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

February 20, 2006

38th Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2006-Feb-20 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Monday 20 February 2006 Lundi 20 février 2006

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

CONSERVATION OFFICERS

TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE

CHILDREN'S TREATMENT CENTRES

HEALTH CARE

BLACK HISTORY MONTH

PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE PARTY

MYLES MCLELLAN

OMERS PENSION FUND

PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE PARTY

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

SOCIAL POLICY

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

MORTGAGE BROKERAGES, LENDERS AND ADMINISTRATORS ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR LES MAISONS DE COURTAGE D'HYPOTHÈQUES, LES PRÊTEURS HYPOTHÉCAIRES ET LES ADMINISTRATEURS D'HYPOTHÈQUES

GENERAL BROCK

PARKWAY ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR

LA PROMENADE GÉNÉRAL-BROCK

VISITORS

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

MORTGAGE BROKERS

ONTARIO HERITAGE WEEK /

SEMAINE DU PATRIMOINE

DE L'ONTARIO

HEATHER CROWE

MORTGAGE BROKERS

ONTARIO HERITAGE WEEK

HEATHER CROWE

MORTGAGE BROKERS

ONTARIO HERITAGE WEEK /

SEMAINE DU PATRIMOINE DE L'ONTARIO

HEATHER CROWE

ORAL QUESTIONS

MINISTERIAL CONDUCT

NUCLEAR ENERGY

ENERGY RATES

OMERS PENSION FUND

MUNICIPAL FINANCES

NORTHERN ONTARIO DEVELOPMENT

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

TENANT PROTECTION

OMERS PENSION FUND

DISASTER RELIEF

CHILD CARE

AMATEUR SPORT

EMPLOYMENT STANDARDS

PETITIONS

CANCER TREATMENT

IDENTITY THEFT

CANCER TREATMENT

MACULAR DEGENERATION

SERVICES FOR THE DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

DIABETES TREATMENT

OMERS PENSION FUND

ASSISTANCE TO FARMERS

CURRICULUM

GO TRANSIT TUNNEL

PUBLIC LIBRARIES

FIREARMS SAFETY

ORDERS OF THE DAY

REPORT, INTEGRITY COMMISSIONER

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

CONSERVATION OFFICERS

Mr. Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): I have a question: Is this government providing the resources to protect our resources in Ontario?

This government inherited Ontario's Living Legacy, the designation of signature sites, the right to hunt and fish, a rejuvenated Fish and Wildlife Heritage Commission, and yet now we hear so

little. We don't hear about the Great Lakes Heritage Coast, the Nipigon Basin, the Kawartha Highlands or the St. Williams crown preserve. Funding for programs like Ontario's Living Legacy has dried

up under this government, funding that sat at $4.8 million just two years ago. What about funding for enforcement and support of the good work of our conservation officers? Are those expensive

trucks sitting in the lots with empty gas tanks?

Greg Farrant, of the Federation of Anglers and Hunters, made these concerns clear to the finance committee in Cornwall, stating, "Because of the lack of

operating dollars, conservation officers are no longer able to go on routine patrols and carry out routine assessments. They are to respond only on complaint. So quite often you'll find them

sitting in the office instead of being in their vehicles. This is because of fuel costs...."

So I'm concerned: Is this government backing up our fish and wildlife officers? Enforcement can be very lonely, dangerous work. At minimum, they need gas for

their trucks.

TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE

Mrs. Linda Jeffrey (Brampton Centre): I rise today to speak about the progress on the Ministry of Transportation's project to extend Highway

410. In 2004 the ministry, the region of Peel and the city of Brampton partnered to secure land parcels which would allow completion of phase 1 of the highway extension.

Highway 410 is the corridor of economic growth in Brampton. It is essential that we make transportation improvements in Brampton to accommodate the growing

population. Our government has invested the money and is keeping its promise of forging ahead with this project. We are now in phase 2, having acquired the land and completed the design, and will

soon be issuing a tender for the plan.

I'm pleased to be part of a government that recognizes the need to invest in transportation infrastructure. The ministry is continuing to work with its municipal

partners, stakeholders and the public on the remaining phases of the extension. I'm proud of the progress our government has made and look forward to seeing the highway and driving on it. I believe

we are on our way to completing Highway 410 in Brampton.

CHILDREN'S TREATMENT CENTRES

Mrs. Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener-Waterloo): There are 9,000 children waiting for necessary therapy and health services from children's treatment

centres in this province. This is totally unacceptable.

About 1,053 of these children are served by KidsAbility in Waterloo and Wellington. These include children who cannot walk or talk properly, premature babies who

need therapy to survive and thrive, disabled preschoolers and children with complex medical syndromes.

These children are not being treated equitably or fairly as they wait two to three times longer in the province than many children elsewhere; in fact, it is a

wait of nine months for necessary services.

These unfair wait times are penalizing our young children with disabilities, jeopardizing their future in school and life. It is placing an unfair and expensive

burden on our schools and undue stress on already worn-down families.

Research from McCain and Mustard tells us that intervention before a child enters school minimizes the health, learning and social problems they would have later

in their childhood, and reduces education and health costs. It also shows that we must give them this early intervention in order that they can achieve their full potential.

Despite this research, the government is not living up to the government policy on fairness and equitable access to services. So today, I urge the government to

provide $2.2 million in its budget to eliminate the wait times.

HEALTH CARE

Ms. Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): Last Monday the emergency department at the Sudbury Regional Hospital faced another crisis as patients waited

24 hours to be admitted to a hospital bed. The problem: 55 alternative level of care patients were still in hospital beds, unable to be transferred to the community because there are no beds and

services available for them.

This sorry saga has plagued the community for 18 months now. In October 2004, the Ministry of Health applied a category 1A crisis designation, forcing

alternative-level-of-care patients to long-term-care homes on Manitoulin Island and Espanola. City council asked the Minister of Health to open 30 interim long-term-care beds at Pioneer Manor. The

minister approved only 10.

Late last summer, the emergency department was in chaos again. Surgeries were cancelled due to a lack of available hospital beds. So in October 2005, the

ministry added 15 beds at Pioneer Manor -- still short of the original request made by city council. This didn't solve the problem, so the ministry extended its crisis designation to now send

frail, elderly seniors to Parry Sound.

Seniors groups went public again, the city again requested more interim beds at Pioneer Manor and finally, in January 2006, 20 more beds were announced. They are

still not open. A pre-occupancy review of the beds is required. Hopefully, this will occur by March.

So the crisis continues, with seniors staying in the hospital because there is nowhere for them to go in the community, the ER getting backed up since there are

no hospital beds available and surgeries being put at risk with no beds for patients to recover in. What a mess.

To the minister: Get the occupancy review done, get alternative level of care patients into appropriate settings and get the pressure off.

BLACK HISTORY MONTH

Mr. Jim Brownell (Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh): February marks Black History Month, a time when we reflect upon and celebrate the great

achievements and contributions African Canadians have made to our province and to our country.

Since Mathieu Da Costa, an African interpreter, took his first steps onto the shores of a yet-to-be-born nation, African Canadians have contributed to our rich

history and heritage. Black Canadians hail from all corners of the globe. Indeed, we are a nation consisting of all the ethnic, linguistic and cultural groups of the world. We take great pride in

that unique diversity.

This was not always so. There was a time in our history when those of African descent were discriminated against; when most were forced to work in poorly paid

jobs. It has been a long struggle towards equality, and there is still work to be done.

Still, we can take great pride in people like the late Garth Taylor, an ophthalmologist and humanitarian from my riding of Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh, and

the Right Honourable Michaëlle Jean, who graces us with her presence here today.

Black Canadians, throughout the history of our nation, have played an important role not just in creating a distinct Canadian culture but in forming our

essential Canadian values: the values of equality, understanding and appreciation of differences. We must continue to build on this foundation, to promote our ideals of diversity and community both

here and abroad. We must never forget that a functional multicultural society depends on understanding, respect and co-operation.

PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE PARTY

Mr. Robert W. Runciman (Leeds-Grenville): I rise today to congratulate and thank over 1,000 people from around the province who, this weekend,

attended the Ontario Progressive Conservative policy conference in Niagara Falls and helped begin the process of building Ontario's new foundations. The conference marked the mid-point in our

party's policy process and focused on listening and reaching out to all Ontarians, unlike the upcoming Liberal conference -- a closed-door affair, we hear.

On the weekend, we heard ideas about how to restore our economy after two and a half years of Liberal mismanagement and return some of the 80,000 manufacturing

jobs lost so far under the Liberal watch, and strategies to keep the lights on in Ontario, something the Liberals clearly have no plan for.

This weekend was a demonstration that Ontario Progressive Conservatives under John Tory's leadership are committed to listening to the grassroots of our party

and everyday Ontarians. Unlike the current government, we reaffirmed that we will do what we say we will do when we form the government.

Once again, I would like to thank the over 1,000 people who travelled to Niagara Falls from across this great province and engaged in a process that will help

the Progressive Conservative Party build a new foundation for the province of Ontario.

MYLES MCLELLAN

Mr. Pat Hoy (Chatham-Kent Essex): It is my great privilege to speak about the life of a brave, exceptional little boy: Myles McLellan. Miles

attended Our Lady of Fatima school in Chatham. He celebrated his 13th birthday on February 9 and passed away just a few days later.

He had been battling brain cancer since he was nine years old, but instead of giving up, he used his illness as an opportunity to give to others. He raised

awareness about childhood cancer and raised funds to help find a cure. The foundation named after him, Myles' Miracle Mission, continues to accept donations to help cancer patients and their

families in the Chatham area. I invite my fellow members to consider making a donation in his memory.

On behalf of Premier Dalton McGuinty and all members of the Legislature, we send our thoughts and prayers to Myles' parents, Susan and Wayne, their family,

friends and Myles' classmates.

The poet Ralph Waldo Emerson once wrote that it is not in the length of life but the depth of life that we find our meaning and purpose. Myles McLellan did not

live a long life but he lived a deep life, and it is my sincerest hope that together we will take up his fight against childhood cancer and that his dream of a cure one day soon will be

realized.

OMERS PENSION FUND

Mr. David Zimmer (Willowdale): I'd like to speak about an issue that is of great concern to the people of Ontario. Bill 206, if passed, would

give control of the OMERS pension plan to the people who pay into it and benefit from it.

This is something that CUPE Ontario, along with many other OMERS stakeholders, has been asking for for some time. But now, some members of CUPE Ontario are

threatening an illegal strike if Bill 206 is passed. These people have said they will ignore their responsibility to the public and walk off the job.

After extensive consultation, two rounds of committee hearings and a number of amendments, they have decided that they are willing to break the law in an attempt

to force the government to give them what they want. They have threatened, among other things, to keep kids out of school, leave roads covered with snow and ignore hydro systems.

As the Premier said in the Legislature last Thursday, threats of an illegal strike have overshadowed the substantive discussions on the legislation. Fortunately,

cooler heads have prevailed for thousands of workers across Ontario.

I would like to applaud those CUPE locals that refuse to participate in an illegal strike. I would also like to encourage other locals to stop and think about

what an illegal strike means and ask them to join their colleagues in putting the Ontario public service first.

PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE PARTY

Mr. Peter Fonseca (Mississauga East): This government knows that no one is stronger than all of us. That is why our vision for Ontario is one

where every citizen has access to high-quality health care regardless of their ability to pay. With every new family doctor trained, with every new nurse hired, this government is defying the

critics who would rather see us concede the system to the private sector.

Our vision for Ontario is one where every child has the opportunity to learn and grow. We've worked hard to bring peace to our classrooms, because we know that

high-quality public education is the best way to ensure our prosperity.

I was saddened to see the Conservatives spend the weekend plotting how to dismantle two of our most precious public institutions. While Liberals are reinvesting

in universal health care, the Tories plan to cut health care spending by $2.4 billion and open the doors to a two-tier system. While Liberals are doing everything possible to revitalize public

education, the Tories plan to siphon taxpayer dollars out of the public school system, starving it of the resources it needs to survive.

It's clear that the Tories' renewed commitment to the slash and burn of our province has only strengthened this government's resolve to forge ahead and invest in

an Ontario where everyone, regardless of their income, gets taken care of.

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

SOCIAL POLICY

Mr. Khalil Ramal (London-Fanshawe): I beg leave to present a report from the standing committee on social policy and move its adoption.

I'm more than happy to give it to Mark, to give to the Clerk. Thank you, Mark.

The Clerk-at-the-Table (Ms. Lisa Freedman): Mr. Ramal from the standing committee on social policy presents the committee's report as follows

and moves its adoption:

Your committee begs to report the following bill, as amended:

Bill 210,

An Act to amend the Child and Family Services Act and make complementary amendments to other Acts / Projet de loi 210, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les

services à l'enfance et à la famille et apportant des modifications complémentaires à d'autres lois.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Shall the report be received and adopted? Agreed.

The bill is therefore ordered for third reading.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

MORTGAGE BROKERAGES, LENDERS AND ADMINISTRATORS ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR LES MAISONS DE COURTAGE D'HYPOTHÈQUES, LES PRÊTEURS HYPOTHÉCAIRES ET LES ADMINISTRATEURS D'HYPOTHÈQUES

Mr. Duncan moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 65,

An Act respecting mortgage brokerages, lenders and administrators / Projet de loi 65, Loi concernant les maisons de courtage d'hypothèques,

les prêteurs hypothécaires et les administrateurs d'hypothèques.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

The minister may have a brief statement.

Hon. Dwight Duncan (Minister of Finance, Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet): Ministerial statements.

GENERAL BROCK

PARKWAY ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR

LA PROMENADE GÉNÉRAL-BROCK

Mr. Craitor moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 66,

An Act to name Highway 405 the General Brock Parkway / Projet de loi 66, Loi nommant l'autoroute 405 promenade Général-Brock.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

The member may have a brief statement.

Mr. Kim Craitor (Niagara Falls): General Sir Isaac Brock died at the Battle of Queenston Heights while leading a charge against invading

American forces in the War of 1812. A monument to his courage dominates the Niagara Escarpment just along the side of Highway 405. He is buried there. Highway 405 passes by this monument, and

hundreds of thousands of visitors who travel this area are not aware of the fact that a major historic site is located there.

Other highways are named after historic figures, such as Ontario's first highway, the Queen Elizabeth Way. Highway 401 bears the name Macdonald-Cartier

Freeway, after two fathers of Confederation and, of course, Hamilton named the Linc after a friend of everyone in this assembly, former Lieutenant Governor Lincoln M. Alexander. So it is

appropriate for Ontario to name a highway along Queenston Heights in honour of a man who died heroically for all of our country.

VISITORS

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): The minister on a point of order.

Hon. Mary Anne V. Chambers (Minister of Children and Youth Services): I know you're going to say it's not a point of order, but I'd just like

to take the opportunity to introduce members of Youth Justice Ontario, who are in the public gallery today. These people run facilities and programs for youth in secure, open, and community

supervision who have been in conflict with the law.

The Speaker: Thank you, and are you right, I am going to say it's not a point of order.

On a point of order, the member for Oak Ridges.

Mr. Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): I would like to recognize two special guests in the gallery today: Mr. Don MacKinlay, who is a teacher at

Richmond Hill High School, and Mr. Christian Scenna, who is a recipient of the Lieutenant Governor's award for volunteers. They were special guests today at the reception with the Governor General.

Welcome to Queen's Park.

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

Hon. James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism, minister responsible for seniors, Government House Leader): At the request of my friends in the

New Democratic Party --

Interjection.

Hon. Mr. Bradley: -- and my friend Bill Murdoch as well, I have the following motion.

Mr. Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): No.

Hon. Mr. Bradley: Don't say no yet. You don't know what it is.

I move that, pursuant to standing order 9(c)(i), the House shall meet from 6:45 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. on Monday, February 20, 2006, for the purpose of considering

government business.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry?

All in favour will say "aye."

All opposed will say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1355 to 1400.

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

Ayes

Arthurs, Wayne

Barrett, Toby

Bartolucci, Rick

Berardinetti, Lorenzo

Bradley, James J.

Broten, Laurel C.

Brownell, Jim

Bryant, Michael

Cansfield, Donna H.

Chambers, Mary Anne V.

Chudleigh, Ted

Colle, Mike

Craitor, Kim

Crozier, Bruce

Delaney, Bob

Duguid, Brad

Duncan, Dwight

Flynn, Kevin Daniel

Fonseca, Peter

Gerretsen, John

Gravelle, Michael

Hoy, Pat

Jackson, Cameron

Jeffrey, Linda

Klees, Frank

Kular, Kuldip

Kwinter, Monte

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Leal, Jeff

Levac, Dave

Marsales, Judy

Martiniuk, Gerry

Matthews, Deborah

Mauro, Bill

Miller, Norm

Milloy, John

Munro, Julia

O'Toole, John

Orazietti, David

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Peters, Steve

Phillips, Gerry

Racco, Mario G.

Ramal, Khalil

Runciman, Robert W.

Ruprecht, Tony

Sandals, Liz

Smith, Monique

Smitherman, George

Tascona, Joseph N.

Watson, Jim

Witmer, Elizabeth

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Zimmer, David

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

Nays

Bisson, Gilles

Horwath, Andrea

Kormos, Peter

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

Murdoch, Bill

Prue, Michael

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 54; the nays are 7.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

MORTGAGE BROKERS

Hon. Dwight Duncan (Minister of Finance, Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet): It is my honour to rise and introduce an important piece

of legislation today, the proposed new Mortgage Brokerages, Lenders and Administrators Act.

Obtaining a mortgage to buy a home is one of the most important financial decisions consumers can make. The McGuinty government recognizes this. That is why we

are proposing to replace the outdated Mortgage Brokers Act with new legislation that improves consumer protection, enhances and modernizes financial regulation, and encourages greater competition

and choice for consumers. It's an important part of our government's plan to improve Ontario's economic advantage and support a new generation of economic growth through modernized financial

services regulation, and it's an initiative whose time has come.

I'd like to acknowledge some guests in the House today, representatives from three organizations who participated in the consultations on this new legislation.

Please welcome Mr. Ron Swift, president, and Mr. Jim Murphy, senior director, of the Canadian Institute of Mortgage Brokers and Lenders; Mr. Jeff Atlin, director of the Independent Mortgage Brokers

Association; and from the Consumers Council of Canada, Ms. Eleanor Friedland, vice-president. I want to thank all of them for joining us today and, indeed, for their support of the bill. I've

referred them to the opposition House leaders to ensure that this bill gets speedy time coverage and debate.

The existing act dates from the early 1970s. In the three decades that have passed since that act was legislated, the financial services marketplace has

changed considerably. Ontario consumers are enjoying many new and innovative mortgage products and services. Mortgage brokers, ranging from large, sophisticated operations to single owner/operator

firms, play an increasingly important role in helping consumers with their borrowing needs and in helping lenders to place their funds. More than one home buyer in four relies on the services of a

mortgage broker. I think it's safe to say that when the current act was being drawn up decades ago, nobody could have foreseen the evolution of financial services in Ontario.

Consumers, lenders and the mortgage brokering industry support an overhaul of the current Mortgage Brokers Act. They recognize that a sound regulatory climate

is critical to ensuring the continued confidence of borrowers and lenders, which is necessary to make markets work.

Before I go into the details of the proposed act, I'd like to provide a bit of background outlining how we got from the decision to do something about the act

to where we are today. The government has undergone extensive consultation with the community. A consultation paper and subsequently a consultation draft of the proposed act were released for

public comment. The Ministry of Finance also hosted a technical briefing of stakeholders, and my colleague the Honourable Mike Colle, then parliamentary assistant, chaired a round table. Some 50

written submissions on the consultation draft were received. The proposed Mortgage Brokerages, Lenders and Administrators Act, 2006 was developed out of this extensive public consultation and has

the support of stakeholders.

I'd like to thank former Minister Greg Sorbara, Minister Colle, and officials at finance and the Financial Services Commission of Ontario for all their hard in

getting us to this point.

The transparent process by which we have prepared this legislation will help ensure that it works for the people, businesses and economy of our great province.

We are delivering on our 2004 and 2005 budget commitments to build a strong economy in a culture of transparency and accountability.

Key benefits that would result from implementing the new act include improved consumer protection, streamlined regulatory requirements, strengthened investor

protection and cost-effective regulation. I'd like to briefly touch on these points now.

The proposed Mortgage Brokerages, Lenders and Administrators Act would, first and foremost, improve protection for the growing number of Ontarians who use the

services of mortgage brokers. This legislation would improve accountability by all industry participants to ensure consumers are adequately protected.

First off, all industry participants involved in dealing, lending or trading in mortgages will need to meet education and suitability requirements, and be

licensed by the Financial Services Commission of Ontario.

Secondly, brokerages will be responsible for the actions of their brokers and agents. Each brokerage will be required to have a principal broker, and it is

intended that the principal broker will oversee conduct and act as the chief compliance officer for the organization.

In addition, the new act proposes a separate licence for those who administer mortgages, which involves handling investor funds. We are aware that some

exemptions from licensing will need to be made and we've made them accordingly or will do so in regulation.

And modern enforcement provisions would provide appropriate measures for FSCO to address particular infractions of the act. Included are new cease-and-desist

powers and the ability to levy administrative penalties.

Another feature of our proposed legislation is the elimination of current foreign ownership restrictions, which we heard support for during the consultations.

Removing the restriction on foreign ownership would encourage greater competition and innovation, improve service and provide more options for consumers.

Before concluding my remarks, I'd like to mention that this new act does not signal the end of our commitment to updating regulation of the mortgage brokering

industry. There is a comprehensive review currently under way by FSCO of education requirements, and we continue to consult with industry and consumer stakeholders on the regulations.

These are just some of the highlights of our proposed Mortgage Brokerages, Lenders and Administrators Act. Consumers and the industry fully support the new act

and have been thoroughly engaged every step of the way in developing this legislation. I'm very proud of the legislation that we are putting forward today.

I appreciate the support we've had, and hope we'll continue to have, from members as we move ahead. I look forward to debate on this very important bill.

ONTARIO HERITAGE WEEK /

SEMAINE DU PATRIMOINE

DE L'ONTARIO

Hon. Madeleine Meilleur (Minister of Culture, minister responsible for francophone affairs): It is with great pride and pleasure that I stand

before this Legislature today to encourage both members of this House and the people of Ontario to participate in the province-wide annual celebration known as Heritage Day.

The Heritage Canada Foundation designated the third Monday in February as Heritage Day back in 1973. In 1985, Ontario designated the third week in February as

Ontario Heritage Week. Today, National Heritage Day kicks off our own provincial week of celebration. This year's theme focuses on our cultural heritage places.

Earlier today, I attended the Ontario Heritage Trust launch of Ontario Heritage Week at the Elgin and Winter Garden Theatre Centre. The event was attended by

heritage stakeholders of every description. That's because heritage matters to people of Ontario.

Le secteur du patrimoine en Ontario a connu une excellente année. L'adoption du projet de loi 60 en avril 2005 a permis de placer l'avenir de nos

ressources patrimoniales provinciales entre les mains des Ontariennes et des Ontariens. C'est tout à fait normal, parce que les Ontariennes et les Ontariens savent que le patrimoine est

important et qu'il contribue à améliorer notre qualité de vie et à favoriser la prospérité économique de la province.

This morning at the Heritage Week launch, I took the opportunity to unveil the Ontario heritage tool kit. The tool kit contains four guides to help

municipalities implement the new act and create successful heritage conservation programs. The tool kit is intended to support the public and local government in setting up an effective municipal

heritage committee, researching and evaluating cultural heritage property and understanding the different processes to designate individual property and heritage conservation districts.

Today I also unveiled the first of a series of information sheets on cultural heritage and archaeology policies of the provincial policy statement under the

Planning Act. All publications contained in the Ontario heritage tool kit are also available at the Ministry of Culture's website.

La nouvelle

Loi sur le patrimoine de l'Ontario, qui est une loi plus musclée, fait des municipalités ontariennes des leaders. La trousse de

publications inclut des guides essentiels et des cartes qui aideront les municipalités à fixer leurs objectifs en matière de conservation du patrimoine. Cette trousse n'aurait pas vu

le jour sans la contribution inestimable de nombreux intervenants dévoués oeuvrant dans le secteur du patrimoine. La publication de cette trousse aujourd'hui témoigne de façon

tangible de l'engagement pris par mon ministère au plan de l'habilitation du secteur du patrimoine et du soutien qui lui est accordé dans le cadre de ses travaux.

I would like to take this opportunity to commend the Ontario Heritage Trust and its chair, the Honourable Lincoln Alexander, for its fine work in leading this

year's Ontario heritage celebrations. Heritage Week is also a good time to thank the many local heritage organizations as well as the hundreds of dedicated volunteers across the province who give

their time and energy all year long to help preserve and protect Ontario's heritage.

Happy Heritage Week. Bonne Semaine du patrimoine.

HEATHER CROWE

Hon. Jim Watson (Minister of Health Promotion): I rise to pay tribute to a courageous woman who is an inspiration in the fight to protect

workers from the ravages of second-hand smoke in the workplace and in enclosed public places.

The fatal consequences of prolonged exposure to second-hand smoke have been well documented. Heather Crowe is an Ottawa-area waitress who worked in a series of

smoke-filled restaurants for over 40 years, and Heather in fact never smoked a day in her life. In 2002, she was diagnosed with lung cancer from second-hand smoke in the workplace. Since her

diagnosis, Heather has become a tireless advocate to ban smoking in the workplace and in public places.

On a pu la voir dans les messages d'intérêt public produits par la Fondation des maladies du coeur de l'Ontario et par Santé Canada visant

à sensibiliser le public sur les dangers de la fumée secondaire. Madame Crowe a parcouru cette province, et toutes les régions du pays, poussée par un seul but : faire

modifier les lois de telle sorte que d'autres travailleurs ne subissent pas le même sort qu'elle.

In April 2005, Heather Crowe appeared before the standing committee on health and social service policy during the public hearings for Bill 164, the Smoke-Free

Ontario Act. Heather told the committee, "I'm hoping that you will understand that I'm not asking smokers to give up smoking; I'm simply asking them to step outside to save a life and make a

difference in our workplace so we can at least be living. Workers shouldn't go to work to die."

The McGuinty government heard people like Heather Crowe and we acted to protect the health of Ontarians by introducing -- and I give credit to my colleague the

Minister of Health, the Honourable George Smitherman -- the most comprehensive anti-smoking legislation in the province's history, which will come into effect on May 31, 2006.

It's with great sadness that I report to you that Heather Crowe's cancer is no longer in remission, yet Heather continues to fight her illness with courage and

determination. She also continues to fight to protect workers and the public at large from the harmful effects of second-hand smoke.

Il y a un grand nombre de personnes et d'organisations partout en Ontario qui ont fait, à l'image de madame Crowe, d'énormes contributions aux

efforts de lutte contre le tabagisme.

On behalf of the government of Ontario, last December we created the Heather Crowe Award to acknowledge the efforts of individuals and organizations that

promote smoke-free initiatives in their communities. The award is for residents like the citizen who spearheaded the development of a local bylaw to ban smoking in public places, or a former smoker

who visits schools to talk to young people about the dangers of tobacco use, or a young woman who advocates against teens smoking.

On December 16, Premier McGuinty and I had the distinct honour and privilege of visiting Heather Crowe's nursing home in Ottawa and presenting her with the

very first award in her name.

I've since presented the Heather Crowe Award to Sergei Sawchyn, the original owner of Smokeless Joe, a bar located in the heart of the entertainment district

of Toronto. A decade ago, long before any city bylaw, Sergei made his bar 100% smoke-free, an original and courageous example that exemplifies what the Heather Crowe Award is all about.

In Sault Ste. Marie, I recently joined MPP David Orazietti in presenting the Schools Without Borders Youth Smoke-Free Committee with the Heather Crowe Award.

This youth committee played an important part during the city council debate on a smoke-free bylaw, launching a targeted campaign declaring their right to live and work in a smoke-free environment.

The student committee mobilized 16 schools to participate in the campaign, which saw 1,511 paper hands signed by youth in support of a smoke-free bylaw.

I should also commend the Sault Ste. Marie hospital. It so happens that just when I was there and I walked into their board meeting to meet with them, they had

finished passing a new regulation that requires individuals to smoke completely off the property. So I commend them and other hospitals, such as CHEO in my hometown, the Ottawa hospital.

In Thunder Bay, I met Jim Morris and Simon Hoad, two residents who first began lobbying Thunder Bay city council in the 1980s to ban smoking in restaurants and

bars, literally decades before most others imagined a smoke-free Ontario.

Finally, I want to commend the Westin hotel chain, which was the first private company to eliminate smoking in all their hotels across North America on January

1, 2006. I was joined by my colleague the member for Ottawa-Vanier to present John Jarvis, an innovative individual who is the general manager of the Westin in Ottawa, for bringing in this very

worthwhile new regulation that I believe is going to help business, not hurt business.

Je suis fier d'annoncer aux membres de l'Assemblée que ce gouvernement a reçu à ce jour près de 100 nominations pour le prix Heather

Crowe.

We've received over 100 nominations for the Heather Crowe Award. I am privileged personally to know Heather. I got to know her when she worked in one of those

restaurants that did not have a very progressive smoking policy. Heather Crowe Award nominations will be accepted through MPPs' offices until May 31, which is the day the smoke-free Ontario

legislation comes into effect.

I thank all of those members from both sides of the House who have submitted the applications. It's a wonderful opportunity for us to encourage these people in

our communities who have gone above and beyond the call of duty to help protect the lives of people, whether in the hospitality industry or in an office environment.

I want to thank Heather for her courage and determination to ensure no future employee in the province has to go through what she has suffered.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Responses?

MORTGAGE BROKERS

Mr. Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln): I'm pleased to respond to the earlier statement by the Minister of Finance concerning the introduction of the

Mortgage Brokerages, Lenders and Administrators Act, 2006. I too, on behalf of the Progressive Conservative caucus, want to recognize and thank Ron Swift, the president of the Canadian Institute of

Mortgage Brokers and Lenders, and, in the gallery as well, the affable and very handsome Jim Murphy, who has played a role in this, somebody whose judgment we have a lot of faith in as well, among

others in the gallery, and to congratulate them all on the work they have done to date in bringing this legislation forward.

Hon. James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism, minister responsible for seniors, Government House Leader): Does that mean that the rest of them

are not handsome?

Mr. Hudak: I won't delay comments from my other colleagues by rating the members across, but what I can rate is that I know they're excellent

individuals, dedicated to the profession, and I have great confidence in the advice they have brought forward to government and the opposition parties as well on this legislation.

We look forward to reviewing the bill when we'll have a chance to look at its details, and we are pleased the minister has brought this bill forward to the

House. There's no doubt that the mortgage credit industry in Canada is growing significantly, particularly here in Ontario, and we need to ensure there are high qualifications involved in the

business side.

I do want to take a few seconds to remind the government that there are ongoing concerns with one of the minister's colleague's bills, Bill 14, in how it

interacts with some of the same services done by the mortgage brokers among others in that field. So we look forward to debate on this bill when it comes forward, but we also want to register an

ongoing concern with some of the provisions under Bill 14, I think standing under the Attorney General.

ONTARIO HERITAGE WEEK

Mrs. Julia Munro (York North): I'm pleased, on behalf of John Tory and the PC caucus, to be able to join in with the minister in launching

Ontario Heritage Week.

I think all of us recognize how important it is to our culture and our sense of identity, to our understanding of the past, because, of course, it is only

through the preservation and the viability of our heritage that we're able to define ourselves and recognize who we are.

In my own case, I look at the work done by the many people who work at fundraising and volunteering for the sites that are in my riding, including such places

as the Campbell Museum and the national historic site of the Sharon Temple; and the folks who work on the Lloydtown rebellion and the Georgina Pioneer Village. They have also undertaken to launch

and fundraise for a new military museum as well. So there's much, then, that all of us can take pride in.

I would suggest, however, that there are some things the ministry and, through the minister's leadership -- certainly we would appreciate a much stronger voice

on the issue of the provincial archives from this minister, as well as a stable commitment to funding for our small-town libraries.

Heritage is recognized around the world, and we have to accept the fact that we need to have that strong provincial voice to maintain the viability and

economically sound value of our heritage property sites. Of course, the province is the owner of many of those.

We look forward to the minister accepting the challenge of continuing that kind of opportunity for all of us in Ontario.

HEATHER CROWE

Mrs. Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener-Waterloo): I'm very pleased to respond to the Minister of Health Promotion on behalf of John Tory and the

Progressive Conservative caucus.

We rise with our colleagues today to pay tribute to this very, very courageous woman, Heather Crowe, who has been such an outstanding inspiration in her fight

to protect other workers from the consequences of second-hand smoke. She certainly has been a tireless advocate. She has obviously done more than any other individual to ban smoking in the

workplace and in public places. We appreciate the tireless efforts that she did undertake on behalf of all other workers who unfortunately will suffer as a result of being in a workplace with

smoke.

I am sorry and I'm sad, as the minister has said, that her cancer is no longer in remission. Certainly our prayers and our thoughts go to Heather as she

continues her fight. I'm pleased that so many people have come forward to recognize that --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you. Responses?

MORTGAGE BROKERS

Mr. Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): In response to the Minister of Finance, we welcome, of course, any reform in this area. I would like to

thank all of those people who have participated to make the reforms as far-reaching as they appear to be. There are three items, though, that I would like to draw attention to at this point.

The first is that the minister has spoken about consumer protection, and I did not hear anything, nor do I see anything in the notes, about consumer education.

Clearly, if this new act is going to be as far-reaching as I hope it will be, then the consumers will need to be protected by way of education as to what they might expect in this bill and how it

differs from the past one.

I also would like to speak about the exemptions, because I find them rather far-reaching, and there's no explanation for them. It says, "Financial institutions

and their employees are exempted." It goes on to say, "Persons and entities that provide simple referrals are exempted." It goes on to say, "Other exemptions from the requirement to be licensed

include exemptions for lawyers." So it appears that there are many, many exemptions here, and I'm not sure as to the rationale. We'll be trying to find out the rationale for those many exemptions

to a bill that requires licensing.

Last but not least, the bill goes on, I think puzzlingly, to explain, "The Mortgage Brokers Act imposes foreign ownership restrictions on mortgage brokers.

That act also requires a prospectus to be filed with the superintendent in respect of mortgage transactions involving land outside of Ontario. The new act does not include such provisions." So it

would appear that the new act will not protect Ontarians and Canadians from foreign ownership, nor will it protect people who buy property outside of Ontario.

We are going to have to look very closely at these as it goes into second and third reading debate.

ONTARIO HERITAGE WEEK /

SEMAINE DU PATRIMOINE DE L'ONTARIO

Mr. Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): On behalf of New Democrats, I was pleased to be at the Ontario Heritage Trust launch of Ontario

Heritage Week at the Elgin and Winter Garden Theatre. That building is a true gem that we have, and each time I go I realize the wonders of what we hold by way of heritage buildings.

The preservation of Ontario's heritage has grown in the last 10 or 15 years, has attracted a great deal of interest and has attracted a lot of adherants to the

preservation of our heritage, which is very good to see, so much so that if it weren't for them, we would not have had Bill 60 before us today, because it was they who forced the Liberal

government, after sitting on that bill for one year -- to bring it forth. I tell you, it's an opportunity to thank the heritage activists for the great work they have done.

This too is another opportunity to remind the Minister of Culture and to remind Monsieur McGuinty, who is present with us, that in order to preserve our

heritage and to maintain and build on our culture, we need to give it more support, not less. To this extent, the government last year cut the budget of the Ministry of Culture by 6.8%.

You will know and remember that the Conservative government devastated the Ministry of Culture in a good economy. We were hoping that this minister, in a good

economy, would increase the support for culture. Instead, we have sustained yet again 6.8% cuts.

Je vous encourage tous et toutes à participer cette semaine aux événements organisés dans ma collectivité locale. Aussi, comme vous le

savez, le ministère de la Culture a subi de grandes coupures. J'encourage les citoyens, les citoyennes et les organismes patrimoniaux de presser le gouvernement libéral d'augmenter leur

appui financier. Merci.

HEATHER CROWE

Ms. Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): Our thanks to Heather Crowe for her tremendous courage and commitment. Heather Crowe never smoked a day in

her life, but she contracted lung cancer. The WSIB ruled that her cancer was directly related to the second-hand smoke that she had breathed in every working day of her life over 40 years, working

as a waitress in smoke-filled restaurants.

Heather Crowe could have taken her decision and she could have gone home, but she made a very conscious decision to become an advocate; she decided to use her

first-hand experience to try and get governments to ban second-hand smoke in workplaces and public places. She had no public speaking experience, no knowledge of how to lobby government, but she

visited many governments and many people who were in authority to try and convince them that second-hand smoke kills and to ensure that workers would not be subject to the same fate that she

had.

We are very sorry today to hear that her cancer is out of remission, and we send our thoughts to her and our best wishes, as well.

ORAL QUESTIONS

MINISTERIAL CONDUCT

Mr. Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln): A question to the Premier concerning the ongoing scandals around his Minister of Transportation: In a sworn

affidavit, Minister Takhar's trustee states that at his April meeting at Chalmers "Mr. Takhar's telephone rang" and he proceeded to go outside and to speak upon it.

Premier, if this is the case, why is there not a single record of his phone call or any other phone call from Minister Takhar's cellphone at that time or that

day?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): I will be pleased to address these kinds of questions for as long as the

opposition would remain interested in them, but having said that, I think that the Integrity Commissioner dealt with this matter conclusively. Beyond that, the Minister of Transportation also has

taken the necessary measures that were requested by the Integrity Commissioner with respect to dealing with his trustee in an effective way, and he also has apologized a number of times now.

I have every faith that he has drawn whatever lessons should be drawn from this experience and that he will continue to work as hard as he can to uphold the

public interest.

Mr. Hudak: I understand why the Premier refuses to address the facts in the question. It gets worse: Minister Takhar, in a scrum Tuesday with

the media, said it was not registered on his own cellphone log because he was using his wife's cellphone. However, in paragraph 19 on page 8 of your minister's sworn affidavit, the following quote:

"Towards the end of the meeting, my cellphone rang and the reception inside the building where we were meeting was poor."

Premier, you have two very different and contradictory versions of the truth from your minister. Are you going to support this minister and keep him in the

executive council, when it's clear that his story does not meet with the facts?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I have every confidence that the Integrity Commissioner would have dealt with this issue and any others that would have

been either immediate in nature or collateral.

There were three separate allegations made by Mr. Tory. One was whether Minister Takhar's company benefited from his position in cabinet, and the Integrity

Commissioner found that the answer to that question was no. The second was whether Minister Takhar was involved in the running of his family business while also ministering and, again, he answered

no. What he did find was that the minister did err when he didn't tell the commissioner that his trustee, who had originally been approved by the commissioner, had also become the CFO of his riding

association, and we agree with that as well.

I believe the matter has been dealt with by the Integrity Commissioner. If there are additional issues that the opposition member feels are pressing and of

concern to the public, then, again, he can raise those directly with the Integrity Commissioner.

Mr. Hudak: It's disappointing that the Premier does not seem to care that there are two contradictory statements by his Minister of

Transportation on a very serious issue. I'll say again: We have an FOI of the minister's cellphone bill. It does not reveal a telephone call that day. The Minister of Transportation, in a sworn

affidavit, said he made a telephone call that day. One of two things is obviously apparent: either he tampered with the with the FOI, or his statement of the cellphone does not reach with the

facts. Mr. Premier, which is it, and will you get to the bottom of this or move your minister to the back row where he belongs?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: The opposition, the Conservative Party, is apparently very unhappy with the Integrity Commissioner's findings and

recommendations. Again, if they think they have something new that the Integrity Commissioner has not properly considered, then of course they are at liberty to raise that with the Integrity

Commissioner. But from my perspective, I believe the matter has been dealt with conclusively. I think -- in fact, I know -- the Minister of Transportation has drawn the important lessons that

should be drawn from this experience, that he remains absolutely committed to upholding the highest standard in his capacity as a minister and as a representative of a riding, and that he will work

as hard as he can to uphold the public interest.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): New question.

Mr. Hudak: Premier, this is a serious problem. When you were on this side of the House, you raised bloody hell at the slightest whiff. It's

obvious that your Minister of Transportation has said two entirely contradictory things about the cellphone at the meeting at the Chalmers Group. Your Minister of Transportation has broken the

Members' Integrity Act; he has been found in violation by the Integrity Commissioner. Your minister has a sworn affidavit saying that he made a phone call, or received a phone call, that day at

Chalmers, but last week he said that was not the case.

Premier, it's a question about your minister and it's a question about your ethical standards that you set for your cabinet. How can you stand by this

minister, knowing that his own words indicate that a sworn affidavit has provided false information to the Integrity Commissioner?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I'm not sure about the propriety of that assertion just made by the honourable member, but let me say this: The Integrity

Commissioner asked for and received the information he sought with respect to cellphone records. If for some reason the member opposite now believes that the Integrity Commissioner should have

access to new information that he feels is important -- and essentially what he continues to say is that he's not satisfied with either the thoroughness of the investigation made by the Integrity

Commissioner or the findings of the Integrity Commissioner -- then that's a matter, once again, that he should, himself, take up with the Integrity Commissioner.

Mr. Hudak: Again, Mr. Speaker, this is the Premier and the standards, or the lack thereof, that Premier McGuinty sets for his cabinet. Your

Minister of Transportation had a sworn affidavit saying he received a cellphone call at Chalmers on that controversial day. The Premier is well aware of that day; he's well aware of the call. We

waited some seven months for his cellphone bills through the freedom of information request. We finally got them back, we looked at that very day, and not a single call on the minister's cellphone,

as he claimed there was.

Mr. Premier, how can we have any belief in the words the Minister of Transportation says, how can we have any belief in your picks for cabinet, when we find

that his sworn affidavit does not meet with the facts that we found under the freedom of information request?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: The member opposite is under the mistaken apprehension that somehow volume adds to the logic of his assertions.

I have every faith in the Integrity Commissioner. He has reviewed this matter. If this particular Integrity Commissioner has shown anything, he has shown

himself to be thorough. He took a great deal of time to reflect on this matter and to hear evidence that was brought in over an extended period of time, and he came to the conclusion that he

did.

I think the matter has been dealt with. I think it has been dealt with conclusively. Once again, I say to the member opposite that if he is not satisfied with

either the result or the process culminating in that result, then that is something he should take up, once again, with the Integrity Commissioner.

Mr. Hudak: The opposition makes no apology for raising the volume on this issue. The Premier is obviously voluntarily deaf when it comes to

the conduct of his Minister of Transportation. I say to you again: On one hand, the Minister of Transportation says in a sworn affidavit that he used his cellphone that day; on the other hand, in a

discussion with the media last week, he said he did not use his cellphone that day. We got the freedom of information request, and it showed that he made or received no calls from Chalmers that

day. It's one of two things, Premier: Either the FOI request has been doctored in response to the opposition, or secondly, the sworn affidavit by the minister does not meet with the facts. Surely,

even for your low standards, you'd look into this and find out, did he break the FOI or did he lie in his sworn affidavit?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: Perhaps, in fairness, the member opposite has never had the opportunity to get to know Minister Takhar. Let me say, for the

benefit of the members opposite, that he is a man of the utmost integrity. He considers it a genuine privilege to serve in public office, and he considers it a tremendous honour, beyond that, to

serve in cabinet as Minister of Transportation.

He made a mistake. The Integrity Commissioner came to a conclusion, which I completely agree with. The minister has apologized. He has drawn the appropriate

lessons from that experience. I think the matter has been dealt with conclusively.

NUCLEAR ENERGY

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Premier, but I'm happy to tell the House that the score is now Canada 1,

Sweden 0.

Premier, you said you would listen to what the people of Ontario have to say about your $40-billion nuclear power scheme. Last week, you held three days of

so-called open houses on your $40-billion nuclear power scheme. In community after community, working families said no to your $40-billion scheme and yes to thoughtful energy efficiency and

conservation. The question is, will you now listen to the people?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): We will continue to listen to Ontarians. We're very pleased with the

interest that was demonstrated in that 12-city consultation.

Today Ontarians will find being delivered to their mailbox and their doorstep a brochure called Our Energy, Our Future: It's Time To Talk About Our Electricity

Future. I would encourage all Ontarians, as many as possible, to take a moment to review this literature and take advantage of the opportunity to convey to us their impressions, their opinions,

their advice, their concerns at the website listed therein. This is, I would argue, the most unprecedented effort to connect with Ontarians when it comes preparing for our energy future.

Mr. Hampton: This is what people said about your so-called open houses: "a sham," "a disgrace," "totally inadequate."

Premier, you want to boast about this. This is like sending out the New Year's invitation on January 3. The party is over. The open houses were held last week.

If anything, what this $1.1-million pamphlet shows is just how big a sham it is. After the open houses are over, people get something in the mail saying, "Oh, by the way, there was an open

house."

There is a way to have a real process where people have a chance to examine the situation and provide alternatives. Will you submit your Ontario Power

Authority supply plan to a full environmental assessment, where people can actually look at, examine it and cross-examine it, and provide alternatives?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I really do hope that Ontarians take the opportunity to review this brochure in some detail. A specific website,

www.ontario.ca/energy, has been created, which I would encourage Ontarians to avail themselves of. We are very much interested in hearing from them in this regard.

We've got a huge challenge before us, not one that any other government has been prepared to take on. What we're really talking about is what kinds of

decisions we need to make today in order to ensure we have the essential supply we're going to need by about 2015. We're taking on an important debate today in order to ensure that we have

reliability of supply about 10 years from now. It would be easy to duck that, but I think that would be irresponsible. So in addition to that 12-city consultation phase, we have yet another

opportunity we're creating for Ontarians and we very much want to hear from them in this regard.

Mr. Hampton: The open houses, three days, inadequate as they were, were held last week. At some time at the end of this week or next week,

people might get their invitation in the mail, saying, "Oh, by the way, the McGuinty government is holding an open house on the future of nuclear power."

Premier, doesn't this seem obvious to you? It seems obvious to everyone else. This is a sham. This is a hoax. This is totally inadequate. Even if people get

this during the first week of March, they have to respond within a couple of days in order to make the deadline that you've set out in here. I think it's obvious to everyone that $1.1 million has

been wasted on this. It's the invitation that comes after the party. This is all about trying to finesse through your nuclear power scheme with the minimum public commentary.

Will you do the right thing, Premier: no more sham, no more hoax, no more invitation after the party is over? Submit your Ontario --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you. The question has been asked. Premier.

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: The leader of the NDP does not feel, obviously, that this is a worthwhile undertaking on the part of the government and on

the part of taxpayers. I strongly disagree.

Let me tell you about some of the issues that we broach in this brochure and on which we're asking Ontarians to comment. We ask questions like: Do we have

enough power right now? What about coal-fired plants? What about wind and other types of renewable energy? What options do we have? What about clean coal? Can we use more natural gas? What about

nuclear energy? Can we buy power from other provinces that have more than enough? What is the least expensive choice for generating more power? What about conserving more so we don't have to build

new generation? What's the most environmentally friendly choice for generating more power?

I would argue that this is comprehensive in nature. It is balanced, it is thoughtful and it's designed to provoke thinking among Ontarians. Again, we very much

look forward to hearing from them.

ENERGY RATES

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): It's an after-the-fact invitation designed to hide the fact that your whole consultation process is a

sham.

Premier, I want to ask you about the 6,000 jobs that have been lost in the forest sector under your government as a result of your failure to have an adequate

electricity policy. Industry leaders are saying that more job losses are to come -- many more. They all agree that it's your policy of driving Ontario's hydroelectricity rates through the roof that

is the major factor in killing these thousands of jobs. They've been telling you this for two years now.

My question is, before thousands more lose their jobs, what is the McGuinty government finally going to do about the situation you've created in the forest

sector across northern and central Ontario?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): To the Minister of Natural Resources.

Hon. David Ramsay (Minister of Natural Resources, minister responsible for aboriginal affairs): The member will know that if you go company by

company, there are very different factors that affect each company. But overall, as our Minister of Economic Development and Trade has said, the rapidly increasing value of the Canadian dollar

vis-à-vis the American dollar is the number one issue --

Interjection.

Hon. Mr. Ramsay: They are, Mr. Bisson -- that they are saying. Some companies are saying it's the high cost of petro-energy, whether it be the

direct fuels they use in their trucks or the resultant by-products and the chemicals that come from a barrel of oil. That has had a high input. All of these inputs have hit them altogether, as many

financial analysts have said, as maybe a perfect storm.

As you know, we made an announcement two weeks ago extending for three years the electricity cap so that there is certainty there, and the rate, May 1, will be

lower than it is today.

Mr. Hampton: The minister should know that the forest sector has experienced the high value of the Canadian dollar before and they've

weathered the storm. They've also had to deal with foreign competition before and they've weathered the storm. But what is different this time is that the McGuinty Ontario government is determined

to drive the price of electricity through the roof. Every company that has shut down mills has said that.

Here's the reality, Minister: A mill in Ontario is paying about eight cents a kilowatt hour for their electricity. If they're in Quebec, they're paying four

cents. If they're in BC, they're paying 3.5 cents. If they're in Manitoba, they're paying three cents. The reason more shutdowns are happening in Ontario is because the McGuinty government has

driven the rate of electricity through the roof.

What are you going to do about that problem? Stop blaming everything else under the sun. They're your electricity rates; you set them. What are you going to do

about it, or are you going to kill more jobs?

Hon. Mr. Ramsay: Let's be clear what's happening here. First of all, this is not just a problem and a challenge for Ontario industry. This is

happening across the country. He knows that pulp mills in Newfoundland, Quebec and BC have closed, as well as in Ontario.

Also, the member makes it seem as if there's no cyclical adjustment going on here. He knows that when he was in government in the early 1990s, there were at

least 14 mills that closed on his watch, and all the same factors were there. In fact, electricity prices were not a big concern at that time, but other factors impacted that industry and so there

was further adjustment.

In each industry, there will always be cyclical adjustments that happen, and companies will transition themselves to do that. We have invested $680 million to

help that transition now to make sure that this industry can sustain itself.

Mr. Hampton: Once again, the minister wants to blame everyone else. Here's the reality, Minister: When the Cascades mill closed in Thunder

Bay, they announced they were moving production to where? Saint-Jérôme, Quebec. When they shut down two paper machines at the Domtar mill in Ottawa, what they also announced was they were

moving production across the river to the paper machine in Quebec.

What's happening here is, thousands of jobs are leaving Ontario. They're going to Quebec, Manitoba, British Columbia, they're going to Michigan and Minnesota,

and the McGuinty government stands there and says, "Oh, gee, this is too bad." You've got a responsibility to do something, because if more paper mills and more pulp mills shut down, then that

means sawmills are going to shut down because they'll have no place to sell the residual wood chips.

My question again: You've created this problem. What is the McGuinty government going to do to fix it before thousands more lose their jobs in the forest

sector across northern and central Ontario?

Hon. Mr. Ramsay: In the last two weeks, I've been working with all the companies. I've visited Cascade headquarters in Montreal. I've spoken

to them there. The assets there are going to be protected. We and the company are looking at securing new owners for that operation, so there may be very good news when it comes to that.

We've also been working on a daily basis with the companies as to what more this government could be doing to help these companies and to help the industry.

We're working at that. We have some ideas we've been sharing with them, and they're very excited about what we're about to do. I would say to the member to stay tuned, because this government is

about to announce some very exciting new initiatives when it comes to forestry.

OMERS PENSION FUND

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): I have a question for the Premier. Premier, last week, John Tory wrote and pleaded with both yourself

and Sid Ryan, and other affected parties, to sit down and discuss your differences over Bill 206 so that the people of Ontario would know that absolutely everything had been done in order to avoid

an illegal strike.

Premier, John Tory seeks common ground and a possible solution to avoid this unnecessary withdrawal of important public services. Sid Ryan is now willing to

remove his threat an illegal strike in exchange for meaningful dialogue with and your government. Will you not take him up on his offer?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): To the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Hon. John Gerretsen (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): Let me just say that we believe there have been 10 years of discussions about

the OMERS devolution idea. There have been all sorts of legislative hearings, after both first and second readings. There has been an unprecedented number of amendments that have been put forward,

discussed and debated. There will be a further debate as soon as the bill is called for third reading. We have done everything possible to try to bring in a bill that is fair to employers and

employees. They are the people who should be running this plan. It's their contributions, and the benefits that will go to the workers from those contributions, who should have the say over that

plan. We truly believe that the bill is as good as it could possibly be in being fair to all parties involved. It's time to devolve OMERS, and the time to do it is right now.

Mr. Miller: The bill's a mess. You've had over 100 amendments. You have the employers and the employees upset about it.

Premier, none of us support an illegal strike. Although it may not suit your political strategy to do so, you owe it to the people of Ontario to do everything

in your power to avoid this illegal strike. You promised Ontarians labour peace in our province and you promised to end the politics of division, yet you are using the politics of division with

Bill 206.

Premier, why then would you break these promises and not provide Ontario families with a last-ditch effort to avoid this illegal strike that will negatively

affect them now? Why not do as John Tory has suggested and take a deep breath and step back? Convene a meeting with CUPE, AMO, police and firefighters, John Tory and Howard Hampton, and work out a

better solution before the bill is called for third reading.

Hon. Mr. Gerretsen: As the member well knows, AMO wants changes to the legislation so that there is unanimity before any further benefits are

being made available to be bargained at the local level. On the other hand, CUPE and the employees want it done on a 50% basis. The two positions are directly contrary to one another. As a matter

of fact, the executive director of AMO, Pat Vanini, has stated, "What we want and what Mr. Ryan wants are diametrically opposed."

We are simply saying that the solution that we came up with when it comes to supplementary plans is the proper and fair solution, and that is that there should

be 50% plus one before mediation and arbitration take place. It's not exactly what AMO wants --

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Gerretsen: -- I'm sorry -- and it's not exactly what CUPE wants. But it's fair to all parties concerned.

I apologize to the Minister of Energy here for unfortunately touching her, spanking her.

MUNICIPAL FINANCES

Mr. Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): My question is to the Premier. Mr. Premier, requiring the city of Toronto to pay for your share of

provincially mandated programs has left them with a $212-million budget shortfall for this year. Your government promised to change the Harris downloading fiasco in order to support cities, and

instead they are going bankrupt providing provincially mandated programs. When will you stop perpetuating the unfair downloading of provincial costs onto the backs of the citizens and taxpayers of

Toronto?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): To the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Hon. John Gerretsen (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): We are into discussions with the city of Toronto, as we are into discussions

with the municipal world in general. As you know, currently there's the ROMA conference going on at the Royal York, which brings some 1,200 delegates from around the province -- municipal elected

officials -- together for discussions. We're always discussing with them as to how we can improve the delivery of services to municipalities, whether it's the city of Toronto or whether it's the

rest of the municipal world.

We know that as a result of the actions that that party across, the Conservative government, took for the eight to nine years before we took over,

municipalities are in a difficult situation. Taking our financial situation into account, it's going to take some time to rectify that. We're willing to work with the city of Toronto and we're

willing to work with the rest of the municipal world to make sure that the taxpayers and the residents of this province will get the best possible services both at the provincial and the local

levels.

Mr. Prue: In opposition, the Premier said that he looked forward "to putting the city of Toronto on a sustainable footing so it can properly

assume its responsibilities." But what you are doing, in effect, is allowing Ontario's economic centre to continue to pay for the downloaded programs that you have now adopted from the previous

government.

Toronto's property tax base simply cannot afford to shoulder these broken promises any longer. When are you going to start assuming your own bill payments?

Hon. Mr. Gerretsen: First of all, the new historic city of Toronto act that has been introduced will do more for the city of Toronto than any

government has done over the last 100 years for the city of Toronto. There have been many other initiatives as well that this government has undertaken. Let's take a look at the gas tax

arrangements that have been made and the over $180 million per year that the city of Toronto will benefit from. Let's look at the housing agreements that have been signed with the city of Toronto

for the first time in 10 years, from which the city will benefit as well.

There are numerous ways in which we want to help the city of Toronto, and the rest of the municipal world, so that the people of Ontario -- and that's really

who it's all about, whether they're in Toronto or elsewhere -- will get the best possible services. This government is working toward it to make sure that the damage that was done by the previous

government can be overcome as quickly as possible for all concerned.

NORTHERN ONTARIO DEVELOPMENT

Mr. David Orazietti (Sault Ste. Marie): My question is for the Minister of Northern Development and Mines. Minister, as you know, promoting

economic development in northern Ontario is especially challenging. Our northern communities faced years of neglect under the former two governments, and Sault Ste. Marie was no exception. We need,

as much as any other community in Ontario, new, secure, high-paying jobs to diversify our local economy, to grow and become more prosperous. We also face the same challenges as other jurisdictions,

particularly with the forestry industry, with the high Canadian dollar and the unresolved softwood lumber issue.

We've been working very hard in my riding of Sault Ste. Marie to seek out and develop new, innovative projects and opportunities for our community, and I want

to thank you and Minister Cordiano for coming to Sault Ste. Marie on February 10 to support the recently announced Algoma-SIAG project. Minister, can you elaborate on the details of this project

and explain how our government's GO North program works for communities like Sault Ste. Marie?

Hon. Rick Bartolucci (Minister of Northern Development and Mines): First of all, I want to thank the member from Sault Ste. Marie for the

question. GO North is a key component of our northern prosperity plan, and it will help attract investment and create jobs in the north. Through the hard work of MPP Orazietti and our GO North

investor program, the McGuinty government is bringing high-value, highly skilled jobs to the people of Sault Ste. Marie. We're doing this by investing in the SIAG Great Lakes Ltd. Partnership, a

more than $35-million joint venture between Algoma Steel and the German-based SIAG company. This will create 140 new high-value, highly skilled jobs, which will create steel wind towers using

SIAG's innovative technology.

The GO North investor program is also working with the northern Ontario heritage fund to foster economic well-being. Ontario's commitment to SIAG is that we

will make a one-time conditional grant of $1.75 million and a $3-million loan from the Northern Ontario Heritage Fund Corp.

Mr. Orazietti: Thank you, Minister. This incredibly important investment reinforces the McGuinty government's commitment to play a major role

in diversifying Sault Ste. Marie's economy. The creation of 140 high-skilled jobs is fantastic news because it means more employment opportunities and tremendous spinoffs for our city.

Minister, I know that the northern Ontario heritage fund is also an essential tool for our northern communities, especially since we have refocused the fund to

focus on job creation. Minister, can you please share with my constituents and this House how the NOHFC is working for northern Ontario and what other initiatives our government is working on to

attract international investment into northern Ontario?

Hon. Mr. Bartolucci: I am very pleased to say that we have met our commitment to return the northern Ontario heritage fund to its original

mandate, which is fostering private sector job creation. Since October 2003, the Northern Ontario Heritage Fund Corp. has approved over $126 million toward projects that will help create 4,768 net

new jobs -- that's 4,768 net new jobs. We had funded 532 projects across the north, leveraging investments of over $453 million into the northern Ontario economy. We are also promoting investment

in northern Ontario through a new video that showcases the north's business advantage, sector strength and the quality of life to international audiences. This video is only part of our GO North

investor program.

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

Mr. John Yakabuski (Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke): My question is for the Minister of Energy. We learned yesterday that each household will soon

receive this slick little piece of Liberal advertising, paid for to the tune of over $1 million by the hard-working taxpayers of Ontario. Minister, what a sham. You pretend --

Interjections.

Mr. Yakabuski: Yes. If it fits, it's reusable.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Stop the clock. Order, Minister of Health Promotion. The Minister of Community and Social Services will

come to order. I need to be able to hear the member ask his question.

The member for Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke.

Mr. Yakabuski: Minister, you pretend to consult with people across the province because you're feeling the heat. This is a joke. If you wanted

people's input, you should have been asking for it before you released the OPA's report; you should have been asking for that input two years ago. Why don't you simply admit that you don't really

care what the people of Ontario think about your failed electricity policy and that this is nothing but a $1.1-million piece of Liberal propaganda?

Hon. Donna H. Cansfield (Minister of Energy): Actually, if anybody would like see slick, how about the budget of 2003: the education report,

the seniors report, all those pictures that are in there -- the Premier of the day, Mr. Eves; the finance minister of the day. That's slick.

The difference was that what we did was publish a document in our two official languages which simply asks questions of the people of Ontario. They need to

have some information in order to give us back some information about what they believe the supply mix should look like for the future. We've put in motion the 10,000 megawatts we need for 2010,

and now we're asking them to participate with us in what the future would look like.

We didn't have to resort to using our pictures; all we had to do was give them the right information and the right tools for them to make goods decisions

The Speaker: Thank you. Supplementary?

Mr. Yakabuski: Minister, you're not asking people questions; you're trying to give them the answers. For goodness' sake, there's nothing in

there but you trying to get them to accept what is a disaster in your electricity policy; you're trying to get them to accept a failed energy policy. You're not asking them what they think about

electricity; you're trying sell your mess. That's what you're trying to do. It's like offering free first-class passage on a sinking ship. Minister, why don't you simply admit that you never had a

plan in electricity?

You know, there's an old saying: Measure twice, cut once. You guys are cutting up the electricity file in this province with a blunt axe. You have made a mess

of it. Admit you have no plan and that we're heading for pending disaster under your leadership.

Hon. Mrs. Cansfield: I'm pleased to respond. We've always said we would maximize our existing assets, be they in generation or transmission;

we would build new generation, and we have put into action in this province more generation than any other jurisdiction in North America; and we would create a culture of conservation, which we are

doing. It's the first time in 12 years that phenomenal things are happening in this province, which has been absolutely dead. If they weren't cancelled by one group, they were ignored by another.

They ignored generation, they ignored transmission and they sold off our assets. The difference is that we're going to change the way business has been done: engage the people in Ontario, knowing

they have in place a strategy that will ultimately keep the lights on for them. We are going to continue to do that, because that is our job and it is the right thing to do.

TENANT PROTECTION

Mr. Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): My question is to the Minister of Municipal Affairs. You promised to repeal the so-called Tenant

Protection Act within 365 days of taking office. I have to tell you that you're late. Today is 871 days -- 871. As a matter of fact, you're very late. If you were a tenant, you'd be evicted by now.

When Dalton McGuinty asked for the tenant vote, he called this act the "tenant rejection act" and promised to fix it within one year. You promised to provide real rent protection to tenants. When

will you repeal this so-called Tenant Protection Act and replace it with effective tenant protection law?

Mr. Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): Soon. It's coming.

Hon. John Gerretsen (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): I think one of his colleagues knows the answer: It's coming soon.

We want to get it right. There have been so many pieces of tenant protection legislation in this province over the last 20 or 30 years that were wrong that we

want to get it absolutely right. In order to do that, we had one of the largest consultations ever to take place in Ontario.

We've already done an awful lot for the housing situation in Ontario. We've opened a rent bank in which we put $10 million, which has prevented over 3,000

evictions that otherwise would have taken place. We signed an agreement with the federal government for a total of $738 million to make sure there's affordable housing from a home ownership

viewpoint, from a rental viewpoint, and from a housing allowance viewpoint for low-income individuals. We've had the lowest rent guideline increases in this province over the last two years, lower

than ever before in the previous 20 years. The new tenant protection legislation is --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you. Supplementary?

Mr. Prue: From that response, I think you can just add tenant protection and rent controls to your list of broken promises. Minister,

evictions in Toronto have reached record levels. You're talking about stopping them. The Federation of Metro Tenants' Associations calls the recent eviction notices -- increases of 10.7% in Toronto

and a whopping 14.1% in Scarborough -- outrageous and distressing. That's the highest number since the Harris government introduced the Tenant Protection Act way back in 1998. With eviction notices

at record levels, how many more tenants have to be evicted before you repeal this act and replace it with one that works?

Hon. Mr. Gerretsen: As the member well knows, a new act will be coming to this Legislature soon. As he also knows, quite often the eviction

method is used in order to get both sides to mediation, and that's exactly what is happening. We read the articles in the newspaper this week as well and realize that there is a higher level of

eviction notices going out than before. We're studying that right now. We're certainly taking that into account as we come up with our new tenant protection legislation. We want to make sure that

when that legislation is presented to the House, it is both fair and equitable to good landlords and good tenants. That's what we're striving towards and that's what we're going to deliver.

OMERS PENSION FUND

Mr. John Milloy (Kitchener Centre): My question is for the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing and deals with OMERS devolution as

outlined in Bill 206. As members of this Legislature know, OMERS legislation devolution has been debated for over 10 years and, in 2002, the OMERS board issued a report that involved 18 months of

consultation with all planned groups at the table, a report that our government used for the creation of Bill 206.

Since its introduction, the bill has gone through two rounds of committee hearings, with standing committee members hearing over 50 deputations and receiving

over 100 submissions from retirees, municipalities and OMERS plan members. During this process, the government accepted a number of amendments from stakeholders and the opposition in order to

strengthen the bill. What has emerged from this process is a model for managing the pension plan designed to be fair and equitable. One group, however, that has had particular concerns has been

retirees. Could the minister tell the Legislature the role that retirees will play in the new model?

Hon. John Gerretsen (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): I know it's a concern about the myths that have been put out there that

somehow pensioners' pensions are going to be affected. I want to say categorically that pensions will not in any way, shape or form be affected. I would encourage pensioners who are interested in

this to go to the OMERS website. OMERS is the board that currently governs the pension plan. It's got seven employee representatives and seven employer representatives on there and it clearly and

categorically states that pensions are not going to be affected. Current rights are not going to be affected one iota.

As a matter of fact, under the new bill that we're proposing, a pensioner, a retired individual, will have a seat on both the sponsorship corporation and the

administrative corporation, which will give them a right to make the kind of decisions that we expect those employers and employees who are members of those boards to make in the future on the

plan.

Mr. Milloy: I'd like to point out that Bill 206, if passed, would affect more than 355,000 active and retired workers who rely on OMERS for

their pension plan. As I understand it, the province doesn't contribute directly to the plan because it's not an employer. However, the province does contribute millions in the form of transfer

payments to certain OMERS agencies; for example, children's aid societies and school boards. I understand that this morning the minister addressed the ROMA/OGRA conference and indicated that

municipalities ought to revisit their cost estimates for early retirement options for paramedics, firefighters and police officers. Could the minister explain to the Legislature why he believes

that these municipalities need to re-examine their cost estimates?

Hon. Mr. Gerretsen: Again, the numbers that have been put out on the potential cost of this plan are, in our opinion, grossly and drastically

overstated. There have also been suggestions made that for the supplemental plans that may be negotiated at the local level, once the bill is implemented, there's going to be some sort of

cross-subsidization from either the main plan to the supplementary plan or vice versa. That simply cannot happen.

The bill is intended to do two things and two thing only: (1) to make sure that the OMERS file is finally transferred to those employers and employees who have

been paying the payments and receiving the benefits from that plan; (2) that supplementary plans be made available to our emergency workers -- namely, fire, police and paramedics -- who, on a daily

basis, risk their lives to make sure that all Ontarians, including you and me, are safe to live in this province.

DISASTER RELIEF

Mrs. Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener-Waterloo): My question is to the Premier. This past week Ontarians watched in horror as a landslide wiped out

a village in the Philippines and buried hundreds of homes and a school in mud. It is estimated that up to 1,400 people are missing. On behalf of our leader, John Tory, and our caucus, I extend our

condolences, prayers and thoughts to the families impacted by this disaster.

Yesterday, the Canadian government pledged $300,000 in initial assistance to support the recovery and rehabilitation efforts. I ask you today, will you

consider sending $150,000 to the Philippines on behalf of Ontarians to support the relief efforts and the people who have been impacted by this tragic disaster?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): Let me first of all say that I fully endorse the sentiments just shared

by the honourable colleague opposite, and we offer our sincere sympathies and support to the affected communities. I can say that I issued a statement during the course of the weekend. I also have

a call in, as we speak, to the consul general. Beyond that, I have not yet had an opportunity to fully consider what we might do by way of assistance. I look forward to getting a moment to speak

with some of the ministers in my cabinet about that. But I can say that in the past we have found a way to provide specific assistance to others in other parts of the world in times of need, and I

look forward to considering this matter very carefully as well.

Mrs. Witmer: I appreciate the fact that the Premier has indicated that he is prepared to consider making available to the people in the

Philippines $150,000 in order that we can support their relief efforts and also support the people who have been impacted by this severe tragedy. Thank you.

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration.

Hon. Mike Colle (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration): Just to let the House know, I have spoken to the consul general of the Philippines

this morning and offered our condolences and our support. I have also put in a call to our Commissioner of Emergency Management, Commissioner Fantino. Just like this government and this province

helped in Katrina where we sent 66 members of the civil service to help, we helped in the tsunami and we helped in Pakistan, we've offered our support. We will have discussions with the consul

general of the community to see how Ontario will help, as it always has helped. Despite the fact that some critics have said that we shouldn't have helped in the tsunami, that we shouldn't have

helped in Pakistan, we will be there to help the people of the Philippines, as we are connected with the people of the world.

CHILD CARE

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): My question is to the Premier. In 2003, you promised to invest $300 million of new provincial money for

child care, but you broke your promise. You voted down an NDP motion to start spending that child care money that you committed to. You chose to rely solely on federal money instead of taking

control and creating the spaces that you promised. Had you kept your promise and invested Ontario dollars in Ontario child care, families needing regulated child care would know that you had

protected their interests even as your fragile federal deal is coming apart.

Will you keep your promise today and show the parents the $300 million you promised for affordable, licensed child care?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): To the Minister of Children and Youth Services.

Hon. Mary Anne V. Chambers (Minister of Children and Youth Services): I appreciate the interest of the member for Hamilton East. She should be

care spaces and an additional investment of $93.61 million.

It has been surprising to me that we have heard nothing from the leader of the third party in support of this agreement. There is an agreement in place with

the parents of Ontario to support --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you. Supplementary.

Ms. Horwath: I certainly do know what my community is going to lose, as well as the other demonstration projects, if this government refuses

to invest the dollars that they said they were going to invest in child care funding in the province of Ontario. The $300 million that you promised but didn't deliver would create a lot of child

care spaces for those working families. Nine out of 10 children in Ontario can't get the child care they need, and we all know it. You asked Prime Minister Harper to honour the agreement he has

with the people of Ontario. He should, but so should you. Will you honour your agreement with the people of Ontario and fund child care spaces with the 300 million Ontario dollars, and when will

you do that?

Interjections.

Hon. Mrs. Chambers: I hear a member of the official opposition commenting not in support of the parents of Ontario, but in opposition to our

desire to have this agreement honoured. So let me ask you, as members of the official opposition, Mr. Tory and the Tory caucus, to stand behind the people of Ontario, to stand behind parents and

children. We have yet to hear anything from you as members of the opposition. So to you, Mr. Tory and your caucus, and Mr. Hampton and your caucus, let me see exactly how serious you are about

representing the interests of the parents of Ontario.

Interjections.

Hon. Mrs. Chambers: This is not about politics. This is not about partisan initiatives. This is a deal between the government of Ontario and

The Speaker: New question.

AMATEUR SPORT

Mr. Kevin Daniel Flynn (Oakville): My question today is for the Minister of Health Promotion and it's about Ontario athletes. I think all

Ontarians would agree that fostering and maintaining a culture of amateur sport in this province is extremely important. In 1992, for some reason, the revenue from the Wintario lottery, which had

funded amateur athletes, was redirected to general revenue. Athletes were left without the resources to support themselves while training to represent Ontario nationally and internationally. I know

that many amateur athletes in Oakville commit enormous amounts of time to training and conditioning while trying to balance school and work. Minister, how is our government's innovative Quest for

Gold lottery going to provide real support to the high-performance amateur athletes in Ontario?

Hon. Jim Watson (Minister of Health Promotion): I want to thank the honourable member for Oakville for the question. The Quest for Gold

lottery that we launched just a few months ago has been a tremendous success. Our government has committed $2.5 million, as a result of lottery proceeds from Quest for Gold, to amateur athletes

before March 31 of this fiscal year.

Our athletes act as role models and ambassadors for young and old alike. We watch the Olympics with great pride. I'm pleased to report that in the second

period the women's hockey team is winning 2-0, and we are very proud of them.

Let me just tell you where that money is going: 70% to direct financial assistance for elite athletes; 20% to increase access to high-performance coaching; and

10% in funding for enhancing the Ontario Games program. And 100% of the net proceeds are going directly to amateur sport in this province. It's not going to a bureaucracy, it's not going --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you. Supplementary.

Mr. Flynn: Thank you, Minister. That's great news for any amateur athlete who aspires to compete for Ontario or Canada. Finally, ordinary

Ontarians now will be able to support our amateur athletes any time they buy a lottery ticket.

With the Olympics under way in Turin, many Ontarians will be wishing to help those athletes, but there have been fewer Ontario athletes over the past 10 years

than ever before. The percentage of Ontario athletes on Canada's winter Olympic teams has decreased by more than half. Similarly, the percentage of Ontarian athletes on Canada's Commonwealth Games

teams decreased from 60% in 1986 to 32% in 2002. Minister, how will this lottery reverse this trend, and what can we expect in terms of real revenue from this initiative?

Hon. Mr. Watson: Let me begin by congratulating the Ontario athletes who have done so well in Torino: Jeffrey Buttle from Sudbury captured the

bronze in figure skating; Kristina Groves from Ottawa, silver in pursuit long-track speed skating; Christine Nesbitt from London, silver in pursuit long-track speed skating; and 10 members of the

women's hockey team are from Ontario. We're very, very proud of them.

Our government, under the leadership of Premier McGuinty, with this Quest for Gold funding, has increased base funding for provincial sports organizations by

83%. That compares to the previous government that cut amateur sports funding by 42% in its first three years.

Let me conclude by quoting Adam van Koeverden from Oakville, an Olympic kayak gold medalist, who said, "This lottery will encourage athletes to stay in Ontario

and train here instead of going to Quebec or British Columbia, where they become those provinces' athletes" --

The Speaker: Thank you. New question.

Interjection.

The Speaker: Order. Sit down.

EMPLOYMENT STANDARDS

Mr. Robert W. Runciman (Leeds-Grenville): I have a question for the Minister of Labour. As I'm sure you're aware, in December Mahle Engine

Components announced its closure in Gananoque. That is, as you can appreciate, with 90 employees, an enormous, damaging blow to a small town. The company has since declared bankruptcy and failed to

meet its obligations with respect to pensions, severance and health care. Under the Employment Standards Act, you have the authority to order an audit of the company in circumstances such as these.

I'm asking why you haven't authorized such an audit to occur, as a request has been submitted to your ministry and was rejected.

Hon. Steve Peters (Minister of Labour): I think we all share the concern for the employees and their families in that community. As you are

well aware from my response to you, under the Canadian Constitution it's the Parliament of Canada that has the exclusive domain over bankruptcies and insolvencies. I responded to you last week in

that regard that it is federal jurisdiction and, as a consequence, the Ministry of Labour is not in a position to investigate or assess the legality of a bankruptcy or the proceedings under the

Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act. The Ministry of Labour does conduct investigations into employment standards claims from a former employer who has gone bankrupt.

There are both unionized and non-unionized employees there. Those unionized employees are encouraged to speak to their unions, and the non-unionized employees

are certainly free to contact the Ministry of Labour.

Mr. Runciman: I appreciate the letter, but the minister didn't answer my question then and he hasn't answered it here today. Perhaps he should

speak to his predecessor, Minister Bentley, who issued a press release last year lauding the centralized insolvency and collection unit within the ministry for securing close to $1 million from a

bankrupt company in Ajax, Ajax Precision Manufacturing. This was the former Minister of Labour saying what a wonderful job this unit was doing within the ministry, ensuring that we could go after

these companies who structured a bankruptcy so as to avoid their obligations. What's the difference, Minister, between Ajax, where your predecessor lauded an initiative under the Employment

Standards Act, and what has happened in Gananoque?

Hon. Mr. Peters: I reiterate that the jurisdiction of bankruptcy and insolvency is a federal matter. This is an issue that is laid out as a

constitutional issue, and it is the federal government that is charged with that responsibility. As I said in my earlier response to the honourable member, those non-unionized employees are

certainly free to contact the Ministry of Labour, and the unionized employees involved are encouraged to contact their union.

PETITIONS

CANCER TREATMENT

Mr. Cameron Jackson (Burlington): My petition is to the Parliament of Ontario.

"Whereas Ontario has an inconsistent policy for access to new cancer treatments while these drugs are under review for funding; and

"Whereas cancer patients taking oral chemotherapy may apply for a

section 8 exception under the Ontario drug benefit plan, with no such exception policy in

place for intravenous cancer drugs administered in hospital; and

"Whereas this is an inequitable, inconsistent and unfair policy, creating two classes of cancer patients with further inequities on the basis of personal

wealth and the willingness of hospitals to risk budgetary deficits to provide new intravenous chemotherapy treatments; and

"Whereas cancer patients have the right to the most effective care recommended by their doctors;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Parliament of Ontario to provide immediate access to Velcade and other intravenous chemotherapy while these new cancer drugs

are under review and provide a consistent policy for access to new cancer treatments that enables oncologists to apply for exemptions to meet the needs of their patients."

This has been signed with my support.

IDENTITY THEFT

Mr. Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): I have a petition addressed to the Parliament of Ontario and the Minister of Government Services. It reads as

follows:

"Whereas identity theft is the fastest-growing crime in North America;

"Whereas confidential and private information is being stolen on a regular basis, affecting literally thousands of people;

"Whereas the cost of this crime exceeds billions of dollars;

"Whereas countless hours are wasted to restore one's good credit rating;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, demand that:

"

(1) All consumer reports be provided in a truncated (masked-out) form protecting our vital private information such as SIN and loan account numbers.

"

(2) Should a consumer reporting agency discover that there has been an unlawful disclosure of consumer information, the agency should immediately inform the

affected consumer.

"

(3) The consumer reporting agency shall only report credit inquiry records resulting from actual applications for credit or increase of credit except in a

report given to the consumer.

"

(4) The consumer reporting agency shall investigate disputed information within 30 days and correct, supplement or automatically delete any information found

unconfirmed, incomplete or inaccurate."

Since I agree with this, I'm delighted to sign this petition.

CANCER TREATMENT

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): This is a petition to the Parliament of Ontario:

"Whereas Ontario has an inconsistent policy for access to new cancer treatments while these drugs are under review for funding; and

"Whereas cancer patients taking oral chemotherapy may apply for a

section 8 exception under the Ontario drug benefit plan, with no such exception policy in

place for intravenous cancer drugs administered in hospital; and

"Whereas this is an inequitable, inconsistent and unfair policy, creating two classes of cancer patients with further inequities on the basis of personal

wealth and the willingness of hospitals to risk budgetary deficits to provide new intravenous chemotherapy treatments; and

"Whereas cancer patients have the right to the most effective care recommended by their doctors;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Parliament of Ontario to provide immediate access to Velcade and other intravenous chemotherapy while these new cancer drugs

are under review and provide a consistent policy for access to new cancer treatments that enables oncologists to apply for exceptions to meet the needs of patients."

I agree with this petition. I'm sending it to the clerks' table by way of Michael.

MACULAR DEGENERATION

Mr. Bob Delaney (Mississauga West): It's a pleasure to stand and read a petition supporting an initiative by my seatmate and colleague the

member for Niagara Falls. It reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the government of Ontario's health insurance plan covers treatments for one form of macular degeneration (wet), and there are other forms of macular

degeneration (dry) that are not covered,

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

"There are thousands of Ontarians who suffer from macular degeneration, resulting in loss of sight if treatment is not pursued. Treatment costs for this

disease are astronomical for most constituents and add a financial burden to their lives. Their only alternative is loss of sight. We believe the government of Ontario should cover treatment for

all forms of macular degeneration through the Ontario health insurance program."

It's my pleasure to affix my signature to this petition, and to ask page Hannah to carry it for me.

SERVICES FOR THE DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

Mrs. Julia Munro (York North): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas, without appropriate support, people who have an intellectual disability are often unable to participate effectively in community life and are

deprived of the benefits of society enjoyed by other citizens; and

"Whereas quality supports are dependent on the ability to attract and retain qualified workers; and

"Whereas the salaries of workers who provide community-based supports and services are up to 25% less than salaries paid to those doing the same work in

government-operated services and other sectors;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to address, as a priority, funding to community agencies in the developmental services

sector to address critical underfunding of staff salaries and ensure that people who have an intellectual disability continue to receive quality supports and services that they require in order to

live meaningful lives within their community."

As I'm in agreement, I have affixed my signature and am giving it to Nicholas to take to the table.

DIABETES TREATMENT

Mr. Kim Craitor (Niagara Falls): I'm pleased to present the following petition, and it reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

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

"We are requesting that all diabetic supplies, including insulin infusion pumps and the supplies required to maintain them, blood glucose test strips, insulin

and syringes, as prescribed by" the medical community, "be covered under the Ontario health insurance plan.

"Diabetes costs Canadian taxpayers $13 billion a year and is increasing! It is the leading cause of death and hospitalization in Canada. Many people with

diabetes cannot afford the ongoing expense of managing diabetes. They cut corners to save money. They rip test strips in half, cut down on the number of times they test their blood, and even reuse

... needles. These cost-saving measures often have ... disastrous health consequences.

"Persons with diabetes need and deserve financial assistance to cope with the escalating cost of managing diabetes.

"Every diabetic deserves an equal opportunity in caring for their disease."

We're asking the government to provide all costs for this necessary medical assistance.

OMERS PENSION FUND

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): I have a petition from CUPE Local 1457, from the riding of Parry Sound-Muskoka.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas CUPE Local 1457 is concerned by the Liberal government's legislation, Bill 206, Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System Act, 2005; and

"Whereas Bill 206 contains a multitude of changes that will cripple OMERS' ability to manage its $40-billion pension assets; and

"Whereas Bill 206 makes no provision for oversight of pension funds or accountability; and

"Whereas Bill 206 changes the rules on resolving differences among sponsors, making it harder for CUPE to find a way to improve and protect pensions; and

"Whereas Bill 206 discriminates against women and lower-paid members while providing for special consideration for police and firefighters;

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

"That the McGuinty government abandon passage of Bill 206."

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): The member for Etobicoke -- help me --

Interjection.

The Deputy Speaker: -- Scarborough Southwest. Thank you.

Mr. Lorenzo Berardinetti (Scarborough Southwest): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have nothing against Etobicoke; I think it's a great part of

Ontario as well.

ASSISTANCE TO FARMERS

Mr. Lorenzo Berardinetti (Scarborough Southwest): I have a petition. It was prepared by Sonny Sansone, who is a resident in my riding. He has

several signatures here. The petition is addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario and reads as follows:

"Whereas Ontario farmers are facing difficulties in earning their living and supporting their families;

"Whereas urban residents, such as those in Toronto, count on a reliable food supply from Ontario farmers; and

"Whereas farming is an integral part of the Ontario economy;

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

"To ensure that Ontario farmers are supported so that all residents can count on a reliable, well-priced, safe food supply for all Ontario residents."

I agree with this petition, affix my signature to it and hand it to page Jordan.

CURRICULUM

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): I have a petition to do with grade 12 mathematics curriculum changes from students from the Muskoka

area.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Ministry of Education plans to remove the study of derivatives from the grade 12 mathematics curriculum; and

"Whereas the grade 12 university preparation course Advanced Functions and Introductory Calculus is designed for students intending to study university

programs that will involve calculus; and

"Whereas the course currently provides an introduction to the fundamental concepts of calculus, which are also required in grade 12 physics; and

"Whereas it contains three strands: advanced functions, in which students explore the properties and applications of polynomial, exponential and logarithmic

functions; underlying concepts of calculus, in which students develop an understanding of the basic concepts of calculus by analyzing the rates of change involved in applications; and derivatives

and applications, in which students develop, consolidate and apply to graphing and problem-solving the rules and properties of differentiation; and

"Whereas all of these strands are requirements for most university programs, and to remove any of them from the high school curriculum will leave the students

of Ontario at a disadvantage when compared to the students from other provinces;

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

"To ensure that the Ministry of Education continues to retain all parts of the current grade 12 mathematics curriculum and stops making changes that put the

future careers of Ontario students at risk."

I support this petition.

GO TRANSIT TUNNEL

Mr. Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): I hope you will be patient with this petition, because I keep getting them. It's about the dilapidated bridge

on St. Clair Avenue West and Old Weston Road. The petition is to the Parliament of Ontario, the minister of infrastructure services and the Minister of Transportation. It reads as follows:

"Whereas GO Transit is presently planning to tunnel an area just south of St. Clair Avenue West and west of Old Weston Road, making it easier for GO trains to

pass a major rail crossing;

"Whereas TTC is presently planning a TTC right-of-way along all of St. Clair Avenue West, including the bottleneck caused by the dilapidated St. Clair-Old

Weston Road bridge;

"Whereas this bridge (underpass) will be: (1) too narrow for the planned TTC right-of-way, since it will leave only one lane for traffic; (2) it is not safe

for pedestrians (it's about 50 metres long). It's dark and slopes on both east and west sides creating high banks for 300 metres; and (3) it creates a divide, a no man's land, between Old Weston

Road and Keele Street. (This was acceptable when the area consisted entirely of slaughterhouses, but now the area has 900 new homes);

"Therefore we, the undersigned, demand that GO Transit extend the tunnel beyond St. Clair Avenue West so that trains will pass under St. Clair Avenue West,

thus eliminating this eyesore of a bridge with its high banks and blank walls. Instead it will create a dynamic, revitalized community enhanced by a beautiful continuous cityscape with easy traffic

flow."

Since I'm in full agreement with this petition, I'm delighted to sign it.

PUBLIC LIBRARIES

Mr. Cameron Jackson (Burlington): I have a petition to the Legislature of the province of Ontario:

"Whereas the $700,000 cut in funding to the Ontario Library Service (OLS) budget will have a significant impact on the delivery of public library service

across the province in areas such as:

" -- reductions in the frequency of inter-library loan deliveries;

" -- reductions in SOLS' consultation services and the elimination of a number of staff positions;

" -- the elimination of province-wide research on library and socio-demographic trends that all libraries need for their own planning;

" -- the reduction of consortia/charitable purchasing, a service that provides economies-of-scale discounts to libraries on a variety of goods and services;

and

" -- a reduction in the amount of material that is translated for OLS French-language clients;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislature of Ontario as follows:

"To restore funding to the Ontario Library Service (OLS) in order to signal support for the Ontario public library system."

This particular petition has my support and signature because of the major expansion of the library system in the city of Burlington.

FIREARMS SAFETY

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): I have a petition to do with hunter safety courses, and it says:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the practical examination for the handling of firearms is a valuable component of the hunter safety course; and

"Whereas hunters and safety instructors have grave concerns about the removal of the practical examination for handling firearms;

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

"That the practical examination of the handling of firearms continue to form part of the hunter education safety course for Ontarians."

ORDERS OF THE DAY

REPORT, INTEGRITY COMMISSIONER

Resuming the debate adjourned on February 16, 2006, on the motion that the Legislative Assembly adopt the report of the Integrity Commissioner dated January 4,

2006, and approve the recommendation contained therein.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): The Chair recognizes the member for Trinity-Spadina.

Mr. Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): I want to welcome the citizens of Ontario to this debate. We're on live. It's 10 to 4 on Monday. We're

debating the report of the Honourable Coulter A. Osborne, the Integrity Commissioner, regarding the Honourable Harinder Takhar, Minister of Transportation and member for Mississauga Centre.

I want to, for the record, try to talk about what we're debating so that those of you who are watching have a better sense of the issue.

You should be reminded that the Minister of Transportation had a controlling share interest in the Chalmers Group, and because he had become a minister, that

interest was held in management trust, of which Joseph Jeyanayangam is the Chalmers CFO and is the trustee.

The complaint has to do with the minister having gone on a number of occasions to the Chalmers Group location: on April 29, 2005, including other occasions,

December 17, 2004, which we argue is in breach of the integrity act. It is also known that there is undisputed evidence that Chalmers provided a parking place at its offices for the minister,

something that may be considered irrelevant or minor by some but something we consider to be a problem, including the fact that the individual's shares are in trust to Joseph Jeyanayangam, who is

the treasurer of the minister's riding association. So we think there's a great deal of conflict in what the minister has been involved in, and that is what we are debating.

I will read the

preamble of the integrity act, which states the following: "Members are expected to perform their duties of office and arrange their private

affairs in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity of each member, maintains the assembly's dignity and justifies the respect in which society holds the assembly and its members."

It says as well, "Members are expected to act with integrity and impartiality that will bear the closest scrutiny." We believe the act has been violated by Mr. Harinder Takhar, the Minister of

Transportation. I will go on to show how, based on the evidence provided by the Integrity Commissioner, he has violated the act.

Page 10 of the integrity report: "In his response to the substance of the allegations the minister asserted that in the spring of 2005 he and his wife faced

the prospect of paying for their younger daughter's university education starting in September 2005. The minister stated that because of difficulties in arranging a time for discussion about

university-related matters he and his wife decided to meet at Chalmers on a workday when both of them were free. As to Mr. Jeyanayangam's attendance at the meeting, through his counsel, the

minister stated:

"`It was also decided, at the time that the meeting was being set up, that'" -- I'm having difficulty with his name; I hope I pronounce it correctly -- "`Mr.

Jeyanayangam ... would be asked to attend, since he was in control of the assets from which the education would be paid for.'"

Mr. Peter Fonseca (Mississauga East): Jeyanayangam.

Mr. Marchese: Those of you who can correct me, please do so. It's a serious matter for me in terms of trying to pronounce it correctly.

The fact that the minister met at the Chalmers company is a serious breach. It's a serious matter that the minister ought to have known would cause a serious

problem to him, to his office, to his ministry, to his government, yet he disregarded all the things that he as a minister ought to have known. The fact that he argues he could not find time to

meet at home is incredulous to some, but I suspect unbelievable to most. Most of us who have spouses see each other on a regular basis, meet with each other on a regular basis, find lots of time to

agree on things, disagree on things, debate things that we may or may not agree on, but we do find the time. It's inconceivable to me that someone's defence would be that the two of them simply

could not find the time to meet to discuss a matter having to do with their daughter, who purportedly is to be sent away or wants to be sent away to Britain or Scotland for her education. It's a

simple issue in my mind. It doesn't require a whole lot of time. Having been a minister, I can tell you, yes, ministers are busy, but we do have time to talk about serious issues with our partners

or spouses at home, at any time of the week, but especially on a Friday or a Saturday or indeed on a Sunday. And if we can't find the time to do that, we are in serious trouble as human beings.

It is unbelievable and inconceivable to me that the argument could be made by the minister or the spouse that they couldn't find the time. Most Ontarians would

find that very hard to believe. So the defence that they couldn't find the time and they had to go to the corporation, the company -- the place where he should not be found is the only location

where he and the spouse and the treasurer of his riding asso