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

April 28, 2004

38th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2004-Apr-28 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Wednesday 28 April 2004 Mercredi 28 avril 2004

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

SCHOOL TRANSPORTATION FUNDING

TOURISM IN CHATHAM-KENT-ESSEX

DENISE HOUSE

MISSION BAPTIST CHURCH

ONTARIO SINGS

MISSION PÉROU

WATER EXTRACTION

CHRONIC OBSTRUCTIVE

PULMONARY DISEASE

PREMIER'S RECORD

VISITORS

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE

ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

EDIBLE OIL PRODUCTS REPEAL DATE AMENDMENT ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004

MODIFIANT LA DATE D'ABROGATION

DE LA

LOI SUR LES PRODUITS

OLÉAGINEUX COMESTIBLES

ANTI-SPAM ACT, 2004 /

LOI ANTI-POURRIEL DE 2004

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

EDIBLE OIL PRODUCTS

DEFERRED VOTES

GREENBELT PROTECTION ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 SUR LA PROTECTION

DE LA CEINTURE DE VERDURE

WORKERS' MEMORIAL DAY

ORAL QUESTIONS

USER FEES

LIBERAL CAMPAIGN PROMISES

STEEL INDUSTRY

TAXATION

FOREST INDUSTRY

CITIZENS' DIALOGUE

ON BUDGET STRATEGY

TENDER FRUIT INDUSTRY

STEEL INDUSTRY

TAXATION

SKILLS TRAINING

HAMILTON ECONOMY

WELFARE REFORM

WORKPLACE SAFETY

TUBERCULOSIS

PETITIONS

TAXATION

IMMIGRANTS' SKILLS

PROPERTY TAXATION

PHYSIOTHERAPY SERVICES

UNIVERSITY AND COLLEGE FUNDING

WATER QUALITY

TILLSONBURG DISTRICT

MEMORIAL HOSPITAL

TAXATION

OAK RIDGES MORAINE

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

TAXATION

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

PROVINCIAL DEFICIT

PROPERTY TAXATION

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

ADOPTION DISCLOSURE

ORDERS OF THE DAY

ADAMS MINE LAKE ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004

SUR LE LAC DE LA MINE ADAMS

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

SCHOOL TRANSPORTATION FUNDING

Mr John Yakabuski (Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke): I rise today to draw to the attention of the Minister of Education the issue of school

transportation funding; more specifically, rural school transportation funding. School boards in Renfrew county face a transportation deficit well in excess of $1 million, despite having one of the

highest rates of shared services in the province. Enrolment may decline, but roads don't get any shorter.

While the Liberal government sets in motion its ill-conceived $1.4-billion plan to cap class sizes, we have to wonder if they plan to achieve this by simply

seeing that our children don't have a ride to school. The Rozanski report calls for changes to school transportation funding. The government must put a new funding formula in place now in the

upcoming budget. Without it, boards will be faced with further cuts to educational programs within the schools.

As Renfrew County District School Board chair Roy Reiche stated in a recent letter to the Premier, copied to the minister, "The Renfrew County District School

Board has demonstrated its commitment to students in the tough choices it has made in the past. However, it is becoming increasingly difficult to meet the standards of program delivery within the

current financial pressures."

This government has thus far demonstrated a total lack of interest toward rural Ontarians and the issues facing them. I challenge it to do better. It can start

right now.

TOURISM IN CHATHAM-KENT-ESSEX

Mr Pat Hoy (Chatham-Kent Essex): I'm pleased that our government announced $30 million in new funding to market the province and revitalize the

tourism industry in Ontario. With the tourism season underway, I invite everyone to Chatham-Kent-Essex this summer. Chatham-Kent's many beaches, campgrounds, golf courses and historical sites

beckon tourists to our natural beauty and friendly atmosphere.

The RM Classic Car Exhibit showcases classic automobiles and fine sports cars. You can also watch master craftspeople work on award-winning restorations.

Boating, camping, birdwatching and fishing lure vacationers to enjoy the unspoiled natural beauty of Rondeau and Wheatley provincial parks. You can also follow the path of the Underground Railroad,

which brought settlers out of slavery in the United States to new freedom here in Canada.

In Essex, Leamington is known as Ontario's southernmost recreational playground, and it is North America's newest scuba diving centre. A shipwreck diving area

offers fascinating insights to the rich nautical history of our area. Each summer, Leamington's municipal marina draws thousands of boaters and tourists. Naturalists from around the world come to

witness the spectacular migration of birds and butterflies. Local winery and greenhouse tours are also available. Leamington is Canada's tomato capital. The world-famous tomato stomp contest is a

must-see for everyone on August 20 and 22.

Whether you enjoy history, shopping, swimming, scuba diving, windsurfing, boating or just a day at the beach, Chatham-Kent Essex is the place to be this

summer.

DENISE HOUSE

Mr Jerry J. Ouellette (Oshawa): It's with great pride that I rise today to congratulate Denise House on 20 years of success. The Denise House

women's shelter and support services in my riding of Oshawa provide a safe and protected environment for women and children in abusive relationships.

The shelter was named to establish a permanent memorial to ex-president Denise Penny, who was a murder victim at the hands of her abusive husband.

The shelter has many skilled and dedicated volunteers and staff who provide counselling and support to the women and their children while they reside at the

shelter, as well as continued assistance for ex-residents.

Denise House originally opened in 1984 with 10 beds and can now accommodate 27 women and children. The shelter has gained recognition as a valued service and

support network for women seeking safe accommodations.

The numerous invitations for speaking engagements and information sessions from Denise House suggest that community members recognize the need to commit

themselves to living lives that no longer tolerate violence. Through this service for the past 20 years, Denise House has maintained its original vision of enabling women to create and nurture

their lives free from violence. I ask all members to join me in congratulating Denise House on 20 years of service.

MISSION BAPTIST CHURCH

Ms Judy Marsales (Hamilton West): I'm pleased to stand in the House today to congratulate Mission Baptist Church in west Hamilton on its 50th

anniversary. Week-long celebrations began on April 22 and continued through to April 25, and included several interesting events to celebrate the heritage of the church. Their anniversary theme,

"One Year of Jubilee -- Celebrating the Past -- Anticipating the Future," is a great symbol of hope.

Mission Baptist Church was founded on March 19, 1954, with only 18 charter members. The congregation at that time was predominantly German. They have been in the

same location at 100 North Oval in west Hamilton since the very day this same group of people purchased a small chapel that was built on the property in 1927 on that site. That same chapel has been

enlarged three times since that time to its present capacity of 450. The current congregation numbers 200. Since the church's inception, seven senior ministers have served the congregation.

I was invited to attend the 50th anniversary celebration last Sunday, April 25, and was immediately made to feel comfortable and welcome. The choir was

absolutely wonderful, and the congregational singing was nothing short of amazing. Reverend Reda is very proud of his parishioners and the tremendous sense of unity that they bring to their members

both past and present.

I'm pleased to have had the opportunity to celebrate this joyous event and to share more of the fine history of Hamilton and this congregation with this

assembly.

ONTARIO SINGS

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): It is my pleasure today to announce that on Saturday, May 1, at 7:30 pm, 10 choirs located throughout the

province will come together and unite their voices for a landmark simultaneous concert as part of the first-ever Ontario Sings event.

The 10 communities that will be participating in Ontario Sings are Barrie, Belleville, Guelph, Durham region, Hamilton, Ottawa, Kincardine, Sault Ste Marie,

Thunder Bay and Toronto. They would like to encourage citizens all across the province to come out and support the participating choirs at their concerts. This is the first-ever here, but it's

going to become an annual celebration -- Ontario Sings. It has a mission to enhance the cultural and economic well-being of communities in Ontario through the magic of youth choral singing.

Mr Speaker, you can join me at noon today, along with others -- including MPP Wayne Arthurs, because his choir was here as well -- to hear some songs: a little

sample from the Young Singers of Durham region, and Toronto's own from my riding of Toronto-Danforth, the Riverdale Youth Singers. They are with us in the gallery today. I have to tell you that the

Riverdale Youth Singers sang beautifully, as did the other group. The Riverdale Youth Singers will be singing in St Patrick's Presbyterian, I believe, on Saturday night. I will be there and I

encourage everybody to come out and hear these great singers all across the province on Saturday.

MISSION PÉROU

M. Jean-Marc Lalonde (Glengarry-Prescott-Russell): Il me fait grandement plaisir de partager avec mes collègues de l'Assemblée

législative le projet Mission Pérou. Ce projet était conçu en 1993 en partenariat avec le village d'Indiana au Pérou, au coeur de la jungle amazonienne. Cette année je

suis fier que ce projet était repris par un groupe de 14 personnes de la communauté de Clarence-Rockland dans ma circonscription.

Les participants vivront trois semaines, au mois d'août prochain, dans des familles d'accueil. Même si le but premier de leur séjour est

d'agrandir un système d'aqueduc, ce projet permettra aux jeunes d'acquérir des valeurs humaines, telles que la sensibilisation à la pauvreté et l'ouverture d'esprit.

Le groupe a tout un défi à relever. Le groupe Mission Pérou tiendra un bercethon cette fin de semaine à l'aréna Jean-Marc Lalonde à

Rockland. Ceci étant dit, je me joindrai aux personnalités de la région qui tenteront de se bercer pendant 30 heures consécutives cette fin de semaine.

Finalement, permettez-moi de partager avec mes collègues de l'Assemblée législative les noms des participants de Mission Pérou : Denis

Lalonde, organisateur en chef; de l'Université d'Ottawa, Joëlle Séguin et Monique Lefebvre; et de l'école secondaire l'Escale de Rockland, Marie-Pier Lalonde, Marie-Claude

Bellemare, Yanick Bernard, Mélanie Boyle, Mélanie Brunet, Gabriel Huppé, Dominik Legault, Catherine Séguin, Emmanuelle Séguin, Julie Séguin et Mariève

Vaillancourt.

J'aimerais féliciter le groupe Mission Pérou. Bonne chance, bon voyage, et bon retour, chers amis de chez nous.

WATER EXTRACTION

Mr Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): I stand today to raise the concerns of the bottled water industry of Ontario. I recently received a letter

from the Muskoka Springs Natural Spring Water company, a business located in the town of Gravenhurst in my beautiful riding of Perry Sound-Muskoka. It employs 20 people and meets and exceeds all

government regulations governing product quality, labelling and manufacturing practices. Yet they, like water bottling companies all over this province, are being singled out to pay a water-taking

fee to cover source protection costs.

Now let me be clear: The Canadian Bottled Water Association believes in the importance of water source protection. In fact, they support it very strongly. Their

concern stems from the fact that they are being expected to cover this cost unequally. The CBWA believes that the MOE must consider its water protection policies on the basis of scientific data,

while bearing in mind the economic impact.

Bottled water is a very high-value-added industry and is one of, if not the most efficient and clean users of water in Ontario. Over 97% of the water taken is

used for human consumption. It is an industry where profit margins are measured in fractions of a cent. Bottled water counts for less than 0.2% of the water taken in Ontario each year.

Given this incredibly small portion of water taken in Ontario, it seems unfair to be singling them out to foot the bill. A water-taking fee like that proposed by

the government could have devastating effects on businesses all over the province. I ask that the government listen to the concerns raised by the Canadian Bottled Water Association.

CHRONIC OBSTRUCTIVE

PULMONARY DISEASE

Mr Shafiq Qaadri (Etobicoke North): I rise as a member of this Legislature, as well as a physician, to speak about chronic obstructive pulmonary

disease, known as COPD, specifically the conditions emphysema and chronic bronchitis.

There are many reasons to be concerned. COPD is one of the few leading causes of death on the rise, soon to be the third leading cause of death by the year 2020.

Many of us know people with COPD. People with this disease, for example, have difficulty with simple tasks like walking upstairs, throwing a ball to a grandchild or even talking, because they

struggle for every breath. Having COPD is like breathing through a straw.

There are 270,000 COPD patients in Ontario alone, and an equal number remain undiagnosed. Every day, 115 people with COPD are admitted to Ontario hospitals. It

is the fifth-ranking major cause of hospitalization. There is no cure for COPD, but it can be managed. Disease education, pulmonary rehabilitation, home oxygen and inhaled medications can improve

the quality of life for our patients, keeping them out of emergency departments.

I invite all members of the House to attend an Ontario Lung Association COPD event, many members of which are represented today in the visitors' gallery. This

will be taking place in committee room 228 from 5 pm to 7 pm.

PREMIER'S RECORD

Mr Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): I rise in the House today to congratulate our Premier, Dalton McGuinty. This morning, the Premier was named

"tool of the day" by John Derringer at Toronto's famous radio station Q107. What makes this award so remarkable is that it's not the first time Dalton has won this prestigious award. This time

Ql07's John Derringer recognized the Premier for his ability to create tax increases that manage to affect every Ontarian in some way or another. I can't help but remember the commercial that aired

during the election. It's the one where Dalton McGuinty promised millions of people over and over again, "I will not raise your taxes." But now, McGuinty is making a total mockery out of the

democratic process by pretending that the election never happened. Ontarians are on to this guy. Ontarians are asking, why is the Premier breaking so many promises?

We all know that the Liberals won a comfortable majority on October 2, yet, in spite of their victory, the McGuinty Liberals hired a consulting firm to conduct

focus groups in six locations across the province. In total, only about 250 people were asked to react to the list provided by the McGuinty government. Over the last couple of days, it has become

increasingly apparent that the pre-programmed opinions of these 250 people have more value than the results of the free vote which represented 12 million people in the province. I say to the

Premier, if the election was meaningless, then maybe that's why you are treating the promises you made during the election as meaningless.

Congratulations to Q107 and their ability to choose recipients of their prestigious award.

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I want to take this opportunity to correct the record and tell you that

the Riverdale Youth choir is singing at St Johns Presbyterian Church at 415 Danforth on Saturday night at 7.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): That point of order was good information.

VISITORS

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): In the east gallery is Gurbans S. Sobti, adviser to the Consulate General of Canada in India, and Damanbir

Singh Jaspal, principal secretary to the government of Punjab. We all welcome you.

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE

ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): I beg to inform the House that today the Clerk received the report on intended appointments dated April 28,

2004, of the standing committee on government agencies. Pursuant to standing order 106(e)9, the report is deemed to be adopted by the House.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

EDIBLE OIL PRODUCTS REPEAL DATE AMENDMENT ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004

MODIFIANT LA DATE D'ABROGATION

DE LA

LOI SUR LES PRODUITS

OLÉAGINEUX COMESTIBLES

Mr Peters moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 68,

An Act to amend the repeal date of the Edible Oil Products Act / Projet de loi 68, Loi modifiant la date d'abrogation de la

Loi sur les produits

oléagineux comestibles.

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

Hon Steve Peters (Minister of Agriculture and Food): I will defer my comments to ministerial statements.

ANTI-SPAM ACT, 2004 /

LOI ANTI-POURRIEL DE 2004

Ms Marsales moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 69,

An Act to prevent unsolicited messages on the Internet / Projet de loi 69, Loi visant à empêcher la diffusion sur Internet de messages

non sollicités.

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

Ms Judy Marsales (Hamilton West): The bill provides for initiatives to control spam on the Internet. Sections 2 and 3 require the Minister of

Consumer and Business Services to initiate consultations with other governments and with the Canadian Association of Internet Providers relating to the control of spam.

Section 4 of the bill provides that any person may give notice to the minister or the body to which the minister delegates responsibility that they wish to be on

a no-spam list, and persons sending spam must first check to see if the address is on the no-spam list. The list will not be a public document, and the minister will provide only negative

information from it; for example, that an address is not on the list.

Section 9 of the bill provides that wherever a message is initiated, if it is received by a person in Ontario, it is deemed to have been sent to that person, and

the act of sending it is deemed to have been carried out in Ontario.

The bill provides for offences and punishments that are more severe in respect of messages that involve pornography, explicit sexual activity or attempted fraud,

or that target children as its receivers. It also provides a cause for civil action in nuisance for sending excessive spam and deems damage to have been caused if the volume is sufficient to cause

inconvenience.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

EDIBLE OIL PRODUCTS

Hon Steve Peters (Minister of Agriculture and Food): Today I am introducing a bill that will support this government as it continues to

deliver real, positive change to make Ontario strong, healthy and prosperous. In December 2002, as a member of the opposition, I expressed a great deal of concern regarding a clause of the Food

Safety and Quality Act, 2001, that allowed for the repeal of the Edible Oil Products Act on June 1, 2003.

We were concerned after lengthy discussions with dairy stakeholders, who were troubled because existing federal regulations were not adequate to protect

consumers from fraud and mislabelling of non-dairy products that might resemble dairy products. Because of these valid concerns, a bill was passed in December 2002 that delayed the repeal date of

the Edible Oils Product Act to 2004.

The future repeal of the EOPA will allow for the manufacture and sale of a wide range of new foods in Ontario that are already available elsewhere in Canada.

We do look forward to that. But first we must be confident that our consumers will be protected from fraud and mislabelling of products.

In my current role as Minister of Agriculture and Food, I know my ministry is working with the federal government and industry stakeholders to ensure that

federal regulations will protect consumers. It has, however, become clear that more work needs to be done. For this reason, I'm introducing a bill that, if passed, would amend the Food Safety and

Quality Act, 2001, to allow for a further delay in the repeal of the Edible Oil Products Act.

OMAF's priority is to ensure that consumers are protected against fraud and are well informed about the products they buy and consume. We believe that a strong

federal regulatory framework that focuses on fraud prevention and ensures that consumers have the product information they need to make informed choices is the best approach. In our view, the

regulatory framework should apply equally to all foods. By moving the repeal deadline to January 2005, all industry stakeholders will have the necessary time to ensure that regulations are in place

to adequately protect both consumers and the dairy and edible oil industries.

Notwithstanding the extension of the repeal of the Edible Oil Products Act, Ontario remains committed to the principle of consumer choice in the marketplace

and to breaking down interprovincial trade barriers with respect to edible oils and other products. For this reason, we are also proposing regulatory changes over the next few weeks under the

Edible Oil Products Act. The proposed changes would allow some edible-oil-based products on the market prior to the repeal of the act; for example, soy- and canola-oil-based alternatives to cheese

made with a limited amount of milk protein. In addition, the Ontario Farm Products Marketing Commission will be considering regulatory changes to the Milk Act to allow for a limited number of

specific products under the Milk Act, such as milk beverages with added omega-3 fatty acids.

The Ministry of Agriculture and Food will coordinate the enforcement of new products with the Canadian Food Inspection Agency to ensure adequate labelling and

advertising, and the ministry will be actively enforcing the placement and labelling requirements of the Edible Oil Products Act for as long as this legislation remains in place.

A delay in the repeal date of the Edible Oil Products Act will allow for the phasing in of edible oil products to the market and will set the stage for orderly

and efficient deregulation of these products.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Responses?

Mr Ernie Hardeman (Oxford): I rise today to speak to the introduction of the bill dealing with the edible oil act. I want to commend the

minister for bringing this legislation forward. In fairness, a similar piece of legislation was brought forward a year ago, with the support of the present minister when he was in opposition,

because of the need to do exactly what he put forward in his statement: to protect our dairy industry and to protect our consumers from fraud on the store shelves. This bill is an extension of the

extension that was put in a year ago.

The reason I bring that up is that I think it's so important to recognize that a lot of work needs to be done to protect the products on store shelves, to make

sure that when someone goes into a store to buy a container that has "milk" on it, regardless of whether it has another descriptive term, it does not describe something else that in fact is not

milk, such as putting something on the store shelf saying "soy milk." I think we need some regulatory regime in place to make sure that when people are buying dairy products, that's in fact what

they're buying. Again, I want to commend the minister for introducing it and for supporting the same type of bill a year ago.

I do have some concerns with the bill, and they have to do with the timelines. We went through this a year ago, and one of the conditions was that both the

grain and oilseed industry and the dairy industry would work together with the federal and provincial governments to put the framework in place for a national code for the labelling of these

products. Obviously, a year later, that has not yet happened and, as the minister mentioned, much more work needs to be done. I'm not sure that six months is sufficient time in which to do that,

but again it's six months more than presently exists, so I commend the minister for bringing that forward.

As I said, it's important to recognize that we need to protect consumers for the products they are buying, making sure the label says what it is they're

getting. At the same time, we also need to make sure that these products are available to all consumers and that you don't have to buy dairy products; you can buy a mixture of products or other

products as you deem appropriate. There are people in our society who cannot consume dairy products, but they want the other products on store shelves.

In the minister's statement he speaks to making regulatory changes. I guess it's still left open as to what those regulatory changes will be, that they are not

to such an extent that they negate the edible oils act altogether. We'll be looking forward to making sure that, as those regulations are coming forward, they just do what the minister suggested

they are going to do and not go well beyond that to negate the edible oils act.

One other concern I have in the minister's statement was that he was going to enforce the edible oils act during the period we're putting this in place, the

phasing in. The concern is, if it's only enforcing those products that are going to be allowed through regulation which are presently not allowed, that's one thing, but if we're going to enforce

the edible oils act in its entirety, there are many places and many stores that have these products on their shelves today. I'm not sure the minister has pointed out where he's going to get the

enforcement capabilities in order to make sure none of that is happening in the next six months, nor am I sure the minister intends or would want to do that.

Having said that, I just want to very quickly go back to the start of the statement, that these are positive changes for a strong, healthy and positive

Ontario. I'm pleased to hear that, but there were many things the minister has done in the past that were not doing that, such as turning a public inquiry into a public review on meat inspection,

turning meat inspection over so that in fact we could have no meat inspection if there was a work stoppage in our society through contract negotiations, and turning nutrient management over to the

Ministry of the Environment so it will not have any agriculture control over it or responsibility for it.

These were not positive changes for my farm community. I just want to point out that, though we totally agree with this being brought forward today, there are

some other things where he has some work to do yet in order to give farmers what they had before this minister became Minister of Agriculture.

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): I want to thank the ministry staff for the briefing they gave me on behalf of the New Democrats here at

Queen's Park at noontime, and I want to thank the minister for giving me a copy of the bill prior to introducing it today for first reading.

The bill, as the minister indicates, is a very simple one. It effectively is one sentence, amending the Food Safety and Quality Act of 2001 to extend the date

for the repeal of the Edible Oil Products Act from June 1, 2004, to January 1, 2005.

Having received a copy of the bill and having had a chance to examine it and determine that it does what we support it doing, and having talked to advocates

for Ontario's dairy farmers, I can tell you that members of the New Democratic Party will be agreeable to speedy passage of this bill; in fact, we will ensure that that happens today.

The fear, of course, is that the June 1 date occurs before the bill is passed and then an even greater mess than was originally anticipated when the Tories

mishandled this matter is repeated by this government.

I was drawn into the debate by happenstance. I was subbing for our leader, Howard Hampton, who was on the committee, doing the work and very dedicated to this

issue, and found myself intrigued by the revelations being made by Ontario dairy farmers.

Look, down where I come from is like in northern Ontario: Dairy farmers are small, mom-and-pop operations still. By and large, it's people who work very hard,

very committed, in many instances multi-generational, great stewards of their land and working some years for negative incomes. The life of a farmer is not a happy one in this province, in this

country. It's an incredible amount of hard work and commitment to that industry, to that lifestyle, with dedication, skill and talent on the part of those people.

We learned in that committee that dairy products are being pushed aside by edible oil food products that are masquerading as cheeses, milks, yoghurts and other

types of dairy products. Quite frankly, it's criminal to pass off something that is the furthest thing in the world from dairy as a dairy product, as something that came from the hard work and

management of hard-working dairy farmers. New Democrats were, and continue to be, more than eager to see dairy farmers and their product protected.

However, take a look at the history here. The province, this government, is telling us that they're counting on the feds to create regulations that are going

to protect dairy products and prevent imposters from the edible oil industry from taking shelf space away from those dairy products. But the fact is that the feds have not been forthcoming with

that regulation. Understand that once the Edible Oil Products Act is repealed, then the province's regulation of those goods is eliminated. Getting that back on to the burner is going to be a

feckless endeavour, to be most conservative about its estimation of success.

I'm concerned because January 1, of course, when the House is not going to be sitting, could well come around without there having been a satisfactory

regulatory regime prepared by the federal government. Once January 1 comes with this bill, all the leverage is gone; it's over. The game is over. Whatever the feds produce is what we live with and

what our dairy farmers live with. Understand that the competitors of dairy farmers are not small operators; they're big corporate entities. Unilever was one of the players in that committee room

trying to argue the point for edible oil products masquerading as dairy products. I had no time for them, quite frankly. I listened carefully to what they said but I had no time for their argument.

Their argument was without substance. But Unilever and their ilk, as corporate entities with huge resources, have incredible clout with the federal Liberal government -- in the back pocket of the

big, corporate personality. You know that. My Liberal colleagues here in the rump know that full well.

My fear is that the Unilevers can get to the minister's counterpart in Ottawa. My fear is that the Unilevers can use this but brief delay in the repeal as an

opportunity to slide their agenda right through. I say to you that a far more effective proposal would have been to repeal the repeal and allow the Edible Oil Products Act to remain until an

adequate regulatory regime was established. Having said that, you can bet your boots that people will be watching this government closely to ensure that January 1 doesn't come by without adequate

protection for dairy farmers.

DEFERRED VOTES

GREENBELT PROTECTION ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 SUR LA PROTECTION

DE LA CEINTURE DE VERDURE

Deferred vote on the motion for second reading of Bill 27,

An Act to establish a greenbelt study area and to amend the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act,

2001 / Projet de loi 27, Loi établissant une zone d'étude de la ceinture de verdure et modifiant la Loi de 2001 sur la conservation de la moraine d'Oak Ridges.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): We have a deferred vote on the motion for second reading of Bill 27,

An Act to establish a greenbelt study

area and to amend the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act, 2001.

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

The division bells rang from 1408 to 1413.

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

Ayes

Arthurs, Wayne

Bartolucci, Rick

Bentley, Christopher

Berardinetti, Lorenzo

Bisson, Gilles

Bountrogianni, Marie

Broten, Laurel C.

Bryant, Michael

Cansfield, Donna H.

Caplan, David

Chambers, Mary Anne V.

Churley, Marilyn

Colle, Mike

Cordiano, Joseph

Craitor, Kim

Crozier, Bruce

Delaney, Bob

Dhillon, Vic

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duguid, Brad

Duncan, Dwight

Flynn, Kevin Daniel

Fonseca, Peter

Gerretsen, John

Hoy, Pat

Jeffrey, Linda

Kennedy, Gerard

Kwinter, Monte

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Levac, Dave

Marchese, Rosario

Marsales, Judy

Mauro, Bill

McMeekin, Ted

McNeely, Phil

Meilleur, Madeleine

Milloy, John

Mitchell, Carol

Mossop, Jennifer F.

Orazietti, David

Parsons, Ernie

Patten, Richard

Peters, Steve

Peterson, Tim

Phillips, Gerry

Prue, Michael

Pupatello, Sandra

Qaadri, Shafiq

Ramal, Khalil

Ramsay, David

Rinaldi, Lou

Sandals, Liz

Smitherman, George

Takhar, Harinder S.

Van Bommel, Maria

Watson, Jim

Wilkinson, John

Wong, Tony C.

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Zimmer, David

The Speaker: All those opposed, please rise.

Nays

Arnott, Ted

Baird, John R.

Barrett, Toby

Dunlop, Garfield

Eves, Ernie

Hardeman, Ernie

Hudak, Tim

Klees, Frank

Martiniuk, Gerry

Miller, Norm

Murdoch, Bill

O'Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Runciman, Robert W.

Scott, Laurie

Tascona, Joseph N.

Witmer, Elizabeth

Yakabuski, John

Clerk of the House (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 61; the nays are 18.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

Hon John Gerretsen (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, minister responsible for seniors): I move that the bill be referred to the

standing committee on general government.

The Speaker: The bill is accordingly referred.

WORKERS' MEMORIAL DAY

Hon Christopher Bentley (Minister of Labour): Mr Speaker, I understand we have unanimous consent for each party to speak for up to five

minutes on the International Day of Mourning.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Do we have unanimous consent? Agreed.

Hon Mr Bentley: Today is a day of mourning. It is the day when we honour and remember those who have died, been injured or become ill from

their work. Today is a special day for those we remember. But it is also a day like the rest, when mothers and fathers, sons and daughters get ready for work.

A special day when we remember the pain and suffering of those who have been injured, killed or become ill. A special day when we remember the hopes and

dreams, the promise of a future that will not now be realized.

A day like the rest: the alarm, the rush to eat; plans for the day are quickly made. Do the children need to get up yet, or is it too early? The quick hug

goodbye -- or maybe that was missed in the rush.

A special day when we remember the anguish of those who received the call about their loved ones or who saw them suffer from disease.

A day like any other, where almost 1,000 Ontarians will be injured in workplace accidents -- over 300,000 every year -- and others will contract occupational

disease that will not show up until years later. A day where someone might die of a workplace accident or occupational disease.

A special day where we stand silent and remember. We remember so others will not forget. We remember so others will learn. We remember so we all will succeed.

A day where we stand together and say, "No job is worth a life. No job is worth injury or illness."

How, then, do we honour the memory of those we remember? We honour them by refusing to forget. We honour them by pledging to do better. We honour them by using

the knowledge we already have to make our workplaces safer and healthier. We honour them by standing together, regardless of party or position, regardless of age or occupation, from every corner of

this province to say, "No more." We honour them by working together to prevent every accident, injury, illness and death in the workplace.

By honouring their memory in this way, we will be one step closer to the day when we can stand on the day of mourning and say, "We remember the fallen, but

over the past year there have been no new names to remember"; one step closer to a day, like all the others, when every mother and every father, every son and every daughter, returns from work

healthy and safe.

Mrs Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener-Waterloo): Today I join with my colleagues on all sides of the House to say on behalf of our party some words

concerning this, the International Day of Mourning. Today we have the opportunity to remember the many workers who have suffered injury or illness or lost their lives while on the job.

Today is a day when we are all reminded, and certainly there have been many examples given to us this past year, of the terrible human, social and economic

toll that workplace illnesses, injuries and fatalities can take. So today we join with the workers in this province, the employers and all the others to express our sincere condolences to the

families and to the friends of those killed or injured in the workplace. Indeed we extend our sympathy to the family and friends of the steelworker who I understand was killed on the job in Sault

Ste Marie yesterday.

Today is also an opportunity for us as legislators to reaffirm our shared commitment to the prevention of illness and injury and zero tolerance for fatalities,

for health and safety is not a partisan issue.

I have said this since I was Minister of Labour in 1995: It is a human issue and we all bear responsibility to move forward, to do what we can to prevent

illness, death and injury.

There are over 900 Canadians who die each year as a result of injury, illness and accidents in the workplace. So it is up to us to work together to ensure that

our workplaces are healthy and safe. It is important that people work together in partnerships. We need to continue to develop the health and safety programs and we need to continue to provide the

training that will prevent future illness, death and injury.

I know we have seen some improvements in recent years. However, there is still so much more to do. Education and preventive measures have begun to have a

positive impact, particularly on our younger workers. I can remember, as Minister of Labour, receiving a visit from Paul Kells, whose 19-year-old son had been killed in the workplace, and speaking

to him about his desire to set up a foundation that would prevent similar tragedies to the one his family had suffered. He set up the Safe Communities Foundation.

That's why we need to continue to stress the education measures, why we need to continue to stress the preventive measures. Health and safety must remain a

priority issue for us. We must increase our efforts. So on this day we, as legislators, have that opportunity to renew our personal commitment to the task of eliminating future death, illness and

injury, because one death or one injury or one illness will always be one too many.

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): New Democrats, with the bittersweet understanding that this is a day of celebrating the incredible sacrifice

of workers in the course of building this province and this country, and their deaths, historically and currently -- it's a tragedy that we have to use April 28 still. It's an opportunity to

indicate that while we mourn for the dead we have to commit ourselves to fighting for the living and that condolences, no matter how warm and genuine, are of cold comfort to the child whose father

or mother doesn't come home at 4 o'clock. They're of cold comfort to the spouse who is widowed. They're of cold comfort to the worker who is crippled and maimed in the workplace. They're of cold

comfort to worker after worker after worker who continues to be slaughtered, murdered, in our workplaces.

When we say we fight for the living, it means more than simply regretting the fact that workers die and are poisoned and are maimed. It means, for instance,

understanding that a unionized workplace is in and of itself a safer workplace. That means that we have to commit ourselves to the proposition that every worker in this province, in this country,

has a right to belong to a trade union and a right to freely, collectively bargain so they can make safer workplaces. That includes agricultural workers -- workers in one of the most dangerous

workplaces in this province.

If we're really going to mourn the dead, if we're really going to fight for the living and we're really going to show compassion, then we've got to understand

that the violence imposed upon workers isn't just physical, that it's the economic violence against a worker who is forced to work at minimum wage and for whom the concept of a 40-hour workweek is

alien because they work at two and three jobs -- the first one 30 hours, the second one 20, and the third one 18.

When we have debates about eliminating a retirement age of 65, we have to understand that the debate is really more about elderly workers having to continue

working because of the inadequacy of their pensions, not about their right to work; about elderly people -- our parents and our grandparents -- feeling compelled to work, being compelled to work

because their pensions, if they have one, have shrunk and because their savings have been eroded over the passage of even a few brief years.

If we're really going to mourn the dead, then we've got to fight and tell the Liberals in Ottawa to criminalize workplace slaughter and to criminalize

workplace poisonings. By God, let some CEOs and presidents and boards of directors of corporations go to jail instead of merely paying fines for slaughtering workers, and you'll start to see some

real incentive to create safer workplaces.

If we're really serious about mourning the dead, then we've got to ensure that every worker in this province has access to WSIB workers' comp. We've got to

bring the financial services sector into the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board regime. In communities like mine, where the largest single employer is a call centre -- at a financial institution,

the largest single employer in my community of Welland, not one of its employees is covered by workers' compensation. Can you understand the tragedy of that? Those workers suffer injuries too. I'll

tell you what those workers suffer. Many of them are women who, at the ages of 45 and 50, suffer crippling carpal tunnel syndrome, and not a penny of workers' comp are they entitled to, because

their employer is exempt from WSIB.

We've got a lot of work to do, and I say that mere words are of cold and little comfort. It's time for action. It's time to recognize that workers have to

acquire increasing control over their workplaces so that they can create the safety that the rush for profits will forever deny them.

Mr Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): It was my privilege to attend the Toronto day of mourning, as I have done for many years. It was held

today outside the offices of the Ontario Nurses' Association. That association, along with many other people, were there to mourn those who died during the recent SARS crisis.

Speaker after speaker spoke of the death of their colleagues, the stress on their families, the loss of income and the lack of safety guidelines. Mayor Miller,

who was there to speak on behalf of the city of Toronto, chillingly told the assembled multitude that this is the sixth straight year that deaths have gone up in Canada as a result of lack of

workers' safety, and there is much to mourn.

At the end, the people assembled agreed unanimously that we need to mourn the dead and fight for the living more than ever before. We really need to change the

laws so that the actual statistics go down and not up.

The Speaker: At this moment we will all stand for a moment of silence in respect.

The House observed a moment of silence.

ORAL QUESTIONS

USER FEES

Mr Ernie Eves (Leader of the Opposition): To the Acting Premier: I would like to talk about the subject of user fees and the principles of

your party and many of your members today. I'd like to point out that in your expensive focus group yesterday, you talked about imposing user fees on anything from hunting and fishing and vehicle

licences to the use of water and energy.

I would like to remind you that on May 10, 1996, your party put out a circular about user fees that said, "They're just silent killers hacking away at the

quality of life, city by city, town by town." And I'd like to remind you of your own quote in this House on June 25, 1996, where you said, "Somewhere instead we have to start drawing a basic line

under which we know the consequences of what happens when we impose ... user fees.... What we have then is a net reduction in the quality of life." You were speaking of the impact that user fees

have on our society. Do you still believe that today?

Hon Gerard Kennedy (Minister of Education): Thank you for the question. It is interesting, I want to tell you, that our party and our

government are not afraid to talk to people and actually listen to them; to receive the advice, have considered input and have it done in a non-partisan fashion. I see the looks of

non-comprehension over there that we well recognize.

But I want to say back to the Leader of the Opposition, he is talking to us about user fees, and he sat there and increased co-payments for seniors' drugs.

That's the same party that tried to sneak through long-term-care fee increases on a long weekend; that downloaded costs on to municipalities, causing property taxes to go up; that increased user

fees and made the 407 a never-ending enterprise.

What I would say to you is that we'll learn at the time of the budget how we have dealt with the advice coming from the public, but to hear this advice coming

from the Leader of the Opposition is passingly interesting at least.

Mr Eves: What we're talking about are the principles of yourself, your colleagues, your Premier and your party. We're trying to establish

whether you have any at all or whether you've thrown them all away.

Here are a few other quotes, one from Sandra Pupatello in this House on September 2, 1997: "You can call them taxes or you can call them user fees." There's no

difference. That's what she believed then; it would be interesting to see what she believes now. On September 25, 1997, Dwight Duncan, the now government House leader and Minister of Energy, said,

"There is only one taxpayer. The income taxpayer is the same as the property taxpayer and the same as the person who pays user fees."

Do you and your colleagues still believe that there shouldn't be increases in user fees anywhere, under any circumstances whatsoever? That's what you believed

in 1994, 1996 and 1997, and we can bring you right up to date in the next question, if you wish. Do you believe that, or do you have any principles at all over there?

Hon Mr Kennedy: I understand it's not just prurient interest, and I'm sure the Minister of Finance would like to talk to him about the budget

coming up.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Order. The minister made a full comment on the question already, so to pass it on --

Hon Mr Kennedy: I'm very happy to continue with that answer. The member opposite is asking us to indulge in budget speculation, and he may

wish to direct that to the Minister of Finance.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Would you allow him to respond?

Hon Mr Kennedy: What we have here is the opposition party up on their hind legs about user fees, which they made a constant source of grief to

the people in this province, user fees they imposed on seniors and on vulnerable people right across this province. To ask us where we stand -- we see where you stand. We see a lack of concern and

a lack of consideration for the fundamentals of what is happening in this province.

Mr Eves: As recently as December 2001, your Premier, Mr McGuinty, is quoted as saying, "I don't believe in user fees." Also, during an

interview with the Ottawa Citizen on May 14, 1999, he said that any Liberal government would pass taxpayer protection legislation within the first 100 days and that they would outlaw any increase

in existing taxes or new taxes or user fees without a referendum. The Liberal leader went on to say, when asked whether a Liberal government would be willing to run a deficit to preserve health and

education, that it would be up to the people of Ontario: "We can have a referendum." When can we expect the referendum?

Hon Mr Kennedy: What this House, the public of Ontario and the member opposite can expect is that this government will deal with his

$5.6-billion deficit and his $2.2-billion overhead. He can expect that we will deal with the future of this province in a much more circumspect and much more balanced fashion than the mess they

left behind. He can expect that on this side of the House our principles will include the views and the impact on every person in this province -- not just a select few; not just a few select

friends. In

summary, you can expect a radically different government than the one that went before.

LIBERAL CAMPAIGN PROMISES

Mr John R. Baird (Nepean-Carleton): Yesterday the people of Ontario saw through the transparent attempt of this government to manipulate

public opinion with their $200,000 untendered contract to a high-priced consultant from Ottawa.

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): Who's the question to?

Mr Baird: It's to the Acting Premier.

This focus group report was an attempt to justify your big spending and your big deficit.

There is another report you're not so proud of. It's a 60-page report, written by officials at the Ministry of Finance, that details the true cost of your

campaign promises. Minister, are you afraid to release this report or is it that you're afraid Ontario taxpayers will soon figure out that it's you and your irresponsible, reckless campaign

promises that are the real problem and the real reason behind Ontario's financial woes? Will you do that? Will you release the report?

Hon Gerard Kennedy (Minister of Education): I think the Minister of Finance is more than anxious to respond to that.

Hon Greg Sorbara (Minister of Finance): I will say to my friend from Nepean-Carleton, first of all, that apropos of the report of the Canadian

Policy Research Networks organization, it is one of the most respected organizations of its sort in the entire country. The president of the organization, Ms Judith Maxwell, is one of the

best-known and well-respected economists in this country. The fact that you --

Interjection.

Hon Mr Sorbara: I don't think he wants to hear the answer.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Order. The member from Nepean-Carleton, you're the one asking the question and you don't seem to be

interested at all --

Mr Robert W. Runciman (Leeds-Grenville): We want an answer.

The Speaker: If you're asking for an answer, then you have listen to the answer and stop having a discussion across.

Supplementary.

Mr Baird: Let's be honest: This government is running a closed shop; it's running a secretive, behind-the-scenes agenda that they're not

prepared to stand in this place and be accountable for. You're afraid the public will find out that the real reason behind Ontario's financial woes was the reckless and irresponsible promises made

by Dalton McGuinty when he was trolling for votes before last October's election.

What have you got to hide, and why won't you release this 60-page report? Why are you going to court to block the official opposition's access to this public

document produced with Ontario taxpayers' dollars? Why are you doing that, Minister, and will you release this report today?

Hon Mr Sorbara: Let's get back for the moment to the report that Judith Maxwell made public yesterday and deal with the other report in a

moment.

I will just tell him that within the context of pre-budget consultations, the expenditures we made were minimal in comparison to the quality of advice we

received, not only from Canadian Research Policy Networks but also from consultations I led as Minister of Finance. We visited some 14 communities -- three-hour consultations. One of the things

most noted by me was the number of people who came to the consultations and said things like, "It's the first time in years that I have been invited to this sort of consultation," this from a

teacher; from a nurse, "The first time since 1995 that we have been invited to these kinds of consultations." So let me just tell him that the advice we've received was --

The Speaker: Final supplementary.

Mr Baird: The fact remains, Minister, that we had a consultation with the people of Ontario. You didn't need to spend $200,000 on an

untendered contract to a Liberal-friendly firm in your boss's home riding to get that advice.

The worst idea contained in this bogus report is the idea of taxing lottery and gaming winnings. What a great idea. You'd have to change the slogan for Lotto

6/49 from "Imagine the Freedom" to "Imagine Dalton McGuinty's Hand Going Into Your Pocket for Another Tax Grab." That's what you'd have to do.

Minister, will you stand in your place and admit that this would be breaking faith with the commitment you made to the people of Ontario? Would you stand in

your place and rule out any new tax and any increases in taxes, just as you promised to do before last October's election? Will you do that, Minister?

Hon Mr Sorbara: Let's be fair to my friend and simply say that the expenditures in consultations that we incurred post-election would not have

been necessary had that party, when they were in government and before they dissolved Parliament, came clean with the people of Ontario. If they had said, "The finances of this province are in a

horrible mess. We want to be re-elected even though we've destroyed the revenue base of the province and let expenditures run wild," we wouldn't have needed those consultations.

I want to tell my friend --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. New question.

STEEL INDUSTRY

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Acting Premier. I was in Hamilton today talking with steelworkers. They are

worried about their jobs, the pensions of tens of thousands of workers and retired workers, and the future of their community.

Stelco is in financial trouble and they need the help of the provincial government, but your government and your Premier are showing no leadership at all. All

you've offered so far is excuses and your version of the blame game. Acting Premier, when is your government going to show some leadership to sustain the jobs and the pensions at Stelco and the

economic future of Hamilton?

Hon Gerard Kennedy (Minister of Education): Do you want to respond to that?

Hon Joseph Cordiano (Minister of Economic Development and Trade): I want to reassure the people of Hamilton that this government is going to

take every initiative we can to ensure that whatever happens on a going-forward basis is going to respect the fact that Hamilton is facing certain circumstances that are quite difficult with

respect to Stelco going through the CCAA process, which is in court right now.

We want to reassure the people of Hamilton, as the Premier has and as this government has, that we will take seriously the situation with Stelco, we'll take

seriously the situation in Hamilton, and we will endeavour to do what we have to do to make sure that situation is better in the future.

Mr Hampton: The fact is, so far your government has done nothing. I just want to give you some examples. I remember when Algoma Steel was in

trouble. I was part of a government that showed leadership and got people to the table to sustain jobs and pensions. Provincial Papers in Thunder Bay, Spruce Falls in Kapuskasing, de Havilland

Aircraft in Toronto, St Marys Paper in Sault Ste Marie: In all of those cases we showed leadership, so we were able to sustain jobs, pensions and economic activity.

So far, all I've heard from your Premier is an effort to engage in the blame game. So I put it to you again: When are you going to get to the table? When are

you going to show leadership? Are you going to do that soon, or are you going to continue to duck and try to play the blame game? When are you going to show leadership?

Hon Mr Cordiano: I want to make it clear to this House and remind members just what happened in the past, lest the member opposite have

amnesia now. It was your government in 1992, the Bob Rae government, that allowed for a contribution holiday on pensions, and that created the huge mess we have today at Stelco -- a huge mess. It

was that irresponsible move, way back in Bob Rae's government -- which, I remind the member, you were a part of. You were a cabinet minister in that government. It was that contribution holiday

which created this huge mess.

I say to the member, furthermore, that he doesn't care too much about steelworkers; he doesn't care too much about auto workers. As he said in a quote -- and I

quote from the Toronto Star, December 16, 2000. What did Howard Hampton have to say about steelworkers? "We could blow our brains out trying to talk to these guys." That's a quote from you about

the steelworkers.

All of a sudden he's worried about Hamilton and the steelworkers. You created a mess in the past. We take no --

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): New question.

Mr Hampton: So that the minister can remember, in 1992, Chrysler Canada was in trouble.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order.

Mr Hampton: Apparently the government does not want to hear these questions.

I already pointed out that, for example, Algoma Steel was repositioned. Kapuskasing's Spruce Falls was repositioned. De Havilland Aircraft, now Bombardier, was

repositioned.

Are you saying that you can't take any leadership role? Are you saying your government doesn't have a role to play here, or are you just timid? When are you

going to show some leadership?

There are all kinds of options open to you -- all kinds of options. If you look at Algoma Steel, if you look at St Marys, if you look at Provincial Papers, if

you look at Kapuskasing, Bombardier, formerly de Havilland Aircraft, there are all kinds of options for the provincial government to show some leadership. When are you going to show that

leadership?

Hon Mr Cordiano: Let me guarantee the member opposite that the leadership shown around here is by our Premier, who said he intends to do

everything to help the people of Hamilton. Let me remind members of the House, isn't it passing strange that this is the first time the leader of the third party has mentioned -- even mentioned

once -- the Stelco situation and the plight of the workers in Hamilton? This is the first time you've discussed this matter in this House. So don't talk about leadership.

We will show leadership. The Premier appointed a special adviser, Jim Arnett, to monitor the situation. In fact, as I pointed out, Stelco currently is going

through the CCAA process in the courts, and it would be entirely inappropriate to talk about any additional actions that might be taken --

The Speaker: Thank you. Supplementary?

Mr Hampton: Minister, let me point out some of the options that are open to you. We've had successful worker buyouts in this province before:

Spruce Falls paper in Kapuskasing, Provincial Papers in Thunder Bay. We've had successful repositioning where the province comes to the table and provides a loan guarantee so private capital gets

involved. Your government has done nothing. What we've heard from the Premier so far is an attempt to duck and engage in the blame game.

Monitoring isn't going to do it, Minister. When are you going to come to the table and put some real options there? When are you going to show some leadership

for the workers, the retirees of Stelco and the economic future of Hamilton? When do we see the leadership? When do you stop playing the blame game?

Hon Mr Cordiano: I have to say to the leader of the third party, you want to talk about success? You had no success when you were the

government. Business after business went out of business. There was a record of bankruptcies during the time you were the government; failure after failure. We won't make that mistake.

I tell you and I tell this House that the Premier of this province, Dalton McGuinty, is showing leadership. He has clearly indicated that we will be helping

the people of Hamilton. We will be looking at the situation with Stelco. But I want to remind members that it was the government of Bob Rae that allowed for a contribution holiday to pensions, that

created what we now have, a billion-dollar mess in Stelco. That is directly laid at your doorstep, and it's your responsibility and your fault. We'll clean up that mess as we have to clean up the

messes created by the previous government.

TAXATION

Mr Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln): A question to the Acting Premier: Is your proposed tax on lottery and casino winnings a tax increase by your

definition?

Hon Gerard Kennedy (Minister of Education): I'll refer this question to the Minister of Finance.

Hon Greg Sorbara (Minister of Finance): I simply can't agree with the premise of the question, so it's very difficult to answer it. He refers

to our "proposed tax" on lotteries, and there is no such proposed tax on lotteries. So the question really doesn't have any meaning.

Mr Hudak: I guess the finance minister hasn't read his own untendered, taxpayer-funded, $200,000 contract that puts this on the table. The

Toronto Star found it, the Toronto Sun found it: the new McGuinty plan to tax lottery and casino winnings across the province of Ontario. The taxpayers fought back in diners and restaurants across

this province against the McGuinty-proposed soup-and-salad tax. You had to back down. Don't tell us you're going after these things again.

Look at this report. It talks about increasing hunting fees, fishing, boats, cars, tap water, alcohol, tobacco and lottery winnings. Are you going to put your

hand in the pocket of the winner of the Lions' Club bingo? We read the Premier's lips. He said, "No new taxes." This new tax on lotteries and casinos, Acting Premier: Just say it ain't so.

Hon Mr Sorbara: I will tell my dear friend from Erie-Lincoln a couple of things. Let's start with this: The sales tax exemption on meals $4

and under never made it to first base.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order.

Hon Mr Sorbara: It was never under active consideration. Long before the restaurant association and the opposition mounted their little

foofaraw, it was off the table. I'll just tell him that what he needs to do is make sure that at about 4 o'clock in the afternoon on May 18 --

Hon Gerry Phillips (Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet): Where?

Hon Mr Sorbara: In this Legislature -- that we will all be present, and we will be presenting the budget, and it will start Ontario down a new

road to better and sounder fiscal management.

FOREST INDUSTRY

Mr Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North): My question is for the Minister of Natural Resources. As you certainly know, the forest

products industry in Ontario is going through some very challenging times. In addition to the softwood lumber dispute and the rising dollar, several companies as well as area municipal leaders in

my riding have argued that a decline in the wood supply is also having a significant impact on their ability to do business. Specifically, they have expressed concern about the quality of the

ministry's forest information and how wood supply analysis is carried out in Ontario. Do you think these concerns are legitimate, and if you do, do have any plans to deal with the issue?

Hon David Ramsay (Minister of Natural Resources): I very much appreciate the continuing interest and the member's concern about the supply of

wood fibre for his industries in northwestern Ontario. In fact, this first came up at a municipal meeting of the Thunder Bay Municipal Association that both Minister Bartolucci and I attended in

November. Subsequent to that, I've met with forest companies that are very concerned, especially with the land set-asides that have happened over the last few years. It seems to me that we could do

a better job in inventorying our forests and really identifying what wood fibre is out there. To that extent, I have announced a pilot project with Bowater Forest Products of Thunder Bay. We're

going to be working with them in developing some better systems.

Mr Gravelle: I appreciate that. I think it's probably worth noting that when you and Minister Bartolucci attended the municipal meeting, that

was the first time a minister has ever attended a Thunder Bay district municipal meeting. We were grateful to see you there.

I'm very glad that you've been willing not only to acknowledge the concerns of the industry related to wood supply but also to deal with them. The pilot

project with Bowater strikes me as a specific way to work out increasing the wood supply to the forest products industry. Having said that, can you provide me with more details on the pilot project

and specifically how it will hopefully result in a more stable wood supply?

Hon Mr Ramsay: The other approach that I want to do -- the previous government had really downloaded a lot of the responsibility of forest

inventory to the forest companies. I would like the crown to take back a little more proactive role. What I see in the pilot project is more of a collaborative role between the ministry and the

private sector. I would like to try this out but also start to apply a lot of the private sector forest inventory tools that I've seen. Some of it is a combination of satellite imagery with aerial

photography that can basically identify trees right down to the forest floor. This is something that was never done before. I'd like to see that in a pilot situation with the ministry and companies

working together. With that, we can come up with a more successful forest inventory system.

CITIZENS' DIALOGUE

ON BUDGET STRATEGY

Mr Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): My question is to the Deputy Premier. You will know that in the last election more than 12 million people in the

province heard you and your leader commit to no new taxes. There was no mention of any user fees, and obviously that is what they expected. Can you tell us today how 250 hand-picked people have

more to say and can overturn your entire political platform so that now we're facing a string of increased taxes and user fees for the people of the province? Can you tell me how 250 people can do

that and have that effect on your policies?

Hon Gerard Kennedy (Minister of Education): To hear the member opposite talk -- he has a really tough time, as his leaders and other do, in

trying to understand the job that the government has: to listen to people. We picked the best non-profit organization uniquely placed to do this -- they did it for the Romanow commission -- to

gather it up, and we got real input from people in this province. We have that as one of the many inputs that we've taken in. We're talking to the people in this province in terms of our agenda;

we're not afraid to do that. But we are not going to do what that government did, which was to have a budget somewhere away from this place and spend a million dollars putting out pamphlets

promoting it, trying to control public opinion rather than listening to people. We're not afraid of what the people have to say, and we're not afraid of putting to them the kind of mess that you

left us. Let me tell you clearly: This government, once it has listened, will take action, will provide direction to this province and will make up for the failings of the government that went

before us.

Mr Klees: At 250 people in six cities, that's 41 people per city. That's what you're listening to. I am interested, and I heard you say, "We

are not afraid to receive the advice of Ontarians." I would like to put this challenge to the Deputy Premier: If, in fact, he is not afraid to listen to the people of Ontario, how many thousands of

signatures on a "Recall Dalton McGuinty" petition will it take to have him listen and respond to that?

Hon Mr Kennedy: I understand very well. The members opposite, the government they went through, until the ramparts were burning, they weren't

listening to anybody, but on this side of the House, we're receptive to good ideas, we're receptive to people talking to us, and we are listening.

You know what we're also not afraid of? We're not afraid of our responsibilities. We have to clean up after you. We have to clean up after the lack of fiscal

probity on the part of the previous government. We have to clean up after the lack of direction you had in terms of dealing with essential issues, in terms of health care and education.

But we have in this government a direction, and we have built back the beginnings of trust again and what government can do. Part of that, yes, is having

people spend eight to 10 hours, totally unpaid, of their own time looking at the issues of government. I can tell you that on this side of the House, every member has been engaged in

problem-solving, in trying to do the things that are needed here. We didn't let a bunch of people in the backroom make decisions. That's what you did; that's your style. What's happening here is us

and the public.

Mr Klees: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I want to put the member on notice that we will be starting that recall petition, and we'll see how

many of those --

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

TENDER FRUIT INDUSTRY

Mr Kim Craitor (Niagara Falls): My question is to the Minister of Agriculture. Minister, the fruit industry is incredibly important in my

riding. The tender fruit growers in Niagara are one of the keystone industries in the Niagara region and in all of Ontario.

I'm pleased to have met with a large group of tender fruit growers recently in Niagara-on-the-Lake to hear their concerns on many issues that impact their

industry. They were all concerned with the impact that the plum pox virus would have on the fruit and ornamental tree industry. Yesterday, an announcement was made about the program to eradicate

the plum pox virus. Could the minister tell this House and the people of Ontario about that program?

Hon Steve Peters (Minister of Agriculture and Food): I want to thank the member from Niagara for the question today, because Ontario is

committed to working with the federal government to provide its share of financial assistance to affected tender fruit growers in the Niagara Peninsula.

This funding announcement that was made yesterday is going to provide for an additional seven years of testing and sampling within the tender fruit industry.

Over the past three years, over 600,000 samples have been made, but eradication of the plum pox virus is the key.

We want to make sure that we have a sustainable, successful tender fruit industry in this province. I think it's important to understand that plum pox is a

virus that affects the tree; it's not something that in any way affects human health. I look forward to your upcoming question.

Mr Craitor: First, I want to say to the minister that myself and the people in my riding, particularly the growers, are glad that this issue

is being addressed, but I also want to tell the House that the Niagara region depends on this industry for its direct economic benefits but also for the benefits derived from the tourism industry

that this creates.

Throughout the summer and fall, people come from great distances to drive throughout the countryside to get the fresh Niagara fruit and fruit products that

everyone enjoys. Everyone realizes that this drastic measure needs to be taken, but I am concerned about the growers who may have their trees cut down in the eradication process. Is there a program

to provide compensation for their losses?

Hon Mr Peters: We're very concerned about this industry as well, because this is an industry that is a very important part of the economy of

this province. I think it's important to understand that 80% of the stone fruit industry in all of Canada comes from the Niagara Peninsula. So this is an industry that we want to ensure is

preserved. We're committed to working with the growers as well to ensure that there are adequate compensation programs in place. Part of this announcement that has been made by the federal

government will provide up to $20 million over the next seven years to assist those growers in the removal of trees but, I think more importantly, planting new trees, because we want to ensure that

the tender fruit industry is one that not only thrives but survives. We recognize the important role it plays, not only in the economy of the Niagara Peninsula but in the whole economy of this

province as well, and we're very pleased and proud to be standing behind this most important industry.

STEEL INDUSTRY

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Minister of Economic Development and Trade. Minister, you and your Premier seem

to be saying to the people of Hamilton, "Trust us." Well, here's your record on trust: You promised to protect the Oak Ridges moraine from development -- didn't do that; you promised to lower auto

insurance rates by 20% -- they're going up by 20%; you promised to maintain the hydro rate cap -- didn't do that; you promised to hire 5,400 new teachers -- now the Premier is trying to deny that.

When you don't have a game plan for Stelco, when you're simply standing there saying, "Oh, trust us," given your record of broken promises, why should the people of Hamilton trust you at all?

Hon Joseph Cordiano (Minister of Economic Development and Trade): The question is really to the member of the third party. They didn't trust

you at all because you didn't keep your word on public auto insurance. When you made that commitment -- I remember it, and the member from Welland-Thorold, sitting beside you, will remember this --

it was a solemn promise you made in that election campaign in 1990. In fact, you ran the whole election around public auto insurance.

Talk about amnesia. Talk about not living up to the promises you made and didn't keep in that election campaign, I say to the leader of the third party, on

public auto insurance. Shall we talk about the social contract and the devastating effects that had? You threw collective bargaining right out the window. So I say to the member, don't lecture us

on trust.

Mr Hampton: I say to the minister, you're the government now. Thousands of jobs are at stake, as well as tens of thousands of pensions and the

economic future of the community. I'm simply saying to you, empty promises aren't going to work, denials aren't going to work, and playing the blame game isn't going to work. The people of Hamilton

and the workers at Stelco deserve better. What are you going to do? What's your game plan to sustain jobs, to sustain pensions and to sustain the economic future of Hamilton? Don't engage in the

blame game, and for God's sake, don't pretend that "Trust me" is going to work any longer. You've already broken too many promises. What's the game plan? Where's the leadership? Don't give us any

more broken promises.

Hon Mr Cordiano: I want to remind the leader of the third party that the people in Hamilton, the Stelco workers, the people you refer to,

trusted your government, and what did your government do in 1992? They allowed Stelco to take a contribution holiday, and as a result, the pension plan was not solvent. You did that. Your

government did that. You were a cabinet minister. Where was trust there? Where was confidence then?

We are going to ensure that everything is done that can be done, by a government that acts responsibly. In this matter, I say to the member, we have appointed

a special adviser, who is monitoring the situation with Stelco. Stelco is going through CCAA. That court proceeding is ongoing. That will be completed, and at that point this government will take

the necessary and appropriate action in a responsible fashion -- something your government failed to do. So don't talk to anybody else about trust and placing trust in this government.

TAXATION

Mr Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): To the Acting Premier: We now know your $200,000 report advocates more user fees; more fines;

increased taxes on alcohol, tobacco, gambling, lottery tickets, bingo tickets; increased taxes on boats, cars; tax hikes on gasoline, and diesel fuel may not be far behind.

Last September, your leader, Mr McGuinty, stared right into the camera, telling us, "I won't cut your taxes, but I won't raise them either." Acting Premier,

are you going to eliminate what little credibility your government has left? Where once your leader was measured on a spend-o-meter, your leader is now measured on a Pinocchio meter. No wonder

people are calling for a recall. Are you going to break the promise and jack up taxes?

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Order. Do you want to withdraw that language? Would you like to withdraw that unparliamentary word?

Interjection: Which one was it?

The Speaker: "Pinocchio."

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. I don't take it as a laughing matter, as a matter of fact, I'd like to remind the members.

Mr Barrett: I did make reference to a Pinocchio meter.

The Speaker: Would you withdraw?

Mr Barrett: I withdraw.

Hon Gerard Kennedy (Minister of Education): This former government is now reduced to lists of scaremongering. They simply can't come to terms

with -- the lists of things you're talking about were brought forward by people in open discussion. Do you know what the people of this province do recall? They do recall a government too arrogant

to listen to their ideas. They do recall a government that misused power, and they recall -- because we can't forget it; the information comes out day after day -- how the government misused their

power to reward their friends.

There is example after example of people in connection with your government who had access, all right. They didn't get to say their ideas in open forum. They

didn't get to put them down on paper. They didn't have them captured by the pre-eminent person of consulting with people in this province, getting their genuine views independently. They got it

through the back door. That doesn't happen in our government.

The Speaker: Supplementary?

Mr Ernie Hardeman (Oxford): Minister, you picked the pockets of Ontario's public in a number of ways through increasing taxes. Now your report

is calling for even more taxes, with the focus on luxury taxes. You've already gone to the easiest target, which is tobacco, and promised to increase those taxes even more dramatically in the

future. It's sort of like taking candy from a baby, isn't it? I hope that doesn't give you any ideas.

Minister, with your fondness for raising taxes, tobacco farmers are worried that they will be easy targets over and over again. Can you assure tobacco farmers

that your budget will not increase taxes on tobacco products beyond what you predicted in your election campaign?

Hon Mr Kennedy: We remember well the election campaign fought by a government saying there was no deficit, saying that the books were

balanced. That's what every member sitting opposite told the people in their riding: "We've got this handled, folks." Instead, what did the Provincial Auditor find? A $5.6-billion deficit with

another $2.2 billion of pressures, hidden deficits parked with children's aid societies, parked with hospitals, because you couldn't manage. You couldn't manage the responsibilities on this side of

the House.

We say that we are listening. The people who want to know what we do with the input will listen to the fine Minister of Finance stand in his place in this

House on May 18 and tell people in

summary what we have done with the advice we've gotten. We will take a direction, and that direction will take into account every person in this province. We'll

discharge our responsibilities fairly and, as the title of that very useful report said, in balance.

SKILLS TRAINING

Mr Dave Levac (Brant): My question is to the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities. For the past 10 years, I've been a member of a

very progressive group in my riding dealing with the skills trades shortages we are experiencing in our community -- and I know it's happening across the province as well. The Brant Skills

Development Group is an organization that was formed by industry leaders in my riding to address this very important issue. Over the past several years, this group has desperately wanted to work

with government to deal with the skills trades problem. The industries are willing; the school boards, that are part of this group, are willing; and the college in my riding, that is part of this

group as well, is willing.

Minister, are you willing to meet with this concerned organization to hear their ideas and concerns regarding skills trades and tell them what our government

is doing to solve this very serious local and provincial problem?

Hon Mary Anne V. Chambers (Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities): I'd like to thank the member from Brant for that question. I'd

also like to take this opportunity to ask him to convey my appreciation, our government's appreciation, to the Brant Skills Development Group. No government can do all that needs to be done on its

own, and I'm really pleased to have partners like that group.

I would be very pleased to meet with them and share with them our recent announcement of $18 million in apprenticeship program enhancements. Please convey to

them that I am looking forward to meeting them.

Mr Levac: Thank you very much for that commitment. I know that our group and the industries in our riding will be very pleased to hear that

response, knowing you want to be a partner in this problem across the province as well. Minister, thanks for making that commitment.

While investing in skills training is a very important thing for Ontarians to achieve that potential, it's not the only way to do it. I know that many college

and university students, as we speak, are starting to return home to my community and communities across the province and are still in search of a summer job that sends them down the path to those

types of skills we're talking about. Minister, can you please inform this House what the government is doing to help those students in my riding and in ridings across Ontario start their path

toward skills development?

Hon Mrs Chambers: I'm also pleased to share with the member from Brant and all members in this House that we recently announced $50 million in

summer job programs that will serve 57,000 students, and this --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Order. Let me see if I can get the member for Nepean-Carleton and the member for Windsor West so we can

continue our question period. Order.

Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities.

Hon Mrs Chambers: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I was focusing on this very important question. It's too bad the members across the floor are not

interested.

The summer jobs for the 57,000 students: We need to share that across the province, and all members in this House should be interested in hearing that.

I'd also like employers to know that we will subsidize $2 per hour what they pay these young people. I really hope they take advantage of this opportunity to

help our young people.

HAMILTON ECONOMY

Mr Robert W. Runciman (Leeds-Grenville): I have a question for the Acting Premier. Having been around this Legislature for some time, it seems

like the government's economic policies are back to the future, when the former Liberal government almost doubled spending in this province, 32 tax increases over their five years, thousands of

people building the welfare lists in this province, and we're starting to see the same impact occur after only six months.

It's especially having an impact in the city of Hamilton. If you read the Hamilton Spectator --

Interjections.

Mr John R. Baird (Nepean-Carleton): They think it's funny.

Mr Runciman: They think it's funny, Mr Speaker. I hope the people of Hamilton are noticing this. The Liberals laugh when we raise concerns

about the city of Hamilton. That's what is happening: The Liberal benches are laughing. They think raising Hamilton concerns is a laughing matter.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): I'm having difficulty hearing the member from Leeds-Grenville.

Mr Runciman: Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Apparently they're also laughing at the Hamilton Spectator. I'm quoting from the Hamilton Spectator:

"Byline: Tara Perkins

"The Hamilton area hemorrhaged jobs in February, wiping out most of last year's employment growth....

"February's job losses are huge" in the city of Hamilton.

I would ask the Acting Premier, what are you doing to assist the people of Hamilton during very serious, challenging times? We know what has happened to

Stelco. We know there have been manufacturing plants closed down. What are you going to do to assist that city?

Hon Gerard Kennedy (Minister of Education): The Minister of Finance actually has some news in direct response to that question.

Hon Greg Sorbara (Minister of Finance): I first want to say that the tone and the politics behind my friend from Leeds-Grenville are frankly

unbecoming to a member who has been in this House for that long.

I want to say to him in all seriousness that we are concerned about events in Hamilton over the course of the past six months. Just yesterday we made an

announcement on some property tax relief that has been in the works for two or three months. To give credit where credit is due, this program of property tax relief goes back to 1999. We continued

that because the people of Hamilton need it.

We have a very serious problem in this province and this country on the question of steel manufacturing. This is a problem that has been experienced right

across North America. We've taken a number of very important steps to try and resolve that issue, and there will be more. I await a supplementary.

Mr Runciman: The minister says they're serious about the events in Hamilton. If they're so serious about the events and the actions of this

government, why did they

schedule a by-election before the tabling of his budget? I'd like to hear an answer to that question. Are they going to address the serious problems faced by Hamilton? What

are the members, the Liberal members for Hamilton, doing with respect to the significant job losses, the closure of plants, the threat faced by Stelco? What are they doing?

They're playing political games with the future of Hamilton. They've slated a by-election before the budget because the impact could be very negative on the

city of Hamilton. If they're serious about helping Hamilton, if they're serious about doing the right thing, postpone the by-election until after the tabling of the provincial budget.

Hon Mr Sorbara: I just say that the tone and flavour of that question is unbecoming to a member with such experience in this House. He asked

about the by-election. We actually believe that democratic representation is a good thing. When seats become vacant, as they have done in the tragic and untimely death of Dominic Agostino, you will

see us act expeditiously to make sure those vacant seats have elections as quickly as possible. That's what we've done in the riding of Hamilton East. We think that calling that by-election as

quickly as we can was a tribute to a man who believed in democracy and believed in his party.

WELFARE REFORM

Ms Laurel C. Broten (Etobicoke-Lakeshore): My question is for the Minister of Community and Social Services. Our government recently did the

right thing and lifted the lifetime ban for welfare recipients who had defrauded the system. I have, however, received some calls from individuals in my community, in Etobicoke-Lakeshore, who are

concerned that we may be being soft on those who might seek to abuse and defraud the system. What are we doing to make sure that abuse and fraud does not occur?

Hon Sandra Pupatello (Minister of Community and Social Services, minister responsible for women's issues): I appreciate this question from the

member from Etobicoke-Lakeshore. The irony of the lifetime ban or the zero tolerance that the last government brought forward, the irony of that law in terms of how it impacted on those who

committed welfare fraud, was that individuals who implement the program for us, our municipal partners, wouldn't actually go forward on a suspicious fraud case to the police because everyone

understood that the outcome would be so punitive for people. We actually had individuals who should have gone forward for police investigation and didn't.

What we have done since we eliminated this case, changed this regulation and made all our municipal partners aware of this is that we now know these cases are

being moved forward to the police, as they should be.

Ms Broten: Many people do abide by the rules and are turning to the system for assistance under dire circumstances and in times of need. What,

if anything, is our government doing to help those families and people who turn to the welfare system in that difficult time?

Hon Ms Pupatello: As you know, there are many people across Ontario who have been long-time advocates for the poor and those who are in

poverty. This Ontario government is one of those advocates. What I'm very pleased to see, as we move forward, is all of us, all cabinet colleagues, the caucus of the Ontario Liberal Party, moving

forward to see how the Ontario government can change its policies to help people who are desperate, to help people who are in need. I, for one, am very much looking forward to the budget of May 18,

so that we can see how our collective wisdom will be represented in that budget.

WORKPLACE SAFETY

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): To the Minister of Health: Since 1988, when the Ontario Legislature passed the NDP resolution to officially

observe a day of mourning for workers, there have been almost 4,500 recognized workplace deaths in this province. Last year, pallbearers carried 327 Ontario workers to their graves as a direct

result of unsafe workplace conditions, and another 359,000 claimed for compensation for work-related injuries.

Two major reports on SARS were released last week, and both reports urged major changes in occupational and safety rules and practices in our hospitals.

Minister, please, tell nurses and other health professionals what the government has done to make sure they will not face the same terrible threats to their health and safety as they did a year ago

during the SARS outbreak.

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I say to the honourable member, thank you for an excellent question. In one

sense, as a result of the work that my colleague the Minister of Labour has already undertaken with nurses, represented by Linda Haslam-Stroud, the president of the Ontario Nurses Association, and

by Doris Grinspun, the feisty and well-regarded executive director of the Registered Nurses' Association of Ontario, along with other representatives of unions working on behalf of people providing

services in the public domain of hospitals, they have already been engaged in health and safety action groups related to health.

These are newly established and reflect the reality our government agrees with, and that is, there is too much incidence of workplace health and safety

challenge in our hospitals. I have said that on countless occasions. We've begun to make investments in new bed lifts and other things designed to enhance the quality of environment for nurses.

With respect to the Campbell commission and the Walker commission, I'd be very pleased in a supplementary to give further evidence of our government's

commitment to dealing with those excellent reports.

Mr Kormos: Indeed there were a number of other recommendations in those two SARS reports. One of the most important ones was to make the

medical officer of health truly independent of political interference, the prospect of political interference, the risk of even the most remote chance of political interference. Complete

independence for that chief medical officer of health was a promise you and other Liberals made during the election campaign, and like other promises, you seemed prepared to break it -- another

broken promise.

What are you going to do immediately to ensure that Ontario's chief medical officer of health is completely independent and can directly speak to the public

and the Legislature? You know it has to be done. When are you going to do it?

Hon Mr Smitherman: I appreciate the question. It seems that the honourable member wasn't around last week to hear the response to the

excellent reports that were brought forward by Justice Campbell and Dr David Walker on the issue of the independence of the chief medical officer of health. Justice Campbell's report in particular

lays out the scenario, which this government accepts.

What I've committed to the public to do is respond to these comprehensive reports, keeping in mind that Justice Campbell's report is only interim at this

point. We're going to move forward proactively within 60 days of that announcement. We've committed to respond in a comprehensive way. I've said very clearly that on each of the important areas of

principle that are outlined in those reports, this government supports them and this government plans to act proactively by demonstrating, within 60 days, our commitment on all these points.

I really very much appreciate the opportunity to answer that question.

TUBERCULOSIS

Mr Jerry J. Ouellette (Oshawa): I have a question for the Minister of Health as well. As I hope you're well aware, there is a serious health

concern in the region of Durham. Just this week, health officials reported that about 700 patients might have been exposed to TB at Lakeridge Health in Oshawa and Bowmanville. The department of

public health said this week that a positive TB patient frequented the ambulatory oncology clinic at Oshawa, dating back to February of this year.

I personally know individuals who began their TB testing during the first week of April of this year, and unfortunately for Lorn, he tested positive. Lorn and

his family were told at that time that because of his weakened state, because of the other disease he has, TB came forward as a result of that. Can you tell us why TB was not reported in February

and it took from February to last week to notify 700 individuals?

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): The protocols are very, very clear with respect to notifications related to

infectious disease. The information we have is that the hospital and the Durham region health unit have been working together to identify any patients who may have been put at risk by any exposure

to tuberculosis as a result of one patient testing positive for that infectious disease.

The Ministry of Health, through our public health branch, has been working in support of the hospital and the local health branch to ensure that people are

notified, to ensure that people are tested and that they receive all necessary supports of the health care system, including medication and the like, to ensure a prompt and complete recovery. It's

my understanding that the hospital was able to triage those cases in a certain sense by making sure that those people who are most seriously ill had the advantage of testing and treatment on a

priority basis.

Mr Ouellette: Protecting the people of the province is paramount. What is it that you are actually doing for the patients as well, especially

on this International Day of Mourning for workers -- because workers have contacted me about that as well -- to compensate those individuals, workers and patients, who have been quarantined for

extended periods of time while we worked through this severe medical emergency in the area?

Hon Mr Smitherman: I'd say that our obvious priority is to support the health unit and the hospital in determining the extent of people's

exposure to TB and make sure that they get the appropriate treatments.

With respect to quarantine, this is the first time that matter has been brought to my attention with respect to funding challenges and the like. I'll

undertake, as I did on Monday when I was first notified of this -- I spoke quite immediately to the member -- to determine that and get back to him on a very prompt basis and to do it

personally.

PETITIONS

TAXATION

Mr Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): I continue to receive hundreds of names on the meal tax petitions, gathered by McDonald's Corp and

Tim Horton franchises in Simcoe, Tillsonburg and Caledonia.

"Whereas every day, 1.5 million Ontarians, including seniors, health care workers and students, purchase a basic meal that costs less than $4; and

"Whereas a new 8% tax on such meals will disadvantage low-income Ontarians; and

"Whereas adding a tax for the first time on a glass of milk, a salad, a bowl of soup or a cup of coffee will affect a total of 1.5 million Ontarians each and

every day in restaurants and cafeterias across the province;

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

"Do not impose a new 8% tax on basic meals under $4."

I affix my signature to this petition.

IMMIGRANTS' SKILLS

Ms Laurel C. Broten (Etobicoke-Lakeshore): I have a petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly which I would like to read now.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas Ontario enjoys the continuing benefit of the contributions of men and women who have chosen to leave their country of origin in order to settle in

Canada, raise their families, educate their children and pursue their livelihoods and careers; and

"Whereas newcomers to Canada who choose to settle in Ontario find frequent and unnecessary obstacles that prevent skilled tradespeople, professional and

managerial talent from practising the professions, trades and occupations for which they have been trained in their country of origin; and

"Whereas Ontario, its businesses, its people and its institutions badly need the professional, managerial and technical skills that many newcomers to Canada

have and want to use;

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

"That the government of Ontario, through the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities and the other institutions and agencies of and within the

government of Ontario, undertake specific and proactive measures to work with the bodies regulating access to Ontario's professions, trades and other occupations in order that newcomers to Canada

gain fair, timely and cost-effective access to certification and other measures that facilitate the entry or re-entry of skilled workers and professionals trained outside Canada into the Canadian

workforce."

I agree with the petition, and I'll be signing my name to it.

PROPERTY TAXATION

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): I have a petition from the riding of Durham to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas recreational trailers kept at parks and campgrounds in Ontario are being assessed by the Municipal Property Assessment Corp, MPAC, and are subject to

property taxes; and

"Whereas owners of these trailers are seasonal and occasional residents who contribute to the local tourism economy without requiring significant municipal

services; and

Whereas the added burden of this taxation will make it impossible for many families of modest income to afford their holiday sites at parks and

campgrounds;

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

"That the tax not be imposed in 2004, and that no such tax be introduced without consultation and without owners of the trailers and trailer parks, municipal

governments, businesses, the tourism sector and other stakeholders."

I'm pleased to sign this in support of the constituents of the riding of Durham.

PHYSIOTHERAPY SERVICES

Mr Cameron Jackson (Burlington): This is a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas seniors and other qualified patients require the continued provision of physiotherapy services through

schedule 5 clinics to promote recovery from

medical conditions and continued mobility and good health;

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

"The patients of

schedule 5 physiotherapy clinics request the continued support of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario for provision of OHIP-covered

physiotherapy treatment to qualified seniors and others in need of those vital health care procedures."

It has my signature of support as well.

UNIVERSITY AND COLLEGE FUNDING

Mr Richard Patten (Ottawa Centre): I have a petition which calls on the federal government to increase post-secondary education funding. There

are over 2,000 petitions from students at Carleton University in Ottawa. It calls upon the federal government:

"Whereas the Ontario Liberal government has made a commitment to the Canadian Federation of Students to freeze tuition fees for at least two years; and

"Whereas the Ontario Liberal government has also promised students that this tuition freeze will be fully funded; and

"Whereas the increases in federal transfer payments to the provinces for post-secondary education have not kept up with inflation and today comprise a smaller

portion of the Canadian health and social transfer ... than they did in 1995....

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to call on the federal government to immediately inject $3 billion into the Canadian health

and social transfer" fund "for post-secondary education."

I agree with this, and I will sign this as well.

WATER QUALITY

Mr Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the riding of Simcoe North is made up of many small communities; and

"Whereas not all citizens live in large cities such as Toronto, where access to municipal water service is taken for granted; and

"Whereas smaller communities have little, if any, access to municipal water services; and

"Whereas Ontario's smaller villages and hamlets are home to many community buildings such as churches, community halls and arenas; and

"Whereas those responsible for halls, churches, arenas and other community facilities take pride in ensuring these buildings have access to the highest quality

potable water;

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

"That the implementation of regulation 170/03 as it relates to community halls and similar facilities be delayed; and

"That the province of Ontario ensure that the halls, churches, arenas and other public facilities on private wells comply with water standards that are

reasonable and appropriate."

I'll sign that and give it to Kirsty.

TILLSONBURG DISTRICT

MEMORIAL HOSPITAL

Mr Ernie Hardeman (Oxford): I have here a petition signed by in excess of 2,000 people from my riding and from the surrounding ridings. It is

to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas the Tillsonburg District Memorial Hospital has asked for ministerial consent to make capital changes to its facility to accommodate the placement of a

satellite dialysis unit; and

"Whereas the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care has already given approval for the unit and committed operational dollars to it; and

"Whereas the community has already raised the funds for the equipment needed;

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

"That the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care give his final approval of the capital request change from the Tillsonburg District Memorial Hospital

immediately, so those who are in need of these life-sustaining dialysis services can receive them locally, thereby enjoying a better quality of life without further delay."

I affix my signature to it as I totally agree with the petition.

TAXATION

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

"Whereas every day, 1.5 million Ontarians, including seniors, health care workers and students, purchase a basic meal that costs less than $4; and

"Whereas a new 8% tax on such meals will disadvantage low-income Ontarians; and

"Whereas, adding a tax for the first time on a glass of milk, a salad, a bowl of soup or a coffee will affect a total of 1.5 million Ontarians each and every

day in restaurants and cafeterias across the province;

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

"Do not impose a new 8% tax on basic meals under $4."

I am signing the petition with my constituents.

OAK RIDGES MORAINE

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): I have a petition from the riding of Durham.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Oak Ridges moraine is an ecological treasure that warrants protection and careful stewardship now and in future generations;

"Whereas the province of Ontario has recognized the importance of the moraine with the passage of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act, 2001, to protect

natural and water resources, preserve agricultural lands and provide clarity on where development can and cannot occur;

"Whereas the act has resulted in certain limitations on citizens' use of their property within the moraine;

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

"That the Parliament of Ontario take action to ensure there are no undue restrictions on Oak Ridges moraine residents making minor improvements to their homes

and property; and

"That the province of Ontario work together with municipalities and landowners to ensure the

interpretation and enforcement of the act continues to fully

protect the moraine while also giving residents the right to fair and reasonable enjoyment of their property."

I'm pleased to sign it on behalf of my constituents in support of it in the riding of Durham.

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

Mr Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln): I'm pleased to present a petition on province of the seniors in my riding like the Chmara and the Rowland

families.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

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

drugs and imposing higher user fees; and

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

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

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

seniors' drug fees."

And in support, my signature.

TAXATION

Mr Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): This petition involves the $4 food tax.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas every day, 1.5 million Ontarians, including seniors, health care workers and students, purchase a basic meal that costs less than $4; and

"Whereas a new 8% tax on such meals will disadvantage low-income Ontarians; and

"Whereas adding a tax for the first time on a glass of milk, a salad, a bowl of soup or a cup of coffee will affect a total of 1.5 million Ontarians each and

every day in restaurants and cafeterias across the province;

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

"Do not impose a new 8% tax on basic meals under $4."

I am pleased to sign my name to that as well.

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

Mr Cameron Jackson (Burlington): This petition is now up to over 7,000.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Liberal government was elected after promising in their election platform that they were committed to improving the Ontario drug benefit program

for seniors but are now considering delisting drugs and imposing user fees on seniors; and

"Whereas prescription drugs are not covered under the Canada Health Act unless dispensed in a hospital; and

"Whereas the federal Liberal government refuses to acknowledge this as a necessary health service despite the Romanow report's strong support for a national

drug program;

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

"To immediately and unequivocally commit to end plans for the delisting of drugs for coverage under the Ontario drug benefit program;

"To immediately commit to ending plans to implement higher user fees for seniors and to improve the Ontario drug benefit plan so they can obtain necessary

medications; and

"To instruct Premier Dalton McGuinty to demand more health care funding from Ottawa instead of demanding more funding from seniors."

It has my signature of support as well.

PROVINCIAL DEFICIT

Ms Laurie Scott (Haliburton-Victoria-Brock): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the government insists there is going to be a $5.6-billion deficit;

"Whereas the government campaigned on a `fully costed plan' that accounted for a $2-billion deficit;

"Whereas the government campaigned on a `fully costed plan' that included a $1-billion contingency fund;

"Whereas the government campaigned on a `fully costed plan' which included over 230 promises;

"We, the undersigned, call upon the provincial government to take the responsible approach and immediately apply to the projected deficit the $3 billion the

government said they had set aside. We believe this will substantially increase Ontario's ability to balance the books during the current fiscal year and solve the financial dilemma faced by the

government."

This is signed by many people in my riding.

PROPERTY TAXATION

Mr Gerry Martiniuk (Cambridge): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas an unfair situation has arisen under the Assessment Act;

"Please support extending regulation 390/03 so that it covers and protects me from taxation."

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

Mr Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln): I'm pleased to present a petition on behalf of seniors, these from Fort Erie, like the Pelletier and Lapadura

families. It reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

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

drugs and imposing higher user fees; and

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

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

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

seniors' drug fees."

In support, I affix my signature.

ADOPTION DISCLOSURE

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): I have a petition here from the residents of Durham.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas in Ontario, adopted adults are denied a right available to all non-adoptees; that is, the unrestricted right to identifying information concerning

their family of origin;

"Whereas Canada has ratified standards of civil and human rights in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the UN Declaration of Human Rights and the UN

Convention on the Rights of the Child;

"Whereas these rights are denied to persons affected by the secrecy provisions in the adoption sections of the Child and Family Services Act and other acts of

the province of Ontario;

"Whereas research in other jurisdictions has demonstrated that disclosure does not cause harm, that access to such information is beneficial to adult adoptees,

adoptive parents and birth parents, and that birth parents rarely requested or were promised anonymity;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to enact revisions to the Child and Family Services Act and to other acts to:

"Permit adult adoptees unrestricted access to full personal identifying birth information;

"Permit birth parents, grandparents and siblings access to the adopted person's amended birth certificate when the adopted person reaches the age of 18;

"Permit adoptive parents unrestricted access to identifying birth information of their minor child;

"Allow adopted persons and birth relatives to file a contact veto restricting contact by the searching party;

"Replace mandatory reunion counselling with optional counselling."

I am pleased to sign this in support of my constituents in the riding of Durham.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

ADAMS MINE LAKE ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004

SUR LE LAC DE LA MINE ADAMS

Resuming the debate adjourned on April 22, 2004, on the motion for second reading of Bill 49,

An Act to prevent the disposal of waste at the Adams Mine site

and to amend the Environmental Protection Act in respect of the disposal of waste in lakes / Projet de loi 49, Loi visant à empêcher l'élimination de déchets à la mine

Adams et à modifier la

Loi sur la protection de l'environnement en ce qui concerne l'élimination de déchets dans des lacs.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr Bruce Crozier): Further debate?

Mr Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): I'm very pleased to be able to stand this afternoon and make a few comments in my time on second reading of

Bill 49 and the debate on the Adams Mine Lake Act, 2004.

I have to tell you, my initial reaction to the introduction of this bill was very positive, because I look at pictures of the Adams mine -- and we've seen

these pictures for the last 15 or 20 years -- and I see where the water is filtered through into the mine, or the quarry, whatever you may want to call it. It's kind of a scary thought, that we

would actually want to put water at any time in a site like that. But I'm going to have trouble at this point supporting the legislation because of a number of reasons that I'd like to bring

forward today and for some reasons that I'm very, very concerned about right in my own riding.

I simply cannot understand why, as part of the bill -- and I'll read it here as part of the compendium that Minister Dombrowsky sent out -- it says the

amendment "does not apply to a body of water that is less than one hectare in area." I don't know why that was ever even put in there. I simply cannot understand, if you're dealing with landfill

and you're dealing with water quality, why a one-hectare size of water would be adequate, which basically is what this is saying, to put in a landfill.

I hope it doesn't mean that if there are tiny little bodies of water around the province -- I'm guessing that's about 100 by 100 or about 10,000 square feet.

I'm assuming that's the size and that it would be allowed. When we go to committee on this, and I'm hoping members of the government can actually provide us with information on this, I'm really

looking forward to the answer to that particular question, because I think it shouldn't be there. Whether it's a body of water that's 50 feet square or a body of water that's 100 feet square or two

miles square, why would you want it?

I remember the member from Perth-Middlesex a few weeks ago talked about how you wouldn't dump your water in the ocean. Absolutely; of course we wouldn't dump

water in the ocean. I'm sorry; you wouldn't dump your waste disposal in the ocean. We've got a real responsibility here. We're at the turning point in waste management in Ontario. We're at the

turning point of our protection of our groundwater sources and our groundwater resources.

I understand from a recent TV program I watched that less than 1% of the water that's available in the world today is actually potable. That's talking about

all the different countries around the world: the Far East, the Middle East, Africa, South America etc. It's a scary thought that of this wonderful resource we have that's completely necessary for

our existence, only 1% is actually potable. So when we talk about mixing our waste with any type of water, it's a concern. It's a very strong concern of mine.

I've got to say at this point that the timing of this bill is incredible. I would have thought that the minister, who put out this document back in February --

it's called the White Paper on Watershed-based Source Protection Planning. My understanding back in the winter when she introduced this as part of her expert panels on water source protection was

that she was looking for the expert panels across the province that she had appointed to this committee to come back with some solid recommendations on what the issues were concerning water source

protection and where we would actually go in the future.

So I was surprised when out of nowhere the minister came up with the Adams Mine Lake Act and said simply, "This is not acceptable," and, "This is a new piece

of legislation and we're going to debate it in the House." Of course, it's warm and fuzzy and we all know that, for the very reason that you mix garbage with a body of water.

I know there are people in my riding who have talked to the minister's office and to people in the Ministry of the Environment. I'm really concerned about the

technical reasons for bringing in the Adams Mine Lake Act, which in effect takes away all approvals that have been given to that site over the last 15 years. I repeat that the technical reasons

don't seem to be in the piece of legislation. I don't know if they're going to be in the committee hearings or not, but certainly I know people across the province are looking for the technical

reasons. So far, I believe the ministry and the minister's office have not been able to provide that information to the public. I think it's important that we do so.

Of course, the third point, which is really important at this point, is the fact that it happened as a result of a kind of pork-barrelling situation, in my

opinion. I have a lot of respect for the Minister of Natural Resources, and I know he threatened to resign his position earlier this year if the Adams mine actually was approved as a landfill site.

We've seen all kinds of media reports. I wouldn't want to think for a second that we would do something for a political purpose, like speeding -- bringing

an act forward before the white paper on

watershed-based planning had been approved, before it had been completed, before we'd seen the recommendations from the expert panel and before we'd actually seen the legislation.

My thoughts were very clear on this, and I've ma