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

April 6, 2005

38th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2005-Apr-06 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Wednesday 6 April 2005 Mercredi 6 avril 2005

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

TARTAN DAY

HUGUETTE BURROUGHS

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

HEMODIALYSIS

AUTISM TREATMENT

ST. JOHN'S REHABILITATION HOSPITAL

ADDICTION SERVICES

MUNICIPAL FINANCES

VISITORS

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

APPRENTICESHIP TRAINING

DEFERRED VOTES

PLACES TO GROW ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 SUR

LES ZONES DE CROISSANCE

FILM CLASSIFICATION ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005

SUR LE CLASSEMENT DES FILMS

ORAL QUESTIONS

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION

NATIONAL CHILD BENEFIT SUPPLEMENT

FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY

GASOLINE PRICES

IMMIGRANTS' SKILLS

HOSPITAL FUNDING

FIRST NATIONS MINING AND FORESTRY REVENUES

GROWTH PLANNING

FABRY DISEASE

FIRST NATIONS MINING AND FORESTRY REVENUES

ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION

TOURISM

ALLEGED SEXUAL ABUSE

OF MINORS

VISITORS

PETITIONS

OPTOMETRISTS

CONTROL OF SMOKING

OPTOMETRISTS

CHIROPRACTIC SERVICES

ANAPHYLACTIC SHOCK

REGIONAL CENTRES FOR THE

DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

ANAPHYLACTIC SHOCK

GASOLINE PRICES

FREDERICK BANTING HOMESTEAD

ANAPHYLACTIC SHOCK

CONTROL OF SMOKING

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

ABORTION

ORDERS OF THE DAY

FAMILY RESPONSIBILITY AND

SUPPORT ARREARS ENFORCEMENT

AMENDMENT ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LES OBLIGATIONS FAMILIALES

ET L'EXÉCUTION DES ARRIÉRÉS

D'ALIMENTS

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

TARTAN DAY

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): Today is Tartan Day. I didn't wear my father's tartan today because I knew that Bill Murdoch was going to

be wearing his kilt. Unfortunately, Bill is ill today, so try to imagine for a second that I am Bill Murdoch. This is Bill's statement. Remember, I'm Bill Murdoch.

"I rise today in my own MacPherson tartan to celebrate the 685th anniversary of Scotland's independence and the 14th anniversary of my resolution to name April 6

as Tartan Day in the province of Ontario.

"As you know, Scottish heritage runs deep in our province and has influenced everything from the breeds of livestock to food and drink. In fact, tartans were an

ancient form of dress used by Scottish Highlanders and today denote their clan. Kilts -- a play on the word "Celt" -- were the early battle garb worn by Roman soldiers.

"It could be argued that the independent spirit and stubborn views of our ancestors are alive and well in the House today." You can say that again.

"Canada's first two Prime Ministers, Sir John A. Macdonald and Alexander Mackenzie, were both born in Scotland, as was NDP founder Tommy Douglas. It's easy to

see how Scotland has had a direct impact on the history of Canada and Ontario.

"Adding to the fiery reputation of Scots, the former Proton township resident Agnes Macphail, the first woman elected to the House of Commons, was of Scottish

descent.

"It is good to see some members displaying the tartan in order to celebrate the Scottish contribution to the multicultural nature of Ontario, and I hope you will

continue the tradition of wearing the plaid to commemorate and promote April 6 as Tartan Day."

HUGUETTE BURROUGHS

Mr. Jim Brownell (Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh): I rise today to pay tribute -- je me lève aujourd'hui pour exprimer mes respects -- to

an exemplary woman from my riding of Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh, the late Huguette Burroughs. Huguette passed away this past week, leaving an incredible legacy behind. She was a celebrated

journalist, a recipient of the Queen's Golden Jubilee Medal, a member of the Order of Ontario, and a Cornwall city councillor.

For 23 years, Huguette Burroughs championed the francophone community as the editor of the city's only francophone newspaper, Le Journal de Cornwall. Over the

years, Huguette faced a variety of health challenges that left her blind, cost her a limb, and left her in need of dialysis three times a week.

We could understand if someone in such a position were to retire from active life. Huguette did retire from her editorial position, only to run for city council.

She would let nothing stand in the way of her desire to serve her community, which she held so dear.

Huguette Burroughs provided not only people with disabilities but all of us with an incredible role model. She was a woman of principle and strength, and the

city of Cornwall has been enriched by her community activism and public representation.

I close with a quote from Ms. Burroughs herself, words I hope all of us, as representatives of the people, will take to heart: "Vision isn't just about eyesight.

It comes from experience. It comes from the heart, and my heart is filled with respect and love for this community and its kind and good people who deserve the best."

Huguette, as a proud Ontarian and a proud Cornwallite, you have inspired us, and we will remember you.

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

Mr. Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln): Unfortunately, it has become an old story with the Dalton McGuinty government: You promise one thing and then you

do another. In fact, the Brampton Guardian now calls it "pulling a McGuinty" when that happens, and boy, he's pulling one again when it comes to government in Peel region.

After months of saying they wouldn't intervene in municipal governance affairs, the Dalton McGuinty government appointed a facilitator, Justice Adams, to deal

with the crisis they've created in Peel region. They've had this report since December. They've had this report for months and have failed to make any kind of decision on where they are going to go

on the issue. So not only did Dalton break a promise, but he waded in without any plan whatsoever.

As a result of the Premier's dithering on the issue, municipal councillors and mayors are devoting a good deal of energy to this governance issue and how many

councillors sit, time that could have been spent on improving services in Peel region, like police services, roads, and public health.

Most importantly, I want to know where local MPPs stand. Where do the members for Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale and Brampton West-Mississauga stand on the

issue? Surely they have an opinion, but they're ducking it. I think the Don Guys and the Gerald Butts have put out the gag order and told those members not to say anything. But I'll say to my

colleagues, ask Don Guy what seat he represents. Walk right on by him. Tell Dalton McGuinty where you stand, and tell him to make a decision, once and for all.

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

Mr. Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): I rise today to recognize the enormous efforts of the Interfaith Social Assistance Reform Coalition in

bringing Ontario's affordable housing disaster right to our doorstep. As the members opposite will know, they will be here tomorrow and they will be hosting delegations from across Ontario and any

others who wish to come and hear about the housing crisis that we are having here in Ontario.

Ontario's lack of affordable housing long ago reached that crisis point. In 1995, the then-Conservative government cancelled all non-profit housing programs that

had been initiated. They moved the province out of the housing business and left thousands of low-income Ontarians in the cold.

In 2003, the Premier promised change. So far, we have seen absolutely nothing. All we see is announcement upon reannouncement. As any Ontarian living on social

assistance and working for minimum wage will tell you, even the announcements they make for affordable condos are of no avail to them at $115,600.

Recently, the federal housing minister has moved to help the province access hundreds of millions of dollars of unspent federal monies. Tomorrow, ISARC's forum

will give this government a chance to outline their plan to utilize these dollars. We don't want to hear promises. We don't want to hear reannouncements. We want to know when the shovels go in the

ground and that real people can have the affordable housing they need.

HEMODIALYSIS

Ms. Kathleen O. Wynne (Don Valley West): I rise today to commend an innovative program in my riding of Don Valley West that's making life easier

for patients with kidney disease. Traditionally, a patient in need of hemodialysis would travel to a hospital three times a week, each time for a four-hour treatment. Thanks to the Home Plus

program, a pilot project at Sunnybrook and Women's College Health Sciences Centre, these patients, many of whom are elderly, are now cared for in their homes. This has benefited both the

individuals in the program who receive dialysis overnight as well as the hospital by decreasing wait times, saving money and freeing needed hospital beds.

This is an instructive success story. Here a crisis became an opportunity because of the efforts of dedicated health professionals at Sunnybrook and Women's,

including Dr. Matthew Oliver, director of dialysis; Murray Rowe, project manager -- Murray is with us today in the gallery; and Leo Steven, president and CEO of Sunnybrook and Women's.

In 2001, all the outpatient spots for hemodialysis were full at the hospital's regional dialysis program, meaning that new patients starting hemodialysis

required admission. This took its toll on the hospital's resources. The average stay for these patients was 22 days, using dialysis resources normally reserved only for those with acute renal

failure. The problem peaked when the hospital had to transfer an accident patient out of the city to receive care.

The Home Plus program provides an excellent example of what communities can accomplish when they work co-operatively. The program brings together the North York

Community Care Access Centres, St. Elizabeth Nursing, the Kidney Foundation of Canada, Fresenius Medical Care of Canada and epost/Canada Post, which provides patients with unlimited access to their

medical information in a patient-friendly format.

This is the kind of innovation and planned change that we should celebrate and encourage.

AUTISM TREATMENT

Mr. Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): Dalton McGuinty made this unqualified promise to autistic children and their parents: "The Ontario Liberals

support extending autism treatment beyond the age of six." That same Dalton McGuinty said, "I ... believe that the lack of government-funded IBI treatment for autistic children over six is unfair

and discriminatory."

Those promises were made while Dalton McGuinty was scratching for votes in every corner of the province and behind every issue. So desperately did he want to be

Premier that no promise was withheld and no issue was beyond his political ambition.

He is now Premier, and while he and his ministers have the titles, the offices and the trappings of power, they have lost the respect, the trust and the

confidence of the very people who entrusted them with leadership responsibilities.

Integrity is about keeping your word, doing what is right and having the courage to face difficult issues head-on. This Legislature and the people of Ontario

have witnessed their Premier fail autistic children and their parents on all three counts. He did not keep his word, he did not do what is right, and he did not even have the courage to face those

with whom he broke faith, choosing rather to turn his back on those to whom he made commitments, refusing to take responsibility, and deflecting any and all questions on this important issue to his

ministers, who equally, in turn, were evasive.

The people of Ontario deserve better.

ST. JOHN'S REHABILITATION HOSPITAL

Mr. David Zimmer (Willowdale): It's not very often that someone sits down, takes out a pen, and writes out a cheque to a hospital for $1 million

or more, but recently St. John's Rehabilitation Hospital in my Willowdale riding was the beneficiary of not one but two such donations.

St. John's serves as a national and provincial leader in specialized rehabilitation medicine. It is preparing to begin a major enhancement and expansion of its

patient care facilities located in Willowdale.

This fall, the hospital will launch a public fundraising campaign to raise $15 million to fund its share of the facility redevelopment. This is the first time

the hospital will be seeking community support for a building program since its founding in 1937.

The Anglican Sisters of St. John the Divine founded this hospital and have managed it since. They continue to play a major role in its growth and development.

The sisters have pledged $5 million toward the $15-million goal as evidence of their outstanding commitment to improving access to specialized rehabilitation care for Ontario residents.

Recently, the sisters were joined in this major campaign initiative by Sally Horsfall Eaton and John Craig Eaton, who have also personally pledged $1 million to

the campaign.

The staff and physicians, the Sisters of St. John and the Eaton family are helping to build a critical road to recovery for residents of this province. I want to

congratulate them on this selfless contribution.

ADDICTION SERVICES

Mr. Kim Craitor (Niagara Falls): The people of my riding of Niagara Falls -- in fact, the entire Niagara region -- thank the Minister of Health

and the McGuinty government for improving detox services in our region. Our government moved quickly to cover this program's shortfall. As a result, this vital service remained open in Niagara.

Our government invested $173,000 in withdrawal management and substance abuse services in Niagara region to assist residents dealing with addiction on the road

to recovery. This was a two-part announcement. First, various regional detox centres received necessary funds to stay open for the balance of the year, but more importantly, the second announcement

put into place additional funding on a long-term basis to keep these vital services working in our communities.

Substance addiction is a very serious disease that requires very specialized treatment. Overall, the announcement was part of a province-wide $4-million

investment that builds on the government's $106-million annual investment to provide withdrawal management and substance abuse treatment to cover over 125,000 Ontarians.

Drug and alcohol abuse tears apart lives and families. I am extremely proud that my government was determined to provide those in need with the right care in

their communities, where it does the most good. Thank you, on behalf of a grateful community.

MUNICIPAL FINANCES

Mr. Bruce Crozier (Essex): I rise today to speak about the McGuinty government's commitment to small, northern and rural municipalities across

Ontario. Last week, we reaffirmed our commitment to these municipalities by investing $656 million through the new Ontario municipal partnership fund, an increase of $38 million, or 6.1%, over

2004. We are providing one-time transition funding of $233 million, meeting the province's reconciliation obligations from 2003 and 2004 under the old community reinvestment fund.

Under the new Ontario municipal partnership fund, communities in Essex county will be receiving a total of $4.5 million for 2005, an increase of $3.3 million

from what was received under the old community reinvestment fund. The town of Essex, for example, will receive $1.1 million this year, an increase of $782,000. Essex treasurer Donna Hunter said

that the Ontario municipal partnership fund transfer payment represents 10% of what Essex collects, which is a substantial amount of money for a community of its size.

Just one out of the 87% of the municipalities across Ontario, the town of Essex is benefiting from the McGuinty government's promise to build stronger, more

self-sufficient municipalities. I'm proud to be their MPP. I'm pleased to talk about this new fund. It just makes me feel good.

VISITORS

Mr. Jim Wilson (Simcoe-Grey): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I would ask members to join me in welcoming the family of legislative page Scott

Dickson. We have Mr. and Mrs. Hartley, Scott's grandparents, in the gallery, along with Steve, Sheila, Andrew and Laura Dickson from my riding.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): That's not a point of order, but welcome.

Mr. Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I'd like to welcome to the assembly a number of assembled grand chiefs

and chiefs from across northern Ontario. We have, from Treaty 9, Grand Chief Stan Beardy; from Treaty 3, Arnold Gardner. We have Chris McCormick here from the allied Iroquois nations, along with

Stan Louttit, my good friend from Mushkegowuk Tribal Council.

I'm sure I'm missing somebody, but if I did, please forgive me.

The Speaker: That's not a point of order.

We have with us in the Speaker's gallery a parliamentary delegation from the Republic of Lithuania, led by His Excellency Artūras Paulauskas, chairman of

the Parliament of Lithuania, and also members of the Parliament, and Her Excellency the ambassador. Welcome.

Mr. Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: Along with this delegation is a very distinguished Canadian, the former

president of the Canadian Lithuanian congress, Mr. Al Pacevicius. He's also here.

The Speaker: That's not a point of order.

Mr. Bob Delaney (Mississauga West): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I'd like to welcome a former colleague of mine, Mr. Brian Sullivan, to the

Legislature, making his first visit. But I guess it's not a point of order either.

The Speaker: We all agree it's not a point of order, and I hope it's not a practice that will be continued.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

APPRENTICESHIP TRAINING

Hon. Mary Anne V. Chambers (Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities): Investing in our apprenticeship system is part of the government's

plan to strengthen our greatest competitive advantage: the skills and expertise of our people.

Today I had the pleasure of meeting some students at George Brown College who are training to become electricians, sheet metal workers, plumbers, and air

conditioning and refrigeration mechanics. I was joined by my colleague Minister Cordiano at this event, and we both marvelled at the students' dedication to learning and excelling in their chosen

careers. I'm confident they are on the path to great success.

To further support apprentices like those I met today, I announced our government's investment of $37 million in Ontario's next generation of skilled workers.

As part of today's announcement, we will provide Ontario's colleges with $20 million to help them expand their ability to train the increased number of apprentices our economy needs.

Through the apprenticeship enhancement fund, we are increasing opportunities for training to ensure that apprentices have access to state-of-the-art technology

and facilities. We are also demonstrating our commitment to expand opportunities for students, experienced workers and internationally trained skilled workers to pursue rewarding careers in the

skilled trades.

Since coming to office, the McGuinty government has taken several steps to expand existing pathways to apprenticeship and create new career opportunities in

the skilled trades. We have introduced a new apprenticeship training tax credit that helps employers hire and train new apprentices. We have established 1,500 new $1,000 scholarships for students

who have left school early and then returned to upgrade their academic credentials in order to pursue an apprenticeship. Employers who hire these young people as apprentices will also receive a

$2,000 signing bonus. We have implemented the new co-op diploma apprenticeship program that provides young people with the opportunity to concurrently work toward a post-secondary credential and an

apprenticeship qualification.

Ontario has Canada's largest apprenticeship training system. We provide access to careers in more than 136 skilled trades in construction, manufacturing,

motive power and the service sectors. These activities are the result of partnerships with secondary schools, colleges, industry and labour. We are working together to promote apprenticeship

training as an important and rewarding career path. An apprenticeship in the skilled trades is a very attractive post-secondary education option for our young people.

An example of partnership is the annual minister's apprenticeship employers recognition and awards event, which I will host this evening for the second year. I

look forward to congratulating employers who are exceptional leaders in training apprentices and promoting careers in the skilled trades. The commitment of these employers is an essential component

of our province's continued economic success. The training they provide is indeed an investment in our economy's future and in the prosperity of our people. The Ontario government appreciates the

commitment of these and other employers.

We are committed to increasing the number of new apprenticeship registrations by 7,000, to a total of 26,000 annually, by the end of 2007-08. We will continue

to invest in programs to help our people enhance their skills. Our commitment is clear: We will build an economy based on strong skills and high standards; we will build a quality of life in

Ontario that is second to none.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Responses?

Mrs. Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener-Waterloo): I'm very pleased to respond to the announcement today, indicating that the government is going to

take some additional steps to support apprentices and provide them with increased access to training.

I think everyone in this House, and in fact most people throughout the province of Ontario, recognize it's absolutely essential that we do more to ensure that

we have the apprentices and tradespeople we will need to meet the needs of the economy, because we know that at the present time there are shortages in many of the trades. We also need to make sure

that the initiatives we undertake start to encourage young people, probably from the age of about 12, to start looking at and seriously considering whether they want to pursue jobs in the

apprenticeship area and to become skilled tradespeople. So this announcement certainly is a step forward.

This announcement builds on what my colleague the Honourable Dianne Cunningham had undertaken when our government was in office. We recognized that there was a

shortage of high-tech and skilled workers in Ontario and undertook many initiatives that enabled us to work co-operatively with and encourage employers to invest in training, because it is

absolutely essential to the competitiveness and economic prosperity of our province. There is a responsibility on the part of government, the private sector and obviously the institutional

educational sector to do what they can to support it.

I just want to review some of the initiatives we did take. We actually had a plan to double the apprenticeship program, and we did increase the investment in

training. If we go back to the 2002 budget, we made substantive new investments in apprenticeship and training. The number increased from $5 million in 2002-03 to $25 million in 2005-06. In fact,

we increased funding for apprenticeship training by $33 million in 2004-05 to help double the number of new entrants into apprenticeship programs. We also indicated that we were going to be

investing $50 million over five years, the capital funding for our colleges to upgrade equipment and facilities for apprenticeship training.

So I think you can see that part of the announcement today is very similar to the announcement we made in 2002, where we recognized the need to make sure our

colleges could update their facilities and equipment. So that's an announcement we had already made.

We also expanded the Ontario youth apprenticeship program and doubled its funding from $2 million in 1998-99 to $6 million in 2002-03 to allow more students to

start apprenticeships while completing high school. We also invested in pre-apprenticeship programs to encourage potential new entrants into the system, and a journeyperson updating program to help

experienced skilled workers keep their skills current.

So if you take a look at the announcement here, I think it is, in some respects, a reannouncement of some of the initiatives we indicated we would be following

through with from 2002. I'm pleased that this announcement has taken place today, because I think it is incumbent on all of us in this House to ensure we have the needed individuals working in the

province, and we need to continue to invest in training in order that this province remains competitive and in order that we can enjoy the economic prosperity we're going to need if we are to

continue to provide high-quality educational services, health services and community safety. Certainly this is a step in the right direction, but as I say, in some respects it is simply a

reannouncement of some of the plans we indicated we were going to move forward with.

Mr. Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): I want to say that New Democrats support any initiative that builds on any apprenticeship program this

government has in mind that will help our trades and the technology programs we are offering in the high school system or the college system. But here is the problemo -- and I want to read from a

letter sent to me by an educator in Ottawa. This is what this teacher says. I know that the minister, who at the moment is not as attentive as she might want to be, would want to listen to this

letter. Minister, here is what this educator said:

"As an educator, I am concerned that our students are receiving the best possible education to prepare them for the future. I am very concerned that the $20

million of the technological education renewal initiative (TERI) your government has promised for the school year 2004-05 has yet to be distributed, which is seriously jeopardizing the education of

our future skilled workforce, and subsequently the future economy of Ontario.

"In our technological world, it is important that today's student acquire the technological skills and knowledge necessary for success in tomorrow's careers.

Technological education, with an applied, hands-on, project-based approach, is critical to providing today's students with the essential and transferable skills for all manner of careers,

particularly in the skilled trades and technical occupations. However, there has been a lack of adequate funding and comprehensive planning in technological education in secondary schools,

resulting in shop closures, inadequate facilities and limited educational opportunities for today's students.

"In 2003, the government of Ontario announced the $90-million technological education renewal initiative (TERI) to provide for the renewal and enhancement of

technological education programs in our high schools. The present government," meaning you, "subsequently announced, in the spring of 2004, that the TERI allocation would be increased to $20

million for the 2004-05 school year. This has yet to occur.

"The success of post-secondary programs, school-to-work and school-college initiatives, vocational training and apprenticeship programs in the skilled

occupations and trades all rely on a steady influx of well-prepared, technologically literate students. The economy of Ontario relies on a well-trained, skilled workforce, and this workforce relies

on a strong, accountable and sustainable technological education.

"We urge the Ontario government to expedite the 2004-05 allocation of the TERI fund...."

Minister, I think you're getting my drift. If you cannot deliver on a promise you made last year, how are you going to deliver on a promise you are making this

year for yet another program? I know that the minister is busy at the moment, but I know that every other Liberal is listening and I know that the people watching this program are listening. I'm

saying to you, before you break another promise, deliver on the promise you made last year. That's the concern I've got with the promise you're making today.

People for Education have indicated that there is a rising high school dropout rate. It has reached 29%, and this is affecting the most vulnerable students in

our high school system.

I say to you, Minister, you should reach out to the curriculum casualty minister and work with him to deal with all the problems we've got in our high school

system. Why not increase the availability of such programs as aircraft technology, construction technology, architectural design and other programs so that we would ensure a full range of technical

relate to training and trades, math. for carpentry and science for auto repair? Why not equip existing apprenticeship offices to find placements for student applicants so that high school students

would be able to apply for apprenticeship positions through the guidance office in the same way that they apply to college and university?

Why don't you do something practical? Work with the curriculum casualty minister so that together we can help students in our high school system who

desperately need the help. Do something serious like that. That would be helpful.

DEFERRED VOTES

PLACES TO GROW ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 SUR

LES ZONES DE CROISSANCE

Deferred vote on the motion for second reading of Bill 136,

An Act respecting the establishment of growth plan areas and growth plans / Projet de loi 136, Loi

sur l'établissement de zones de croissance planifiée et de plans de croissance.

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

The division bells rang from 1406 to 1411.

The Speaker: All those in favour, please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

Arthurs, Wayne

Bartolucci, Rick

Bentley, Christopher

Berardinetti, Lorenzo

Bountrogianni, Marie

Bradley, James J.

Broten, Laurel C.

Brownell, Jim

Bryant, Michael

Cansfield, Donna H.

Caplan, David

Chambers, Mary Anne V.

Colle, Mike

Cordiano, Joseph

Craitor, Kim

Crozier, Bruce

Delaney, Bob

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duguid, Brad

Duncan, Dwight

Flynn, Kevin Daniel

Fonseca, Peter

Gerretsen, John

Jeffrey, Linda

Kular, Kuldip

Kwinter, Monte

Levac, Dave

Marsales, Judy

Matthews, Deborah

Mauro, Bill

McMeekin, Ted

McNeely, Phil

Meilleur, Madeleine

Milloy, John

Mitchell, Carol

Orazietti, David

Peters, Steve

Peterson, Tim

Phillips, Gerry

Pupatello, Sandra

Racco, Mario G.

Ramal, Khalil

Ruprecht, Tony

Smith, Monique

Sorbara, Gregory S.

Takhar, Harinder S.

Van Bommel, Maria

Watson, Jim

Wilkinson, John

Wong, Tony C.

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Zimmer, David

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

Nays

Arnott, Ted

Baird, John R.

Barrett, Toby

Bisson, Gilles

Chudleigh, Ted

Flaherty, Jim

Hardeman, Ernie

Horwath, Andrea

Hudak, Tim

Jackson, Cameron

Klees, Frank

Kormos, Peter

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

Martiniuk, Gerry

Miller, Norm

Munro, Julia

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Prue, Michael

Runciman, Robert W.

Tory, John

Wilson, Jim

Witmer, Elizabeth

Yakabuski, John

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 53; the nays are 24.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

Shall the bill be ordered for third reading?

Hon. David Caplan (Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal): Speaker, I would ask that the bill be referred to the standing committee on

general government.

The Speaker: So ordered.

FILM CLASSIFICATION ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005

SUR LE CLASSEMENT DES FILMS

Deferred vote on the motion for second reading of Bill 158,

An Act to replace the Theatres Act and to amend other Acts in respect of film / Projet de loi 158,

Loi remplaçant la

Loi sur les cinémas et modifiant d'autres lois en ce qui concerne les films.

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

The division bells rang from 1415 to 1420.

The Speaker: Mr Watson has moved second reading of Bill 158.

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

Ayes

Arnott, Ted

Arthurs, Wayne

Baird, John R.

Barrett, Toby

Bartolucci, Rick

Bentley, Christopher

Berardinetti, Lorenzo

Bountrogianni, Marie

Bradley, James J.

Brownell, Jim

Bryant, Michael

Cansfield, Donna H.

Caplan, David

Chambers, Mary Anne V.

Colle, Mike

Cordiano, Joseph

Craitor, Kim

Crozier, Bruce

Delaney, Bob

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duguid, Brad

Duncan, Dwight

Flynn, Kevin Daniel

Fonseca, Peter

Gerretsen, John

Hardeman, Ernie

Hudak, Tim

Jackson, Cameron

Jeffrey, Linda

Kennedy, Gerard

Kular, Kuldip

Kwinter, Monte

Levac, Dave

Marsales, Judy

Matthews, Deborah

Mauro, Bill

McGuinty, Dalton

McMeekin, Ted

McNeely, Phil

Meilleur, Madeleine

Miller, Norm

Milloy, John

Mitchell, Carol

Munro, Julia

Orazietti, David

Peters, Steve

Peterson, Tim

Phillips, Gerry

Pupatello, Sandra

Racco, Mario G.

Ramal, Khalil

Ruprecht, Tony

Smith, Monique

Sorbara, Gregory S.

Takhar, Harinder S.

Tory, John

Van Bommel, Maria

Watson, Jim

Wilkinson, John

Witmer, Elizabeth

Wong, Tony C.

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Zimmer, David

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

Nays

Bisson, Gilles

Chudleigh, Ted

Flaherty, Jim

Horwath, Andrea

Klees, Frank

Kormos, Peter

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

Martiniuk, Gerry

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Prue, Michael

Runciman, Robert W.

Wilson, Jim

Yakabuski, John

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 64; the nays are 14.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

Shall the bill be ordered for third reading?

Hon. Jim Watson (Minister of Consumer and Business Services): Mr. Speaker, I would ask that the bill be referred to the standing committee on

justice policy.

The Speaker: So ordered.

ORAL QUESTIONS

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the Premier. On September 22, 2003, the Premier said, "I think that [in]

governing in the beginning of the 21st century, an important aspect of that is transparency."

On February 9 of this year, the Ministry of Health said, in response to a freedom of information request we filed, that it would cost $10,190 for a copy of the

expenses filed by your Minister of Health and his staff. If your government has the paperwork good enough to write the cheque to the minister and his staff for those expenses, then why can't you

make that paperwork public? Is this delay of the $10,000 cost your idea of transparency?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I'm pleased to receive the question, and I want to remind the leader of

the official opposition that these are the very rules his government put in place. He's now standing in this Legislature railing against rules and regulations put in place by his government. I will

stack our government's record against that government's record any day when it comes to openness and transparency. No government has done more to create more openness and more transparency, and I

look forward to detailing that in the supplementary questions.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Just a moment. There's an anxiety on the government side by three or four people who want to answer the

question. The question will be answered by the person who has been designated to do so.

Mr. Tory: Unfortunately, this only gets worse. On October 22, 2004, we requested a copy of the House book of your Minister of Education, which

he carries with him into the House each and every day. I know that it's probably sitting on his desk right now. Six months later, we still have no response at all from the ministry. If you'd like,

I could photocopy the book right now in our office and give it back to you in 20 minutes at a cost of about $40. Is this the kind of stonewalling you mean by running this transparent government you

boast so much about?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: Can we be serious about this, Speaker? If you provide us with copies of your questions before question period, then we'll

provide you with copies of our ministers' briefing books before question period.

Mr. Tory: Let's try again -- another question for the Premier. When we finally do receive something back in response to a freedom of

information request, this is the kind of thing we get, and I'm happy to send this to the Premier. This is the kind of thing we get. This is an FOI seeking copies of e-mails sent by your own staff

members, blacked out except for a name, a date and a title.

Mr. Premier, is this what you mean by the kind of transparent government you're operating? Is this what you mean?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I'm taking delivery of all kinds of goods here.

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I'll share it with the Leader of the Opposition first.

By way of a government that is committed to openness and transparency, let me tell you about some of the things we have done. We're taking more bills to

committee for public input than ever before. We passed the Fiscal Transparency and Accountability Act, something that party opposed. We opened up Hydro One and OPG to freedom of information

requests, something they were against.

As well, we've expanded the power of the Provincial Auditor to look at the broader public sector, like universities, colleges and hospitals. They were also

against that. Furthermore, we have passed a law that requires that ministers be present for at least two thirds of question period. I'll put my record, where I'm here for at least two thirds of

question period -- by the way, for the entire question period -- against any representative of that government any day.

The Speaker: New question.

Mr. Tory: The Premier has spoken in the past and continues to speak at great length today about his plans for an open and accountable

government. When you launched your so-called --

Interjection.

The Speaker: Minister of Community and Social Services, the leader of the official opposition has the floor. I don't like him to be shouted

down.

Mr. Tory: Premier, when you launched your so-called Government That Works for You platform on April 30, you said, "We will encourage MPPs to

represent their constituents instead of blindly toeing the party line." You haven't had a free vote yet, but that's for another day.

Your press secretary did issue a memo to MPPs and their staff ordering them not to talk to the media. Is that your idea of the kind of open and transparent

government you're going to run?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: That is pure, unadulterated nonsense. I think you'll you find all kinds of newspapers, media newscasts and radio stories

that are filled with commentary from members of our government. We feel a responsibility to speak out on behalf of this government and speak up for our constituents, and we will continue to do

so.

Mr. Tory: I say to the member that, for openness and transparency, we're still waiting for the first free vote. Premier, you have so far

failed to disclose the specific science that supposedly guided your greenbelt boundary decisions. We made a freedom of information request in respect of that information, trying to get the

information on the science, and we were told that would cost $1,400 and would take over three months to respond to the request. Again, is this what you meant by operating an open and transparent

government?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: You know, I've given that answer before, and I'm more than pleased to give it again. With respect to the science upon which

we relied -- and by the way, which was relied on to a great extent by the Tories when they were in power -- I'll be pleased to list those documents again:

There is the Natural Heritage Reference Manual, released in 1999 by the Tories. It's a good document. It's solid. There's the LEAR report, the land evaluation

and area review. We also relied on that. That was produced, again, in 2002 by the Tories. There is A Current Assessment of Gross Land Supply in the Greater Golden Horseshoe, released in the winter

of 2005. By the way, these are all available online. As well, there is the Growth Outlook for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. That was made available in January 2005. There's The Application of Land

Use Intensification Target for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. That was also made available in January 2005. All those documents and others we relied upon are available online.

Mr. Tory: Premier, you stood in this House on May 10, 2000, and said, "I believe in an open government." Let's run down the list: First, your

press secretary orders Liberal MPPs not to talk to the media. Secondly, we have directives being issued by the Ministry of Health for civil servants not to talk to opposition MPPs. We have months

of delay, sometimes to the point where there's no answer at all, in dealing with the most straightforward freedom of information requests. Finally, in the last couple of days, we have a memo from

your children's minister instructing MPPs not to answer questions about autism. Premier, is this what you meant by saying you believed in an open government and that you would operate an open and

transparent government? Is that what you meant?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I think, at some point, as we have these conversations in this place, it's important to introduce a few facts, and I'm

quite pleased to do that once again. This is what our government stands for when it comes to openness and transparency: We are sending more bills to committee than any government ever before. We

passed the Fiscal Transparency and Accountability Act. They voted against that. We opened up Hydro One and OPG to freedom of information requests. They stand against that. We expanded the power of

the Provincial Auditor to do something he's been looking to do for years. We said you can and must go into universities, colleges and hospitals. They opposed that. We said we were going to pass,

and we have passed, in this House a new law requiring cabinet ministers to be present for at least two-thirds of question period. They opposed that; we are in favour of that. Again, we will put up

our record on openness and transparency against their record any day.

NATIONAL CHILD BENEFIT SUPPLEMENT

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Premier. This has been a tough week for Ontario's children. First, you

couldn't look autistic children and their parents in the eye when you broke your promise to fund IBI treatment for autistic children aged six and over. Then there was the letter from the Minister

of Children's Services telling your MPPs to avoid meeting autistic children and their parents.

Today, you refuse to meet with parents and children who ask you to keep your promise to stop the clawback of the national child benefit supplement for

low-income families. During the election, Premier, you said, "The clawback is wrong," and you said you would end it. These parents and children are here today to say hands off their baby bonus. Why

are you taking money from the pockets of the lowest-income children and parents in this province?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): The member opposite brought up at the outset our record in connection

with supports for children who have been diagnosed with autism, and I want to speak to that for a moment.

First of all, I'm proud that we have doubled the budget from $40 million to $80 million. Secondly, I'm proud of the fact that we have reduced the waiting list

for assessment by 72%. I am proud of the fact that we have increased the number who are receiving treatment by 25%. I'm proud of the fact that when it comes to students diagnosed with autism who

are in our schools, we have hired 139 experts who are available to our teachers and educational assistants.

Beyond that, Dr. Rozanski said that what we needed as a injection for support for special education needs in our schools was $250 million. We said no to that.

Instead, we've increased it to $365 million.

No government has ever done more to help students with special needs in the history of our province.

Mr. Hampton: Well, Premier, I'm sure Madam Justice Kiteley will be really impressed. You presented all of that before her, and she's found

clearly that you were discriminating against autistic children.

The fact is that they had to go to court to try to get you to keep your promise, and now you're doing the same thing to these lowest-income children and

parents. During the election, you promised to stop the clawback. Now you are making 164,000 of the lowest-income kids and 91,000 of the lowest-income families in the province go to court to make

you keep your promise.

Low-income vulnerable families should be able to spend their money on food and clothing and paying the rent; they shouldn't have to go to court against a

Premier who won't keep his promises. So, Premier, why are you wasting taxpayers' money dragging these lowest-income children and parents through the court? Shouldn't they be allowed to use that

money for food, clothing and to pay the rent?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I am proud to say that for the first time in 11 years, the most vulnerable have seen an increase in their assistance.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): The member from Nickel Belt, come to order.

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I'm also proud to say that, in addition, families with children on social assistance were able to keep the July 2004

national child benefit supplement. This means that this year there will be an extra $7 million for parents and children who need it most, and next year that number will rise to $20 million. We're

proud of that record.

Mr. Hampton: Premier, during the election, you said that the clawback was wrong. You said, "We will end the clawback." Those are your words.

Now, you're forcing these families to go to court to try to force you to keep the promise.

You wouldn't meet with them today. I did. I want to tell you about them.

Lisa is a single mom with children: Dylan and Zoey. She works hard. She volunteers for church suppers. She does a lot of work, but do you know what? She can't

always afford to put food on the table because you claw the money back from her. She said that if you would end the clawback, she would have enough money for food. She might even be able to pay for

her son to play soccer and maybe take her kids to the movies once in a while.

Premier, tell them why you're taking $226 a month, every month, from her and her children.

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I guess the leader of the NDP honestly and sincerely believes that he has a monopoly on compassion and social consciousness

when it comes to those who have the privilege of working in this place. I say again --

Interjection.

The Speaker: Order. I don't think the member from Nickel Belt needs to give the response. I'm going to call her to order again.

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: The leader of the NDP might not be prepared to acknowledge this, but the fact is, we have eliminated the clawback on a

go-forward basis. That means that there's $7 million more for parents and children this year and it will grow to $20 million next year.

Now, that may not be enough for them. They may feel that we should be doing more. But given our financial constraints, given the circumstances we find

ourselves in compliments of the previous government, we are proud that, notwithstanding those constraints, we found $7 million this year, growing to $20 million next year.

Mr. Hampton: Premier, this is one shiny dollar, one loonie. One loonie a week: That's how much this family and these kids get to keep after

you take 97% of the federal national child benefit supplement from them. You leave them one loonie a week.

Premier, we know who you listen to. Developers pay $10,000 for a private soiree with you. Your private fixer, Warren Kinsella -- lobbyists or interest groups

can pay him money and get access. Baby Zoey would have to collect this loonie for 200 years in order to have access to you. Her mother would have to collect this loonie for six months in order to

take her kids to the movies.

When are you going to stop your loonie idea, stop the clawback, and allow these children and their mother to keep the money the federal government rightfully

gave to them?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: Again, I think it really is important to introduce a few facts into this conversation. Clawback money in 2002 and 2003 was

about $202.5 million, and members are entitled to ask, "Where's that money going?" Some $20 million goes to children's mental health services.

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I know they may not want to listen to this, but $22 million goes to children's treatment centres; $120 million goes to the

Ontario child care supplement for working families. It's not as if we are somehow taking that money and putting it into a wheelbarrow and wheeling it out the back door. It's going to benefit needy

children across the province. So I'm proud that, in addition to being able to provide those supports to those children, we have also found $7 million this year and $20 million next year.

Mr. Hampton: I think what this means for the lowest-income families is that Dalton McGuinty is prepared to give them one loonie a week this

year and two loonies a week next year.

Premier, this is your promise. This is what you promised. And don't try to say, "We're giving the money to municipalities," or giving it somewhere else,

because the following municipalities have all passed resolutions saying that this money should go for the lowest-income parents and their children: London, Toronto, Timmins, Hamilton, Kingston,

Windsor, Ottawa, Kenora, Sudbury and York region. They know that you cannot reduce poverty for some by increasing poverty for others. They want you to keep your promise to end the clawback. It's

your promise, Premier.

Look these children and their parents in the eye. Tell them why you are breaking your promise to end the clawback, why you continue to take $226 a month away

from them.

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: Again, I'm proud of the fact that we have been able to eliminate the clawback on a go-forward basis. I'm proud of the fact

that we found $7 million this year and $20 million next year.

And again, people are entitled to know what is happening to that clawback money. It's not going into tax cuts. It's not going into buying a rain forest in

South America. We're spending $120 million for the Ontario child care supplement for working families, $20 million for children's mental health, $22 million for our children's treatment centres,

and $40.5 million is going to municipalities, which are also reinvesting this in programs like Healthy Babies, Healthy Children and the Ontario Works child care and Learning, Earning and Parenting

program. That money is going into good programs that help needy children across the province.

Mr. Hampton: Municipality after municipality has said they don't want your clawback money. They don't want you clawing back money from the

lowest-income parents and children in the province. They want you to keep your promise.

Premier, I'm sending over some postcards. These are "Hands off the baby bonus; hands off the child supplement" postcards. Here's what some of the postcards

say:

"These children are tomorrow's future. They cannot learn if they go to school hungry."

Here's one from a 13-year-old boy named Robert: "I am often left out on pizza and milk days at school. Please let us keep the money. It's supposed to be ours."

The one loonie a week that you're flipping Robert won't even buy milk and pizza at school.

So I ask you again, Premier: Look at these families. Look at these children that you made the promise to. Tell them why you continue to take $226 a month from

the lowest-income children and families in this province.

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: The leader of the NDP may enjoy bringing families into this place on a regular basis and parading them through. That may be

his style, but it's certainly not my style, and I want to make that perfectly clear.

Mr. Hampton: You hypocrite.

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: Again, let me say --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Could we just get the temperature down a little bit?

The leader of the third party made an unparliamentary comment. Would you like to withdraw that?

Mr. Hampton: If I made an unparliamentary remark, I withdraw.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. New question.

FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY

Mr. Jim Flaherty (Whitby-Ajax): My question is for the Minister of Finance. In your economic statements -- two of them so far -- and in your

one budget, which is almost a year old now, you talked with some pride of your comprehensive four-year plan for Ontario. It's clear that plan has been abandoned by the Premier and, I assume, by

you, given the spending that has gone on. That's what my question is about: your profligate spending.

You said in your budget a year ago that you would limit spending on average to 1.9%. The exact quote is that "program spending will increase at an average

annual rate of 1.9% between 2004-05 and 2007-08." It is your duty, as you know, sir, as Minister of Finance, to keep track of the spending in Ontario. My question then is, what is the current rate

of program spending increase in the province of Ontario?

Hon. Greg Sorbara (Minister of Finance): I'm delighted my friend from Whitby-Ajax is re-reading last year's budget, and I invite him to be in

the House when we present the budget later on in the spring. He will see that we are building on the plan we established in our first budget. I'm surprised that he hasn't advocated, as his leader

is doing and his party is doing, that we eliminate the health care premium and cut $2.4 billion out of health care. I'm surprised that he's not advocating in his question that we redirect money out

of public education and do as he would do and put it in private schools. We're very proud of the plan we've presented, and we continue to pursue that plan diligently and with determineation.

Mr. Flaherty: Your plan was at 1.9%; your spending is way over 1.9%. You've abdicated your responsibility as a government to monitor and

control spending in Ontario. That's why you can't even answer the question. I don't think you know the answer to the question, spending is so out of control.

Let me ask you about two other things that you said were about better management of provincial assets. This is in your budget, Minister. You might remember it,

on page 8. You said you were going to do two reviews. One review "will ensure that in all cases the public interest is promoted," and it will review all assets of the province and report back. Has

the review been done? Is it underway? When will it be produced? Will it be made public before the budget so the people of Ontario can have fulfillment of something that you said you would do 11

months ago?

Hon. Mr. Sorbara: The short answer to his question is yes, those reviews are underway, and I will be pleased to report to this Parliament when

they are complete.

He talked about abdicating responsibility. I'll tell you what I think about abdication of responsibility. The behaviour of that government, particularly when

my friend was the Minister of Finance, cutting into the revenues of this province so that there were no more resources available and at the same time, over the last two and a half years of their

mandate, increasing spending at a rate of 21%, which left this province with an almost $6-billion deficit that we are now charged with the responsibility of cleaning up: That was abdication of

responsibility.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order, member from Whitby-Ajax.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. When I ask for order, I would ask members that we have some quiet and not continuous talking.

GASOLINE PRICES

Mr. Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): My question is to the Premier. Before the election, you and your caucus attacked the former government

every time the price of gas went up in the province of Ontario. You called on the government to take action; you asked the government to roll back prices; you asked the government to freeze prices.

Your members introduced legislation in this House on numerous occasions to take steps in that direction.

Premier, the price of gas has hit the roof. It's almost a buck a litre in Toronto, and if you live up in Attawapiskat or Peawanuck, you are paying $2.50 a

litre.

Premier, we're going to make it easy for you. We have a bill that I introduced in this House, called Bill 93. It mirrors the bills of Mr. Brown, Mr. Bradley

and Mr. Bartolucci, along with Mr. Colle. Will you pass that bill and do what you promised prior to the last election?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): The Minister of Energy would like to speak to this.

Hon. Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): The government is very concerned about high gasoline prices and the effect

they're having on Ontario's consumers and on the overall economy. No one likes to pay higher prices for gasoline, including myself.

There are several contributing factors, including high oil prices, high world demand and tight supplies. Prices in Ontario are surveyed twice a week from April

1 to September 30 and weekly during the rest of the year, and my ministry posts this information.

I'll point out that rising gasoline prices are a phenomenon being felt not only throughout the country but throughout the Western world. We continue to monitor

it and to be concerned about those prices.

Mr. Bisson: Listen, Minister, you were far more than concerned prior to the last election; your guys were apoplectic. They were jumping all

over the place, calling on the Conservative government to freeze gas prices and roll them back. Now you say, "We're concerned, and I, as Minister of Energy, don't like to pay high gas prices." I've

got news for you: You've got the limo; you don't have to pay the gas prices.

I'm saying, my friend the Minister of Energy, will you do the right thing and support the bills of your members in the previous Parliament that we have

mirrored in our legislation, and move forward with the promises you made in the last election?

Hon. Mr. Duncan: I remind him what he did in a previous Parliament. Does anybody remember which was the last government to raise taxes on

gasoline? It was the NDP. Mr. Bisson was there, and he voted for it. Mr. Hampton was there, and he voted for it. Ms. Martel was there, and she voted for it. Mr. Marchese was there, and he voted for

it. Peter Kormos ran out, so maybe he didn't vote for it.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): You know that it's proper, if you are going to identify members in the chamber, that you go by their

constituency.

IMMIGRANTS' SKILLS

Mr. Khalil Ramal (London-Fanshawe): My question is for the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities. Today, our government took an

important step toward addressing a looming skills shortage by providing a $37-million investment in apprenticeship training.

I am pleased to see that my local college, Fanshawe, will receive over $1.5 million to improve their apprenticeship facilities and equipment. However, I

believe many of my constituents will be practically interested in investments our government is making in the apprenticeship innovation fund. I understand that this new investment is targeted at

providing assistance to internationally trained skilled tradespeople. Minister, could you please tell the House more about this investment?

Hon. Mary Anne V. Chambers (Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities): I'm grateful to the member from London-Fanshawe for that

question.

Before I answer his question, I'd just like to comment on something that my friend the member from Trinity-Spadina said earlier on -- and he thought I wasn't

even listening to him. I know he agrees with everything that we are doing, so I think he's just not up to date when he suggests that some of the announcements that we made last year have not been

funded. They are funded, they are on their way, and people love them. So I know that the member from Trinity-Spadina would like to know that, to know they are funded.

On the subject of internationally trained skilled professionals, the idea is to ensure that we are not duplicating what they already have learned. I will

follow up in the supplementary.

Mr. Ramal: Thank you, Minister. While we hear a great deal about the need to help internationally trained professionals continue their careers

as doctors, engineers, teachers or nurses, we also know that we face a looming shortage of skilled tradespeople.

Minister, today's investment is an important step we are taking to ensure that we have the skilled tradespeople we need down the road. However, I am sure that

this is just one piece of the puzzle, of the support our government needs to provide to internationally trained tradespeople. What other services does our government provide to internationally

trained tradespeople to help them continue their careers here in Ontario?

Hon. Mrs. Chambers: In addition to the $5 million for internationally trained skilled tradespeople that I announced this morning, we also have

a number of other programs on the way. We have bridge training programs for electricians, industrial electricians, construction and maintenance electricians, and industrial mechanics and

millwrights to help them prepare for their certification exams. We have career maps to help people understand what is required for certification in 10 skilled trades. We also have been engaged in

our local colleges in pre-certification courses. We are providing translators or readers or extending writing times for exams of internationally trained skilled tradespeople, and we have programs

out of 26 offices around the province for assessing their credentials.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): I have a question for the Premier. Premier, the people in the North Bay area are very concerned about

the status of their hospital project. Can you update the Legislature on the status of the North Bay Regional Health Centre project?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): No, I can't. I don't have those specifics in the absence of the

Minister of Health, but I undertake to supply my friend with that information.

Mr. Miller: I appreciate that, Premier, and I know the people of North Bay would very much appreciate having a firm date for the start of the

project.

In fact, five mayors from the area -- the mayor and four retired mayors -- had a historic meeting recently. The North Bay Nugget says:

"In what was described as a historic meeting, a group of former mayors stepped out of their private lives Tuesday to fight for a public cause....

"Speaking on behalf of the five mayors, Lawlor" -- one of the past mayors -- "talked about the importance of the new hospital as he launched a petition calling

on the province to immediately approve the project."

Premier, if you're checking into that, could you please also check into the status of the Mattawa hospital project, which is also awaiting approval? I know the

people of the Mattawa area would very much like to hear when they might be able to start their project.

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I undertake to get that information, but let me say this while I have the opportunity: What many people in North Bay are

asking themselves is, why is it, when they had a Premier as a representative, they didn't get a hospital built? I think that's a very legitimate question. I can say as well that, unlike the party

opposite, the party of which the questioner is a member, a party that intends to take $2.4 billion out of health care, which will compromise our ability to invest in hospital infrastructure, we

won't be doing that. We have different priorities. We believe in investing in health care, not taking money out of health care.

FIRST NATIONS MINING AND FORESTRY REVENUES

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Premier. First Nations across northern Ontario are becoming increasingly

frustrated with the limited decision-making they are able to exercise when it comes to the development of natural resources near their First Nation. For example, today, road blockades are going up

in the forest surrounding Saugeen and Mishkeegogamang First Nations in northwestern Ontario to protest the lack of involvement these communities have in forest management planning in their

traditional areas. They are worried about the encroachment on their traplines and on their traditional way of life. They want to see some co-management of resource development. They want to have

some control over when and where logging happens.

In the election campaign, you promised, "We will build a new partnership with Ontario's aboriginal communities. We will ensure increased participation by

aboriginal peoples in the decisions that affect their lives." Premier, when is that going to happen? Because it's certainly not happening today at Saugeen and Mishkeegogamang First Nations.

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I know the Minister of Northern Development and Mines has some

details.

Hon. Rick Bartolucci (Minister of Northern Development and Mines): I want to welcome our First Nations partners here today.

Certainly, we are committed to a new dialogue with our First Nations people. We started that new dialogue the day we were elected. It will be a long-term

process. When concerns come up that are of mutual interest -- and let me stress that these are of mutual interest -- it won't be the past where the door was closed on our First Nations people by

other, former governments. We are interested in that dialogue. As we speak, the Ministry of Natural Resources people are working with our First Nations people and with the proponent, and we are

trying to reach solutions. We will continue to use a dialogue whereby we develop a mutual partnership based on mutual respect and trust, and we will arrive at solutions to our problems.

Mr. Hampton: When I spoke earlier with the chief from Mishkeegogamang, what you just spoke of, Minister, is not happening. In fact, I want to

read a letter from your colleague the Minister of Natural Resources to Louie Seymour, who works at the Bimose Tribal Council on behalf of the Kenora area First Nations, who are not opposed to

logging; they just want to have some say. This is what the Minister of Natural Resources says:

"Although your participation in forest management planning can assist in protecting First Nation values and identifying opportunities for First Nation

communities, these processes have clearly defined mandates. As such, they are unable to address broader issues, such as treaty and aboriginal rights, co-management of resources and revenue sharing,

which fall outside of these respective mandates."

These are the issues that First Nations want to address, and your government isn't addressing them. That's why these roadblocks are happening. I ask the

Premier again: This is the promise you made to First Nations. You said that they were going to have increased involvement in the decisions that affect their lives. When is that going to happen?

Because it's not happening now.

Hon. Mr. Bartolucci: First of all, with the specific issue the member brought up, it's my understanding that the regional director in Thunder

Bay is scheduled to meet with the chief and the forest licensee in order to try to find a resolution. We have to make sure everyone is aware that this government values the concerns of our First

Nations people and wants to take proactive actions to ensure that we reach resolution.

Certainly, with regard to higher-level discussions, it's my understanding that we have scheduled a meeting with our First Nations tomorrow; there will be

several ministers at that meeting. But as I say -- and want to reinforce, because there are many, many First Nations community leaders in the gallery today -- we have had ongoing dialogue. We will

continue ongoing dialogue with our First Nations partners because we believe that together we can map out a future that is strong and bright for all concerned.

GROWTH PLANNING

Mr. Kevin Daniel Flynn (Oakville): My question today is to the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal. Bill 136, the Places to Grow Act, is

currently before the House. I understand you are consulting on a draft growth plan for the greater Golden Horseshoe area. What will that plan mean for my own community of Oakville and my

constituents if Bill 136 passes?

Hon. David Caplan (Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal): If the proposed Places to Grow Act is passed, it will allow the provincial

government to develop and implement growth plans right across the province of Ontario. We are currently consulting on having a draft plan developed for the greater Golden Horseshoe because this

area is experiencing the greatest growth pressures in the province. The region is currently home to 7.8 million people and is expected to grow by 3.7 million people and approximately 1.8 million

jobs by 2031. It is the fastest-growing region of the province and, in fact, one of the fastest-growing in North America.

The greater Golden Horseshoe is the economic engine of the province. It is a critical region that is economically competitive and offers a high quality of

life. That's why we need the kind of plan that attracts jobs and investment, protects our valuable natural areas and improves our quality of life by determining where and how growth should be

occurring. A growth plan for the greater Golden Horseshoe will help us reduce sprawl, make transit a viable option and reduce gridlock. I'll add some more in the supplementary.

Mr. Flynn: I understand that, as part of the draft growth plan for the greater Golden Horseshoe, 25 communities in that region are being

proposed as urban growth centres, including my own community of Oakville. What does that designation mean to my community and to the 24 others if the proposed Places to Grow Act is passed?

Hon. Mr. Caplan: Urban growth centres are key areas designated to accommodate future growth. Typically, urban growth centres are core

metropolitan areas and/or significant economic hubs that serve as destinations of regional focus. They have high or medium densities for residential and employment mixes. Because of these kinds of

characteristics, they are ideally positioned to accommodate significant growth in the future. In turn, this growth, supported by appropriate public investment, specifically in infrastructure, will

strengthen these characteristics, making the centres more vibrant and transit supportive, and attract even greater investment.

In the case of the member's community of Oakville, we propose, as an urban growth centre, midtown Oakville, currently serving as a regional transit hub by

offering GO and Via Rail services, as well as a local transit hub through Oakville's 20-plus bus routes. Additionally, the Queen Elizabeth Way in the south serves as a major transportation

corridor. The midtown core offers other significant regional services, including regional municipal --

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Thank you. New question.

FABRY DISEASE

Mrs. Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener-Waterloo): My question is for the Premier. As you know, enzyme replacement therapy for people who have

Fabry's disease has been terminated. These people were receiving it under the compassionate use program. This is now creating extreme stress, anxiety and even, in the case of one young man I talked

to yesterday, thoughts of suicide because of the termination of funding for this treatment.

In fact, I've received a letter from Donna Strauss, who says, "Please, Mr. McGuinty, try and show the patients in Ontario that you care by at least listening

to our cries for help."

I ask you today, will you at least commit -- as you know, Ralph Klein's government has agreed to do this -- to bridge funding of ERT for Fabry's patients

between today and when a long-term solution is in place?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I know the member opposite is aware that all the provinces and all the

territories have come together and said that we will adhere to a common drug review, which is the responsibility of the federal government. As drug companies come forward and propose that we add

additional drugs to the list of those which we publicly support, we think it's important to find out whether they are as efficacious as they hold them out to be. All of us together have decided

that the best way to do this is to go through this common drug review, and we await the outcome of that common drug review. I think that's the appropriate thing to do and the responsible thing to

do.

Mrs. Witmer: I beg to differ with the Premier. The reality is, both British Columbia and Alberta have now acknowledged that the common drug

review program is not the appropriate review program for this particular drug. In fact, as I just pointed out to you, the Alberta government of Ralph Klein has committed to bridge funding between

now and the time that a long-term decision is going to be made.

I would hope that you would recognize and that you would support the development, over the long term, of a coordinated national policy on orphan disease and

catastrophic drugs. This is something other developed countries in the world have. But until that time, Premier, I ask you again, please listen to the desperate pleas of these individuals and

commit to bridge funding between now, when they don't have access to this treatment, and such time as a long-term solution is found. I ask you on behalf of these individuals.

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I can't for the life of me believe that my colleague, as Minister of Health, would be adopting the position that she is

advocating I adopt today. That's not the way she dealt with those issues at that time.

Again, we have a process. It's not an easy one, but I think it's the appropriate one and the responsible thing to do. We have a common drug review. What we

need to do is to allow that process to unfold.

I think the appropriate thing would have been for the drug company in question, the pharmaceutical company in question, to continue to fund that drug in the

interim. They decided to pull the rug out from under the feet of a very limited number of patients. But it's a very important issue to them; I don't want to minimize that. I think they should have

continued to provide that funding in the interim.

What we will do is what we set out to do: We will adhere to this common drug review process so that we get the very best scientific advice.

FIRST NATIONS MINING AND FORESTRY REVENUES

Mr. Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): My question is to the Premier. We have with us today in the galleries a large number of aboriginal

leaders from across Ontario. We have the regional grand chief. We have chiefs from Treaty 9, Treaty 3, Nishnawbe Aski and others.

They're here today because it's the eve of the 100th anniversary of the signing of Treaty 9 on the part of their forefathers, the province of Ontario and the

crown. When we signed that treaty 100 years ago, we said, "If you, the First Nations of Ontario, give us," meaning the government, "access to the resources that are found on your traditional

territories, we will share the revenue from those particular activities with the First Nations." Well, we're here 100 years later and, Premier, we have shared nothing. Forestry companies have

gotten rich, mining companies have gotten rich, the province of Ontario has excised taxes on those properties and on those particular activities for 100 years, and First Nations have got

nothing.

My question to you, Premier, is simply this: Are you prepared now, on the 100th anniversary of the signing of Treaty 9, to live up to your treaty commitments

of 100 years ago and go into revenue-sharing with the First Nations communities of Ontario?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Well, during that intervening 100 years, the NDP enjoyed the privilege

of serving Ontarians as their government and, mark my words, they did absolutely nothing when it came to sharing prosperity with our First Nations.

There is a very important meeting that is taking place tomorrow. It is a meeting, I would argue, that is without precedent in the history of this province.

There will be a number of ministers attending that meeting and for the very first time we are going to engage First Nations in a very serious way about sharing prosperity. That has not been done in

a deliberate way such as we plan to do tomorrow, and in the supplementary, I know the Attorney General would like to elaborate on that.

Mr. Bisson: First of all, you're wrong there. There were revenue-sharing agreements between the NDP government and other First Nations. But

the issue is this: A hundred years ago, as the province of Ontario, we signed a treaty with our aboriginal friends. We said to them very clearly, "We want access to your forests, we want access to

your water rights, we want access to mines across northern Ontario, and if you give us access, we will share those revenues with you so that your communities can prosper."

Well, it's clear everybody else prospered. Everybody has made billions of dollars. The names of the legacies of those people and those companies are 100 miles

long. But our First Nations are in desperate conditions, they have not had an opportunity to share, and all we get is that you're prepared to enter into dialogue.

I'll make it simple. I've got a bill in this House, Bill 97. We're prepared to make the amendments necessary to move that bill out of committee. Will you

commit to supporting Bill 97 so we can get some real action on this issue?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: The Attorney General.

Hon. Michael Bryant (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs, minister responsible for democratic renewal): I also want to

welcome and say hello again to the First Nations leadership that is sitting in the gallery. I very much look forward to our meeting tomorrow. Not just myself, but a number of members of cabinet are

attending that meeting: the Minister of the Environment, the Minister of Energy, the Minister of Children and Youth Services, the Minister of Natural Resources, Minister Phillips will be there, and

a number of other ministries. That's because the issue of resource revenue-sharing is an extremely complicated issue. It's not simple, and I know the member understands that it's not simple. It

requires a number of ministries to sit down and work together and work with First Nations.

We're very committed to making unprecedented progress on this. Tomorrow is an important day, one of many meetings we have had. I look forward to that meeting.

I look forward to moving forward on this very complicated but very serious and important issue that comes down to sharing prosperity with First Nations.

ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION

Mr. Dave Levac (Brant): My question is for the Minister of the Environment. On March 21, 2005, the NDP's environment critic, the member for

Toronto-Danforth, in a news release, pointed out that the government "still hasn't called Bill 133 ... for second reading and committee, despite introducing it twice last October."

Minister, could you please explain to the members of this assembly, the people of Ontario and in particular the members of the NDP what your ministry and our

government are doing about Bill 133 since it was introduced last October?

Hon. Leona Dombrowsky (Minister of the Environment): I'm very happy to have this opportunity to share with the members of this assembly, the

people of Ontario and particularly my colleagues in the third party the work that has been underway by this ministry with regard to Bill 133.

It was introduced in October 2004 and then it was posted on the Environmental Bill of Rights registry for 30 days. That posting ended November 28. Because of

the overwhelming response the ministry received to that, we extended the posting, so it provided more opportunity for the public to provide us with their input, and that ended on January 7, 2005.

In the meantime, throughout November and December, representatives from my ministry met with many stakeholders -- industrial stakeholders, environmental stakeholders and community stakeholders --

to gain further input on this very important piece of legislation.

Now I'm very happy to say that the House leader referred this important piece of legislation to a standing committee of this Legislative Assembly.

Mr. Levac: Thank you, Minister. It's obvious that your ministry and you, yourself, plus the government, have been doing some busy engaging

with the necessary stakeholders in discussions about Bill 133 since its introduction last October.

Yesterday in this assembly, the leader of the third party and the party's environment critic criticized the government for referring Bill 133 to the standing

committee. Yet, in a news release on March 21, 2005, the critic -- again, the member from Toronto-Danforth -- said, "The government needs to move forward with this legislation. Let's get it to

committee, and make sure it does what it is supposed to do."

Minister, could you explain to the members of this assembly and the people of Ontario the significance of referring this bill to the standing committee and,

importantly, would you provide the member from Toronto-Danforth with the hat she's going to eat once we get this bill to its fruition?

Hon. Mrs. Dombrowsky: I really can't quite explain why the member from Toronto-Danforth would ask that the bill go to committee and then

yesterday, when it happened, criticize this government for doing just that. Having bills go to committee is a very legitimate part of the legislative process. It is a procedure that has been

followed regularly by this government. It happened with Bill 8, the Commitment to the Future of Medicare Act; it happened with Bill 31, the Health Information Protection Act; Bill 100, the

Electricity Restructuring Act; and Bill 110, the Mandatory Gunshot Reporting Act. I think it's important to note that those were all very important pieces of legislation brought forward by this

government. It went to committee after first reading. We're following through in the same way with Bill 133. We're very anxious and eager to hear what the people of Ontario have to say about this

very important bill. Our government is committed to ensuring it's the best possible legislation to protect the environment and the people of Ontario.

TOURISM

Mr. Ted Arnott (Waterloo-Wellington): My question is for the Minister of Tourism and Recreation. As the minister is well aware, and the House

is well aware, in 2003 the province's tourism industry was hammered by the impact of a number of factors, most particularly the SARS crisis we faced. As you recall, the Eves government at that time

responded with a substantial tourism marketing program that we called the tourism recovery program. The effect of that program was to attempt to expand the tourism marketing budget to bring more

tourists to Ontario once again. I'd like the minister, if you would, to comment on the effectiveness of that program and whether or not it will be continued in the coming years.

Hon. James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism and Recreation): I'm glad the member asked that question. The Chair of Management Board is accusing

me of planting the question. Of course, there couldn't be anything further from the truth, because the member is genuinely concerned about this. He and I and others were at the reception of the

Tourist Operators of Ontario, where they said this program was a highly effective one. I want to tell the member that it has been effective in terms of tourism recovery. What is good about it is

that it brings about partnerships between the private sector and the public sector. At a time when the province was hit very hard by a number of factors, including the SARS scare, it was

instrumental, I believe, in helping the tourism industry to recover.

There are still many challenges facing it out there. I appreciate very much the support of the member for this particular program. I know that the government

will be doing its best to continue to provide the kind of support the tourism industry needs and deserves.

Mr. Arnott: I must say that I appreciate the efforts on the part of the tourism industry that the Minister of Tourism and Recreation has put

forward. Unfortunately, he didn't indicate whether or not the program would be continued. I would ask him once again: Can he commit that the government will continue this program in future

years?

Hon. Mr. Bradley: As the member would be aware, I find it a bit difficult, because my good friend Jim Flaherty, the member for Whitby-Ajax,

was up a while ago talking about the fact the government is spending too much money. I was very concerned when I heard that because I know that the member and I feel there are some good and

strategic investments that can be made to assist the tourism industry. I hope you're able to convince the member for Whitby-Ajax, who, even though John Tory got the most votes, appears to be the

person who actually won, from the questions I'm hearing and the policies of the party. I know this wasn't a question that came from last night's $1,000-a-person event that the Leader of the

Opposition attended, where you could privately speak to him for $1,000, but I want to tell the member that we will work very hard to ensure this program --

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): New question.

ALLEGED SEXUAL ABUSE

OF MINORS

Mr. Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): A question to the Attorney General: It was on February 22 that I asked you in this chamber about a full

public inquiry into the sexual abuse uncovered by the OPP's Project Truth investigation in Cornwall. It is an inquiry that your government has repeatedly promised but not yet delivered. On that

day, you said you would have an announcement in two weeks' time. That was over six weeks ago, Attorney General. Where's the inquiry you promised?

Hon. Michael Bryant (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs, minister responsible for democratic renewal): I thank the

member for his question. I'm in constant contact with MPP Brownell on this particular issue. As the member knows, when I was in Cornwall, I met with a number of victims, and they made it very clear

that they expected the commissioner would be somebody who had a background in criminal law, who would be bilingual, somebody who had no immediate connection geographically to the area, and also

somebody who had a background in it but who of course didn't in any way touch the matters.

I've had significant discussions with all of the chief justices of Ontario. I had a discussion today with a justice and a potential commissioner.

It is a very serious matter and I know the people of Cornwall want to make sure we get this right. We will get this right, we will have this inquiry and we

will see that justice is done in Cornwall.

VISITORS

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: It's my pleasure to introduce the grade 10 civics class from

Bracebridge and Muskoka Lakes Secondary School. They're in the gallery over here. Teachers Jennifer McCreary and Heather Medley-Fernandez have brought their class down.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Let me draw your attention, in the public gallery on the west side, to Mr. Brad Clark, former member for

Stoney Creek in the 37th Parliament. Let's welcome him.

PETITIONS

OPTOMETRISTS

Mr. John R. Baird (Nepean-Carleton): I have a petition submitted by the Ontario Association of Optometrists which reads as follows:

"Whereas the last funding agreement between the Ministry of Health ... and the Ontario Association of Optometrists expired March 31, 2000; and

"Whereas the optometric fees for OHIP-insured services remain unchanged since 1989; and

"Whereas the lack of any fee increase for 15 years has created a crisis situation for optometrists; and

"Whereas fees for OHIP services do not provide for fair or reasonable compensation for the professional services of optometrists, in that they no longer cover

the costs of providing eye examinations; and

"Whereas it is in the best interests of patients and the government to have a new funding agreement for insured services that will ensure that the most

vulnerable members of society are able to receive the eye care they need;

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

"That the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care resume negotiations immediately with the OAO and appoint a mediator to help with the negotiation process in

order to ensure that optometrists can continue to provide quality eye care services to patients in Ontario."

Because I'm in full agreement, I am going to sign this petition myself.

CONTROL OF SMOKING

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): I promised I would bring this petition forward from the Royal Canadian Legion, Branch 58, in Hamilton. The

petition is to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario and it reads:

"Whereas 20% of the adult population, or 1.8 million adults in Ontario, continue to smoke; and

"Whereas hospitality concepts like bars, pubs, taverns, nightclubs, Legions, bingo halls, racetracks and casinos are businesses with a high percentage of

patrons who smoke; and

"Whereas more than 700 businesses in Ontario have invested tens of thousands of dollars each to construct a designated smoking room to comply with municipal

bylaws;

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

"Permit properly ventilated and separate designated smoking rooms in hospitality establishments that regulate and control employee and customer exposure to

second-hand smoke."

Mr. Kim Craitor (Niagara Falls): I'm pleased to introduce this petition on behalf of the people in my riding of Niagara Falls.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas 20% of the adult population, or 1.8 million adults in Ontario, continue to smoke; and

"Whereas hospitality concepts like bars, pubs, taverns, nightclubs, Legions, bingo halls, racetracks and casinos are businesses with a high percentage of

patrons who smoke; and

"Whereas more than 700 businesses in Ontario have invested tens of thousands of dollars ... to construct a designated smoking room to comply with municipal

bylaws;

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

"Permit properly ventilated and separate designated smoking rooms in hospitality establishments that regulate and control employee and customer exposure to

second-hand smoke."

I'm pleased to submit this petition.

Mr. Gerry Martiniuk (Cambridge): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas the current government has proposed province-wide legislation that would ban smoking in public places; and

"Whereas the proposed legislation will also prohibit smoking in private non-profit clubs such as Legion Halls, Navy Clubs and related facilities as well;

"Whereas these organizations have elected representatives that determine the rules and regulations that affect the membership of the individual club and

facility; and

"Whereas imposing smoke-free legislation on these clubs disregards the rights of these citizens and the original intentions of these clubs, especially with

respect to our veterans;

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

"That the Parliament of Ontario exempt Legion halls, navy clubs and other non-profit, private or veterans' clubs from government smoke-free legislation."

I agree with this petition and will sign the same.

OPTOMETRISTS

Mr. Bill Mauro (Thunder Bay-Atikokan): I have a petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the last funding agreement between the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care and the Ontario Association of Optometrists (OAO) expired March 31, 2000;

and

"Whereas the optometric fees for OHIP-insured services remain unchanged since 1989; and

"Whereas the lack of any fee increase for 15 years has created a crisis situation for optometrists; and

"Whereas fees for OHIP services do not provide for fair or reasonable compensation for the professional services of optometrists, in that they no longer cover

the costs of providing eye examinations; and

"Whereas it is in the best interests of patients and the government to have a new funding agreement for insured services that will ensure that the most

vulnerable members of society are able to receive the eye care they need;

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

"That the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care resume negotiations immediately with the OAO and appoint a mediator to help with the negotiation process in

order to ensure that optometrists can continue to provide quality eye care services to patients in Ontario."

CHIROPRACTIC SERVICES

Mr. Jim Flaherty (Whitby-Ajax): "To: Legislative Assembly of Ontario

"Re: Support for chiropractic services in Ontario health insurance plan:

"Whereas,

"Elimination of OHIP coverage will mean that many of the 1.2 million patients who use chiropractic will no longer be able to access the health care they

need;

"Those with reduced ability to pay -- including seniors, low-income families and the working poor -- will be forced to seek care in already overburdened family

physician offices and emergency departments;

"Elimination of OHIP coverage is expected to save $93 million in expenditures on chiropractic treatment at a cost to government of over $200 million in other

health care costs; and

"There was no consultation with the public on the decision to delist chiropractic services;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to reverse the decision announced in the May 18, 2004, provincial budget and maintain OHIP

coverage for chiropractic services, in the best interests of the public, patients, the health care system, government and the province."

I've signed my name.

ANAPHYLACTIC SHOCK

Mr. Bob Delaney (Mississauga West): I have a petition to the Ontario Legislative Assembly. It reads as follows:

"Whereas there are no established Ontario-wide standards to deal with anaphylaxis in Ontario schools; and

"Whereas there is no specific comment regarding anaphylaxis in the Ontario Education Act; and

"Whereas anaphylaxis is a serious concern that can result in life-or-death situations; and

"Whereas all students in Ontario have the right to be safe and feel safe in their school community; and

"Whereas all parents of anaphylactic students need to know that safety standards exist in all Ontario schools, be it therefore resolved ...

"That the government of Ontario support the swift passage of Bill 3,

An Act to protect anaphylactic students, that requires that every school principal in

Ontario establish a school anaphylactic plan."

I thank a group of parents from Erin Mills for having signed this petition. I fully support it. I'll have Alexandre carry it down for me.

REGIONAL CENTRES FOR THE

DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

Mr. Jim Wilson (Simcoe-Grey): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas Dalton McGuinty and his Liberal government were elected based on their promise to rebuild public services in Ontario;

"Whereas the Minister of Community and Social Services has announced plans to close Huronia Regional Centre, home to people with developmental disabilities,

many of whom have multiple diagnoses and severe problems that cannot be met in the community;

"Whereas closing Huronia Regional Centre will have a devastating impact on residents with developmental disabilities, their families, the developmental

services sector and the economies of the local communities; and

"Whereas Ontario could use the professional staff and facilities of Huronia Regional Centre to extend specialized services, support and professional training

to many more clients who live in the community, in partnership with families and community agencies;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to direct the government to keep Huronia Regional Centre, home to people with developmental

disabilities, open, and to transform them into `centres of excellence' to provide specialized services and support to Ontarians with developmental needs, no matter where they live."

I have affixed my signature to this, and I'm going to give it to legislative page Scott Dickson to take to the table.

ANAPHYLACTIC SHOCK

Mr. Kim Craitor (Niagara Falls): I am pleased to introduce this petition to the Legislative Assembly. It was initially introduced by MPP David

Levac.

"Whereas there is no specific comment regarding anaphylactic shock in the Education Act; and

"Whereas anaphylactic shock is a serious concern that can result in life-or-death situations; and

"Whereas all students in Ontario have the right to be safe and feel safe in their school community; and

"Whereas all parents of anaphylactic students need to know that safety standards exist in all schools in Ontario;

"Therefore

be it resolved that we, the undersigned," request "that the McGuinty government support the passing of Bill 3,

An Act to protect anaphylactic

students, which requires that every school principal in Ontario establish a school anaphylactic plan."

I'm pleased to sign my signature in support of this bill.

GASOLINE PRICES

Mr. Gerry Martiniuk (Cambridge): I have a petition signed by good citizens of Cambridge.

"To the Parliament of Ontario:

"Whereas gasoline prices have increased at alarming rates during the past year; and

"Whereas the high and different gas prices in different areas of Ontario have caused confusion and unfair hardship on hard-working Cambridge families;

"We, the undersigned, hereby petition the Parliament of Ontario as follows:

"

(1) That the Ontario McGuinty Liberal government immediately freeze gas prices for a temporary period until world oil prices moderate; and

"

(2) That the Ontario McGuinty Liberal government and the federal Martin Liberal government immediately lower their taxes on gas for a temporary period until

world oil prices moderate; and

"

(3) That the Ontario McGuinty Liberal government immediately initiate a royal commission to investigate the predatory gas prices charged by oil companies

operating in Ontario."

As I agree with this petition, I sign same.

FREDERICK BANTING HOMESTEAD

Mr. Jim Wilson (Simcoe-Grey): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas Sir Frederick Banting was the man who discovered insulin and was Canada's first Nobel Prize recipient; and

"Whereas this great Canadian's original homestead located in the town of New Tecumseth" -- Alliston -- "is deteriorating and in danger of destruction because

of the inaction of the Ontario Historical Society; and

"Whereas the town of New Tecumseth has been unsuccessful in reaching an agreement with the Ontario Historical Society to use part of the land to educate the

public about the historical significance of the work of Sir Frederick Banting;

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

"That the Minister of Culture endorse Simcoe-Grey MPP Jim Wilson's private member's bill entitled the Frederick Banting Homestead Preservation Act so that the

homestead is kept in good repair and preserved for generations to come."

I want to thank local merchants in Alliston for circulating this petition. Of course, I've signed it and agree with it.

ANAPHYLACTIC SHOCK

Mr. Kim Craitor (Niagara Falls): I am pleased to have found another petition here regarding Bill 3. I didn't know I had it.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas there are no established province-wide standards to deal with anaphylactic shock in Ontario schools; and

"Whereas there is no specific comment regarding anaphylactic shock in the Education Act; and

"Whereas anaphylactic shock is a serious concern that can result in life-or-death situations; and

"Whereas all students in Ontario have the right to be safe and feel safe in their school community; and

"Whereas all parents of anaphylactic students need to know what safety standards exist in all schools in Ontario;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned," request "that the McGuinty government support the passing of Bill 3,

An Act to protect anaphylactic

students, which requires that every school principal in Ontario establish a school anaphylactic plan."

CONTROL OF SMOKING

Mr. Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): These petitions were passed around in the Mad Trappers restaurant in Tillsonburg. I'll just quote

in part to save some time:

"Denying smokers the ability to gather in clubs that cater exclusively to them and even to have the option of separately enclosed and ventilated designated

smoking rooms is not a measure designed to protect non-smokers, but rather an attempt to remove my freedom to exercise my choice in a way that does not bother others.

"There are fair and reasonable compromises that can be achieved to respect everyone's rights in this matter. As a taxpayer and a voter, I have the right to

your respect and to your commitment to provide fair treatment to the minority, of which I am a part.

"As a taxpayer and a voter, I urge you to hold province-wide hearings, listen to the other side of the story and revise Bill 164 to respect smokers and provide

fair and balanced legislation."

I signed these petitions in the restaurant and I'll sign them again.

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

Mr. Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln): I'm pleased to present a petition from folks in Port Colborne, Ontario. It reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas during the election campaign the Dalton McGuinty Liberals said they would improve the Ontario drug benefit program, but now are considering delisting

drugs and imposing higher user fees; and

"Whereas the Liberal government has increased costs to seniors by taking away the seniors' property tax rebate and increased the price of hydro;

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

"The Dalton McGuinty Liberals should keep their campaign promise to improve the Ontario drug benefit program and abandon their plan to delist drugs or increase

seniors' drug fees."

I'm in support.

ABORTION

Mr. Gerry Martiniuk (Cambridge): I have a petition signed by hundreds of good citizens of Cambridge, directed to the Legislative Assembly of

Ontario.

"Whereas 68% of Ontarians do not support the funding of abortion on demand in our province; and

"Whereas 30 million health dollars are spent annually on abortion on demand; and

"Whereas the Ontario health system is overburdened and unnecessary spending must be cut; and

"Whereas pregnancy is not a disease, injury, or illness, and abortions are not therapeutic procedures; and

"Whereas the vast majority of abortions are done for reasons of convenience or finance; and

"Whereas the province has the exclusive jurisdiction to determine what services will be insured; and

"Whereas the Canada Health Act does not require funding for elective procedures; and

"Whereas there is mounting evidence that abortion is in fact hazardous to women's health; and

"Whereas Ontario taxpayers funded over 39,544 abortions in 2000;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to stop provincial funding of abortion on demand in Ontario."

ORDERS OF THE DAY

FAMILY RESPONSIBILITY AND

SUPPORT ARREARS ENFORCEMENT

AMENDMENT ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LES OBLIGATIONS FAMILIALES

ET L'EXÉCUTION DES ARRIÉRÉS

D'ALIMENTS

Resuming the debate adjourned on April 4, 2005, on the motion for second reading of Bill 155,

An Act to amend the Family Responsibility and Support Arrears

Enforcement Act, 1996 and to make consequential amendments to the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act, 1997 / Projet de loi 155, Loi modifiant la Loi de 1996 sur les obligations familiales et

l'exécution des arriérés d'aliments et apportant des modifications corrélatives à la Loi de 1997 sur la protection du poisson et de la faune.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): The last time, I understand, Mr. Duguid was on.

Mr. Brad Duguid (Scarborough Centre): I'll only take a couple of minutes, because I did get an opportunity to speak the last time this bill

was before the House, which, if I remember, was yesterday afternoon.

This is Bill 155,

An Act to amend the Family Responsibility and Support Arrears Enforcement Amendment Act. There's $1.6 billion in arrears out there, dollars

that should be flowing to Ontario families, families generally with single parents. This is money they need to pay their rent to keep them out of family shelters. It's money they need for food to

keep them out of our community food banks. It's money they need to pay for clothing for their children, to allow their children to go to school with new shoes and clothes and the kind of things

that all our young people in our community deserve and require. This legislation will help collect some of those dollars, will help ensure that some of that $1.6 billion -- and we know not all of

it is going to be accessed, because some of it may be completely uncollectible. But some of it that is collectible will start flowing back into the hands of single parents so they can then look

after their children appropriately and have the opportunity to ensure that their children can enjoy the benefits of society that all our children deserve.

What this legislation will do is increase enforcement by extending jail term sentences. That will help. It's not going to be the be-all and end-all, but

that'll certainly help.

It'll also improve fairness by allowing the Family Responsibility Office to enforce a lesser amount of support when the number of children entitled to support

decreases. Fairness is very important, because if somebody who may be paying in a certain amount of money feels they're being treated unfairly -- and quite frankly, they may well be being treated

unfairly -- there's a greater chance that they're just going to say, "Well, forget about this. I'm not going to give anything any more." I think that increase in fairness will help with respect to

this as well.

It'll also enhance efficiency by expanding the number of organizations from which the FRO can demand information to include places like unions and professional

organizations. This will help in terms of their opportunities and abilities to collect and ensure enforcement and ensure payment.

This is something that will help Ontario families and will help single parents to ensure that they get the money that's owed to them. It's something that's a

long time coming.

I'm pleased to stand today and support these changes. That's all I have to say for now.

The Speaker: Questions and comments?

Ms. Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I didn't hear all of the comments that the member made, but let me respond to his suggestion that, in fact,

by letting professional bodies know that someone owes child support, that's somehow going to have somebody cough up some child support. I've got to tell the member, just letting the professional

bodies know that one of the members of their association, be it a lawyer or otherwise, is in arrears is not going to produce any money. There is no obligation on the part of that professional

organization to do something with respect to the licence of that individual that would force the issue.

So let's be clear. It would be most unfortunate and, frankly, pretty dishonest to try and suggest to recipients out there that the mere change in legislation

with respect to this provision, because their ex happens to be a professional, is now somehow going to give them some more money. That's just not going to happen. Frankly, I think it's regrettable

that the government would even reference that, because they leave the mistaken impression out there with recipients that as a result of the passage of this bill, if their ex is a professional,

somehow they're now going to get some more money. That's just not true.

Other than the mere fact of the government reporting that to the professional organization, there is no onus, no responsibility and no obligation on the

professional organization to do anything with respect to that payer to ensure that that payer provides some money to the FRO that can be flowed to his -- because it's usually a "he" that's a payer

-- family and his spouse.

So I regret that the government is even essentially saying anything about this, because the fact of the matter is it's a toothless change. It will do nothing

to ensure that people who are professionals will, in fact, have to cough up arrears just by the mere fact of their organization knowing that they have arrears.

Ms. Laurel C. Broten (Etobicoke-Lakeshore): I'm very pleased to join the debate and support Bill 155,

An Act to amend the Family

Responsibility and Support Arrears Enforcement Act.

This new legislation, which was brought forward by the minister in December 2004, follows eight very long years of no substantive legislative amendments. I

think those of us who sit on the public accounts committee and have the privilege of doing so, had an opportunity to learn firsthand the consequence of eight years of inaction; eight years where

resources weren't put toward the Family Responsibility Office, despite very dire comments being brought forward by the Provincial Auditor at the time, who said repeatedly, "We need to see

additional resources in this."

I guess the comments could be no better written than quoting what is in the report: "It is the Provincial Auditor's view that unless the office takes

aggressive enforcement action, supported by effective case management and significantly improved information technology and communication systems, it is in grave danger of failing to meet its

mandated responsibilities."

So unlike the previous government, I'm proud to be part of a government that wants to ensure that the Family Responsibility Office meets its responsibilities.

This legislation follows on our government's four-year commitment, a $40-million budget commitment to implement a new case management system and new technology that will move FRO's enforcement and

service capabilities into the 21st century.

As someone who, in my past professional experience, had the opportunity to practise family law, I know how important an effective Family Responsibility Office

is in this province for both payers and payees. Our government is very pleased to make sure that we revitalize FRO so that it's able to do the job it was meant to do, and that's putting our money

and our mouth and our legislation in support of FRO.

Mr. Jim Flaherty (Whitby-Ajax): I'm pleased to comment briefly on the debate. I listened just a moment ago to the member from

Etobicoke-Lakeshore about the record of the previous government. She might want to have a look at the actual facts. I hate to confuse debate with facts in this place, but I will on this occasion,

having been responsible for the Family Responsibility Office for some period of time in Ontario where we made a number of very substantial changes, one of the most important ones being the

suspension of drivers' permits and giving that power to FRO. It made a huge difference, and I invite members to go back and look at the numbers between --

Interjection.

Mr. Flaherty: Even the minister of infrastructure can learn from this, if he cares to learn the facts.

Between September 1997 and March 2002, we suspended almost 16,000 drivers' licences, which led to the recovery of $190.1 million in outstanding court-ordered

support. That's what it's about. It's about getting money into the hands of the persons who need it. It's not about professional organizations, it's not about housekeeping legislation like this

bill; it's about actually accomplishing something, which is recovering the money that's owed to spouses and children. And it's not just women. Often it's women, most of the time it's women, but

it's also men, which happens increasingly in our society.

The FRO, the Family Responsibility Office, collected a record $555 million in court-ordered support payments during 2001-02. How big an increase was that? A

50% increase from 1994-95, the time of the predecessor NDP government. So this is a remarkable measure of success.

I'm all for these efforts to improve the legislation, although, I must say, this bill is little more than housekeeping.

Mr. Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): I've listened carefully, and I'll be speaking to the bill myself in approximately 25 or 30 minutes' time.

I'm looking forward to it.

I say, "Housekeeping?" It's barely housekeeping. In fact, it's more likely to be but window dressing, because at the end of the day there is very little in

this bill that would cause us to believe there is going to be a substantial increase in monies collected as a result of the bill. That's a labour-intensive exercise. We know that.

As the Ombudsman, Clare Lewis, stated over and over again, most recently in his final comments in January 2005, made upon the occasion of his retirement,

unless and until there are significant new resources put into the Family Responsibility Office -- and I'm going to talk about when Shelley Martel broke into the office back in 1996, the disclosure

she made as a result of her break-and-enter into the Family Responsibility Office, what she discovered and, then, how little has changed in the succeeding nine years -- unless and until there is

significant investment in human resources at this location, we're not going to see substantial increases. I mean, good grief, reporting to a professional organization that one of its members hasn't

been paying child support? That will do zip, nothing, zero, nada, zilch to put money into the pocket of mom, in this instance, and her kids, or, in turn, to put food on their table.

It's remarkable how little interest both the last government and this government have had in meaningful reform of the Family Responsibility Office. As well,

there has to be something said about the Family Court -- the provincial court, family division -- and the incredible understaffing of those courts, the increasing understaffing, the utilization of

contract employees and the fact that that has a direct relationship on the ability to collect money by the FRO, or any other purpose.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Michael Prue): The member from Scarborough Centre has two minutes in which to respond.

Mr. Duguid: Thank you to the members from Nickel Belt, Etobicoke-Lakeshore, Whitby-Ajax and Niagara Centre for their comments.

Our plan is to make the Family Responsibility Office work better for Ontario families. Frankly, despite the comments of the member from Whitby-Ajax, when this

government took office, there had been virtually no improvements made to the Family Responsibility Office for a number of different years, even though for years the Ontario Ombudsman, the

Information and Privacy Commissioner and the Provincial Auditor had been warning that changes were needed. So finally, we have a government that has come into office that is willing to make those

changes.

These proposed amendments are needed to strengthen enforcement, improve fairness and enhance efficiencies at the FRO. The proposed amendments are the first

substantive changes to the FRO's legislation since it was proclaimed in 1997.

I know there have been some negative comments from members opposite, but surely they support the provision to provide the Family Responsibility Office with

stronger trace-and-locate measures by expanding the number of organizations from which they can demand information, such as trade unions. Surely they support extending the maximum jail term for

defaulting parents who fail to pay support from 90 days to 180 days. Surely they support suspending defaulting payers' hunting and sporting licences, something that will affect not all, but some.

Surely they support reporting defaulting payers to professional licensing bodies.

These are the kinds of provisions that are not the be-all and end-all but that help ensure we can get a good part of that $1.6 billion that's outstanding right

now, that's owed to Ontario families who need it, as I said, to put food on their table, clothes on the backs of their children and to ensure that they have an appropriate quality of life.

The Acting Speaker: Further debate?

Mr. Jerry J. Ouellette (Oshawa): I very much appreciate the opportunity to speak on Bill 155. As most members know, it does occupy a great

deal of time in our offices, and we're glad to have anything take place to rectify that problem. But I have some strong concerns. I'm glad to see the PA here, because there are some comments I hope

she will be able to respond to and take back as input on this bill.

First of all, the member from Scarborough Centre spoke about the 180 days of imprisonment and the impact of that. When I spoke with police officers -- and many

here know that my father was in the policing community for a number of years -- I asked about the impact and how they believed that would help. The response that came back was that when you put

somebody in jail for 180 days, they don't have the opportunity to make the income in order to pay it back. So what effectively takes place is that the income which that person potentially could

have been generating to pay down those arrears is no longer there. How is that going to assist the situation? Effectively, it's going to put them even further in the hole.

As members mentioned during debate the other day, there are individuals who are willing to give up their jobs rather than come forward. I guess in situations

like that, no matter what takes place, you won't be able to make any changes there. But putting somebody in jail for 180 days is not effectively going to be a method to assist in retrieving funds.

Quite frankly, we're trying to help kids in this particular piece of legislation, and I don't know if that's going to assist kids.

There are about three other areas I wanted to touch on in this particular piece of legislation.

One was the impact of the suspension of moose hunting licences, or hunting licences in general. The member from Scarborough Centre mentioned that there's going

to be an increase in enforcement staff. The concern with this is, how is a conservation officer, the primary individual responsible for enforcing the fish and game act, under which comes the

fishing and hunting licences, going to be notified that that licence is under suspension? Effectively what takes place is that a conservation officer, or CO, is out in the field and would come upon

a person and ask to check their licence. They take the licence out, the CO looks at i