates;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to stop further progress and action on the deregulation of electrical energy."

I sign this petition.

HYDRO ONE

Mr Bruce Crozier (Essex): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario with regard to Hydro One.

"Whereas Ernie Eves is planning to ram through the sale of Hydro One without a mandate from the people of Ontario; and

"Whereas an Ontario Court judge has ruled that the sale of Hydro One is illegal; and

"Whereas Ernie Eves's Bay Street friends will benefit from the sale of Hydro One at the expense of Ontario's working families;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to encourage Ernie Eves to take Dalton McGuinty's advice to put working families ahead of

his Bay Street friends by immediately stopping the sale of Hydro One."

In support I affix my signature.

ONTARIO DISABILITY

SUPPORT PROGRAM

Mr David Christopherson (Hamilton West): I have a petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario and it reads as follows:

"Whereas the recipients of benefits under the Ontario Disability Act have not received a cost-of-living increase since a $2.50 increase in 1987; and

"Whereas the cost of living in Ontario has increased in every one of the years since, especially for basic needs such as housing, food, utilities,

transportation, clothing and household goods; and

"Whereas disabled Ontarians are recognized under the Ontario Disability Support Program Act, 1997, and as such have the right to have their basic needs met,

including adequate housing, a proper and healthy diet, a bed that does not make them sicker and clothing that fits and is free of stains and holes; and

"Whereas their basic needs are no longer being met because the Ministry of Social Services has not increased the shelter and basic needs allowances of disabled

Ontarians eligible to receive benefits under the Ontario disability support program to reflect the increased costs of shelter and basic needs (and in fact have reduced these benefits for those

recipients who receive a disability benefit under the Canada pension plan);

"Therefore we, the undersigned citizens of Ontario, request the Ontario Legislature to urge the government to respect their own definition of basic needs and

provide a cost-of-living increase to recipients of benefits through the Ontario Disability Support Program Act that is sufficient to cover the increased costs of their basic needs as of 2002

prices, and that this benefit not be reduced as a result of increases in the Canada pension plan benefit."

As I'm in agreement, I'm adding my name to this petition also.

COMPETITIVE ELECTRICITY MARKET

Mr Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): I have a petition in regard to the controversial issue of Hydro One, and it reads as follows:

"We, the undersigned residents of Toronto, demand that the government immediately stop the process of privatizing our electricity transmission system, the

network of steel towers, transformers, wooden poles which transmit power from generation plants to our homes, and further postpone the electricity deregulation process until the Ontario public is

given proof that privatization will not result in price increases, and place a moratorium on any further retailing of electricity until the Ontario Energy Board comes up with a standard contract to

be used by all retailers; and

"That a standard contract spell out in clear terms that the residential users are waiving their rights to future rebates in exchange for fixed rates over a

specified period of time."

Since I'm in agreement, I'm signing my name to this petition.

CHILD CARE

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

"Whereas an internal government document states the Conservative government is considering cutting the regulated child care budget by at least 40%; and

"Whereas the same internal document states the government is also considering completely cutting all funding for regulated child care and family resource

programs;

"Whereas the Conservative government has already cut funding for regulated child care by 15% between 1995 and 1998 and downloaded 20% of the child care and

family resource budget on to municipalities;

"Whereas Fraser Mustard and Margaret McCain identified regulated child care and family resource programs as integral to early childhood development;

"Whereas the Conservative government will receive $844 million from the federal government over five years for early childhood development;

"Whereas Ontario is the only province which didn't spend a cent of this year's federal money on regulated child care;

"Whereas the need for affordable, accessible, regulated child care and family resource programs continues to grow in Ontario,

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

"We demand the Conservative government protect the current regulated child care and family resource program budgets and invest significant federal Early Years

funding in regulated child care and family resource programs. We demand future federal Early Years funding be invested in an expansion of affordable, regulated child care and in continued funding

for family resource programs."

This petition has been sent to me by Michele Giroux of Bells Corner Co-operative Nursery School in Nepean. I agree with the petitioners. I have affixed my

signature to it.

COMMUNITY HEALTH CARE CENTRE

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): It's my pleasure to present a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas Sarnia-Point Edward and area is experiencing a crisis in a shortage of health care professionals, specifically doctors; and

"Whereas community health care centres are a proven primary health care system that can attract professionals and deliver primary health care in a

cost-effective, efficient manner;

"Be it resolved that the Legislative Assembly of Ontario approve a community health care centre for Sarnia-Point Edward and area as soon as possible."

I'm pleased to affix my name and submit this petition on behalf of the member for Lambton-Kent-Middlesex.

COMPETITIVE ELECTRICITY MARKET

Mr Steve Peters (Elgin-Middlesex-London): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas electrical energy is an essential service used by 100% of Ontario citizens; and

"Whereas the experience in privatizing electrical energy in other jurisdictions has led to enormous problems, including huge increases in hydroelectricity

rates;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to stop further progress and action on the privatization of electrical energy in

the province of Ontario."

I'm in full agreement and will sign this petition.

PROVINCE OF ONTARIO

SAVINGS OFFICE

Mr David Christopherson (Hamilton West): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. It reads as follows:

"Whereas the Province of Ontario Savings Office was created in 1922 by united farmers and labour as a unique banking facility that allowed Ontarians to invest

in their province; and

"Whereas the Province of Ontario Savings Office enjoys a strong popularity among Ontario residents, with over 100,000 accounts and over $2.8 billion on

deposit; and

"Whereas the Province of Ontario Savings Office offers customers attractive interest rates, generous chequing privileges and personalized efficient service,

and every dollar deposited is guaranteed by the province of Ontario; and

"Whereas POSO has 23 branches serving 17 communities across Ontario, including Hamilton, Windsor, Ottawa and small communities in northern Ontario not served

by other banks or trust companies. Places like Pickle Lake, Armstrong, Killarney, Gogama and Virginiatown; and

"Whereas the Harris government announced in its latest budget that it will put the Province of Ontario Savings Office on the auction block, even though it is a

consistent revenue generator, and even though this revenue could help Ontario's crumbling infrastructure after years of Tory neglect;

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

"To save the people's bank, the Province of Ontario Savings Office, so that it can continue its historic role of providing excellent banking services to

families in communities across Ontario; so that people in small towns will not be forced to go further afield for banking services and forced to go to private, for-profit banks."

On behalf of my constituents, I add my name to this petition.

Mr Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I have been listening very carefully to the last petition. Since I agree with

it 100%, I hope you don't mind that I sign it as well.

The Acting Speaker (Mr Bert Johnson): That is not a point of order.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

THRONE SPEECH DEBATE

Resuming the debate adjourned on May 16, 2002, on the amendment to the amendment to the motion for an address in reply to the speech of His Honour the

Lieutenant Governor at the opening of the session.

The Acting Speaker (Mr Bert Johnson): When we left off, Mr Bryant, the member for St Paul's, and Mr Smitherman, the member for Toronto

Centre-Rosedale, had just finished their debating time. So we will go into the procedure for questions and answers by four members in rotation, and then one of those two members will have two

minutes to respond.

Comments and questions?

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): It is with regret that I've got to tell you I didn't hear a single word that either Mr Smitherman or Mr

Bryant had to say to the throne speech, but far be it from me --

Mr Michael Bryant (St Paul's): I'll send you a transcript.

Mr Kormos: I didn't hear it. I simply wasn't paying close attention to what you or Mr Smitherman were saying. But it remains the case that I

am going to utilize the opportunity for questions and comments. I want to tell you, Mr Speaker, that New Democrats will be joining in the debate this afternoon. Ms Churley will be speaking to the

throne speech. I will be speaking to the throne speech in approximately 40 minutes' time.

One of the things we noted in these questions and comments was that this throne speech was, if anything, underwhelming, and in the opportunities we've had when

we've been --

Interjections.

Mr Kormos: Well, think about it. When we've been back in our ridings and had a chance to talk to folks in our ridings, whether it's retirees

and seniors, whether it's patients in hospitals, whether it's people who have had their home care torn away from them, whether it's students who face higher and higher tuition increases or whether

it's workers who have just begun to receive their round of decertification notices with their paycheques -- it's no longer the big posters on the workplace billboard, which didn't last very long, I

should tell you, and ended up being a repository for some rather acute comments -- not cute, but acute comments -- regarding the Premier, his predecessor and the Conservatives. Again, the Ministry

of Labour now is including those pamphlets in pay envelopes.

We have great concerns about the people for whom the throne speech held out no promise whatsoever, no relief from the seven years -- and think about that:

seven years. There's something Biblical about that -- of policy pestilence and torment that's been imposed on them by this government. Now, that holds some promise for the next seven years, I must

say, and I will be speaking to that, along with Ms Churley, in short order.

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): Just picking up on the member for Niagara Centre's comments about overwhelming or underwhelming, I think the

opposition day yesterday is an example of an underwhelming experience. This two-minute hit that I'm doing actually is with respect to Mr McGuinty's response yesterday. Really, he was talking about

the issue of Hydro One and trying to have our Premier take this whole issue off the table. In fact, that's exactly what the opposition normally do: they don't want to deal with anything. I think

the best template, if you want to understand the Liberal policy, is to look to Ottawa. The only way you can make no mistakes is to not do anything.

In fairness, later on today I'll be speaking on our response to the throne speech, A New Era for Ontario.

Certainly, if you're looking at the dilemma of the Hydro One debate and looking at the full amount of information, starting, I might say, with the Macdonald

commission around 1996, where they evaluated the total assets at about $40 billion and the debts at about $38 billion, it was clear something had to be done. There were a number of options put

forward by the Macdonald commission.

This government, as usual, is keeping its promise. The promise is to fix a system that was spending way in excess of its means and had no mechanism of

accountability. We heard in question period today of senior executives making exorbitant amounts of money. It just demonstrates to me that bringing this back and dealing with some very difficult

issues in a policy sense -- I can only tell you this, having a riding with a nuclear plant, the Darlington generating station. They're now operating at efficiency levels because of the

accountability mechanism that this government imposes on them. So I think it's open for debate. I certainly want to make sure that we have safe, reliable, affordable power, specifically for people

on fixed incomes. I know our Premier, Ernie Eves, will do the right thing at the end of the day. This government has a reputation for, and in fact our mark is, doing what we promise.

Mr Steve Peters (Elgin-Middlesex-London): I'm pleased to respond to my colleagues from St Paul's and Toronto Centre-Rosedale, and I know the

efforts that my colleague from St Paul's has put into the issue of Ontario Hydro and Hydro One. I think what he tried to get across and what we didn't hear from this government and what the people

of Ontario wanted to hear in this throne speech was some clear words that the government is putting an end to the sale of Hydro One. Of course, we didn't hear that. Once again this government is

abandoning the citizens of Ontario.

My colleague from Toronto Centre-Rosedale is in an interesting position, because Mr Smitherman has a farm in his riding, the Riverdale zoo. It's one of the few

farms in Toronto, the only farm in what we know as downtown Toronto. What I know Mr Smitherman would have liked to talk about, and it's something that I'm going to talk about right now, is the lack

of commitment in this throne speech to agriculture in this province. We did not hear the magic words "made-in-Ontario safety nets." They skirted; they talked about consultations. Farmers in this

province, I believe, feel that with three ag ministers in the past 14 months, they've been consulted to death.

We heard about the nutrient management legislation, but the most pressing crisis facing the agricultural community in this province today is depressed prices

as a result of the government to the south and the unfair subsidies they are putting forward in support of their farmers.

We've heard talk from this government for over a year about a made-in-Ontario safety net program that's going to be there to look after the needs of the

agricultural community in this province. But did we hear any discussion in this throne speech about made-in-Ontario? No. Nada. Zero. I think that lack of commitment shows very, very clearly to the

agricultural community in this province that the government likes to talk the talk right now; they're talking consultations and they're going to do this and they're going to do that. But why don't

they stand up? Why didn't the Minister of Agriculture ensure that included in this throne speech was support for the made-in-Ontario safety net program?

The Acting Speaker: I want to recognize the member for Timmins-James Bay in just a moment, and that is that you have some constituents who

have been suffering the last little while, having to leave their homes for flooding. Please pass along our official best wishes to them, and my personal ones as well.

The Chair recognizes the member for Timmins-James Bay.

Mr Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I will pass that on to Chief Theresa and the rest of the community of

Attawapiskat. As you well know, 1,800 people were evacuated just last week. Luckily, the city of Timmins, which always has its door open and always does a fine job when it comes to being able to

assist our neighbours to the north, did an excellent job in being able to provide emergency assistance to some 900 people who came into our community, as well as people into the community of

Moosonee. So I will make sure those words are passed on.

In response to the speech that was made by Mr Bryant, if I remember correctly what was happening the last time we were here, I just have to say this, and I am

going to be partisan here. I just want my Liberal friends to know I'm happy, I'm very happy, that finally you guys have come onside with New Democrats and Howard Hampton and that you believe the

privatization of Hydro One is a bad idea. Because I remember reading the fundraising letters that Dalton McGuinty or Mr Sean Conway had sent to the hydro industry, where you guys were in favour of

privatization and deregulation. I also remember the comments in the paper where Mr Dalton McGuinty, the leader of the Liberal Party, was saying he was in favour of the sell-off of Hydro One. But

I'm glad that you changed your mind. I'm glad you're with us. I just want to congratulate the Liberal Party for having flip-flopped on its original position, because we think we are right and the

Tories are wrong.

But I want you to go a little bit further. I want the Liberals to also flip-flop on the issue of hydro deregulation and on the privatization of Ontario Power

Generation, because the Liberals are saying it's bad to privatize Hydro One but it's good to privatize Ontario Power Generation, and market deregulation is a great thing. We as New Democrats, and

my leader, Howard Hampton, think that is a bad idea. So we're asking the Liberals: you've taken a baby step. You've come out in support of the NDP on the issue of the privatization of Hydro One.

We're asking you to take one giant leap for the people of Ontario and go all the way and oppose the privatization of OPG and the deregulation as well. I look forward to those responses from my good

friend Mr Bryant.

The Acting Speaker: The member for St Paul's has two minutes to respond.

Mr Bryant: It would be tempting to respond to the member from the third party, other than saying this: his suggestion with respect to the

activities of the member for Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke are totally inaccurate and I wouldn't be surprised if a point of privilege is coming. But I'll leave that to the member.

In fact, the third party, the New Democrats, along with the governing party and the official opposition, all agreed in 1997 in a joint committee report that

electricity restructuring was necessary. There was a recognition that in fact we all had to change the way in which we created electricity in the province of Ontario, because either we were going

to have to buy our electricity from New York or we were going to have electricity made in Ontario. I think the New Democrats did the responsible thing then in 1997, as did the government and the

official opposition.

I'll tell you who flip-flopped: it was the New Democrats. They then saw a political opportunity. They abandoned the responsible position they took in 1997 and

decided to make the same kind of promises we heard in 1989 and 1990, the pipe dreams of public auto insurance. Then the hard, cold reality sunk in when they became the government and they saw they

couldn't fulfill those promises.

It would be grossly misleading to the people of Ontario to let them think that the status quo with respect to electricity creation is satisfactory. It's not.

The easy thing to do is to promise the Dark Ages, to promise that we can go back and engage in some nostalgic moment. In fact, those days are over. We need to move forward.

We oppose the sale of Hydro One because that's in the public interest, but we want to create more electricity in the province of Ontario because that's in the

public interest.

The Acting Speaker: Further debate?

Mr O'Toole: Mr Speaker, I just want to make sure we're starting the second round, which is in fact the order of the day, the response to the

speech from the throne.

It's my privilege and it's certainly my duty today as the member from Durham to reflect the mood and sentiment of my constituents. I do that with a great deal

of sincerity.

When reviewing and preparing for this occasion and this opportunity, I did reflect and review the Hansard from May 9 and the comments made by our Premier,

Ernie Eves, and of course the remarks made on his behalf by the Honourable James Bartleman, Lieutenant Governor for the province of Ontario. I'll look at it in a general sense first, and then I'll

get to more specifics later.

If I look at it in terms of the general themes, it started with a very reflective tone, appropriately I think, given September 11 and other events. He outlined

a number of significant contributors to this great province who have left us: Kenneth Bryden, MPP for Woodbine, as well as Ed Good and Lorne Henderson and Harry Worton. He went on to mention as

well the Queen Mother's passing and Her Royal Highness Princess Margaret, Countess of Snowdon, the Honourable Pauline McGibbon, as well as the recognition that this is the 50th anniversary of Queen

Elizabeth.

He then went on in tone from reflection to commitment. It picks up a serious resolve by reviewing a number of commitments that the government made. I'm just

going to review a number that, for me, represent important goals, objectives and targets for this government to commit to. One is the challenge now to guide our province smoothly through to a new

era. "We must protect the best of what we have while changing what is necessary to improve the lives of Ontarians."

We as elected members here on a daily basis get perhaps 50 phone calls a day, a number of letters and other means of staying in touch with not just our

constituents but indeed all people of Ontario. As the parliamentary assistant to the then Minister of Finance, Jim Flaherty, and now the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Health, the

Honourable Tony Clement, I know something about some of the issues and how difficult the choices are.

On education, I was very happy that the Deputy Premier, Elizabeth Witmer, along with our Premier, has committed -- Dr Mordechai Rozanski, the president of

Guelph University, has agreed to lead a task force reviewing the current funding formula in education. I heard that in the pre-budget consultations, and I'm pleased that this government has

listened and that this government is responding. The Education Equality Task Force will report back sooner than later, on November 1, 2002. Last week, we heard from the Minister of Education,

Elizabeth Witmer, that the government has announced the GLGs, the general legislative grants, for the coming year, and indeed there is more money. In the case of one of the four publicly funded

boards in my area, there is more money, and in many cases including in an environment where there is declining enrolment.

Education was just one of the many issues I think the government made commitments on. Minister Cunningham, the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities,

has invited the federal government to sign the labour market development agreement. Of course, this much-debated agreement on training issues and the labour market would allow Ontarians to access

up to $600 million in apprenticeship and skills training funds. If one looks at the fact that the province of Ontario represents about 50% of the total economy of Canada, then this is long overdue

to help not just new Canadians but new people to the workforce generally, in many cases young students graduating. I think that's an important part of what this government's message is about:

creating opportunities for young people.

I look at the record of this government since 1995. There have been 882,000 -- almost 900,000 -- new jobs created, this against the backdrop of September 11

and other economic pressures. Ontario does remain competitive, a great place to invest and do business. Earlier today, Mr Kwinter from the opposition spoke with some questioning about the auto

caucus round table being held today in Toronto. I was there for the minister's opening comments and those from the leaders of the industry, and I can assure you, representing the riding of Durham,

which includes General Motors and many employees of General Motors, it was breathtaking. The leaders of all the industry were there -- General Motors, Ford, Chrysler, Toyota, Camry -- as well as

the tier-one parts suppliers, and Buzz Hargrove was there, along with Minister Flaherty. I did notice a great deal of willingness to address -- but the most important issue I heard from that sector

was dealing with the bridge in Windsor. The minister -- not in his words, but others around the table, all of the leaders, Buzz Hargrove and others, demanded that all levels of government work

together to make sure that this barrier to trade be removed by governments -- municipal, provincial and federal -- working together. So the Huron Church Road bridge across the river, across the

border, is important, while maintaining our controls and security at the border points as well.

To continue to focus on the economy, one of the themes I saw throughout this throne speech was the importance of trying to understand the basics. The basics

are as simple as this: the first and most important thing is to have a strong economy. Without a strong economy -- that is, jobs and investment -- you cannot possibly have a strong quality of life.

There are those on the other side who think you can spend your way into a higher quality of life. It's an important debate to understand the economic and fiscal policies that are necessary to have

an enhanced quality of life.

The opposition, on every single occasion, has voted against every single tax reduction, yet I hear and read in the papers the importance of having competitive

tax rates. I'm specifically in support of reducing taxes such as the capital tax, which is a very regressive tax on investment and research and development, not just to the auto industry but to the

health industry as well.

So the strong-economy argument has to be seen as a continuing thread throughout much of the debate to make our province the greatest place in the world to

live.

I was also happy, when reviewing the comments, to address the important urgency of -- since 1995, the province of Ontario, in its commitment to technology in

health care, has increased the number of MRI machines by adding 31 in the province for a total now of 43, and OHIP funding would be extended to the operation of 90%. All Ontarians, no matter where

they live, must have health care close to home. That has been our theme right from the very beginning.

There are many sectors, but there are many agendas in the sectors. There are the doctors, the nurses, the pharmaceutical companies, the hospitals themselves,

as well as other stand-alone research and other investments in health care that need to work together. More importantly, it all comes together in the recent debates on community care and long-term

care.

I think the government has tried to address the physician shortage. I'm going to mention just a few initiatives. They have proceeded with the new northern

medical school. Full campuses at Sudbury and Thunder Bay will train more doctors and encourage them to remain in practice in underserviced areas, specifically in the north. The government is

working with health care communities in Ontario to encourage more foreign-trained physicians to locate in underserviced areas and increase the certification rate of these skilled individuals who

are, in many cases, new Canadians.

I also think of the initiative whereby Ontario started to address the problem by helping to pay the tuition of doctors who choose to locate in areas that need

doctors. The tuition plan, I believe, is $40,000 that the province is willing to pay people who are committed to working in an underserviced area.

Also, the family health network will be a raging debate as part of primary health care reform. The family health network increases access to services and is an

important part of our government's plan. There are 14 pilot projects underway around Ontario, and the government's target is to have about 80% of eligible family practitioners in these family

health networks in the not-too-distant future.

As I said, in the Ministry of Health there's a lot to be done with technology, with the integration of patient records and laboratory results being shared with

hospitals and doctors -- all of course under a very strict umbrella of patient consent, confidentiality and security of records -- to try to make the best use of testing dollars so that there isn't

duplication and to make sure we have the latest information.

Telehealth is another initiative of this government to try to bring services closer to patients.

Also, there's the good work done by the Minister of Municipal Affairs, Chris Hodgson, with Smart Growth but also the whole Oak Ridges moraine debate. I really

feel that the environment and that debate overflows into agriculture, with the Nutrient Management Act also an important debate.

As a member of the current select committee on alternative fuels, I can tell you that the report that I believe will be tabled next week by Dr Galt -- Tuesday,

he tells me right now in the House for you, the public, the first to hear it. It will be Tuesday next week. This report will have some very envisioning and very empowering language. It's my

understanding that it'