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

November 15, 2004

38th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2004-Nov-15 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Monday 15 November 2004 Lundi 15 novembre 2004

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

PROPANE EXPLOSION

EID-UL-FITR

ROYAL AGRICULTURAL WINTER FAIR

RELIGIOUS HOLIDAYS

DIWALI

AWARDS

REPORT ON YOUTH VIOLENCE

CONSUMER FRAUD

EDUCATION

VISITORS

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

CANADA-ONTARIO MUNICIPAL RURAL

INFRASTRUCTURE FUND

WATER EXTRACTION

CANADA-ONTARIO MUNICIPAL RURAL

INFRASTRUCTURE FUND

WATER EXTRACTION

CANADA-ONTARIO MUNICIPAL RURAL

INFRASTRUCTURE FUND

ELLEN FAIRCLOUGH

ORAL QUESTIONS

TAXATION

STUDENT DROPOUT RATE

PICKERING NUCLEAR

GENERATING STATION

AUTISM TREATMENT

PHOTO RADAR

STUDENT DROPOUT RATE

CANADA-ONTARIO MUNICIPAL RURAL

INFRASTRUCTURE FUND

COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTRES

CONSUMER PROTECTION

FOREIGN-TRAINED DOCTORS

PIT BULLS

ASSISTANCE TO DISABLED

PETITIONS

HEALTH CARE

REFUNDABLE CONTAINERS

CHIROPRACTIC SERVICES

PIT BULLS

CHILDREN'S HEALTH SERVICES

CHIROPRACTIC SERVICES

ADOPTION DISCLOSURE

CHIROPRACTIC SERVICES

HEALTH CARE SERVICES

TTC RIGHT-OF-WAY

CHIROPRACTIC SERVICES

GO TRANSIT SERVICE

ADOPTION DISCLOSURE

ORDERS OF THE DAY

GREENBELT ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004 SUR

LA CEINTURE DE VERDURE

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

PROPANE EXPLOSION

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): I rise in the House to pay tribute to the emergency services personnel of Clarington and to all those who responded to

the explosion near Port Darlington in Bowmanville on November 9. This was the largest propane explosion in Ontario in over 40 years.

Naturally, our thoughts are with all those affected by this incident, including the nearby homes, businesses and employees. However, our community was indeed

fortunate that despite the magnitude of the explosion and fire, there was no loss of life and no injuries. This is a tribute to the skills and professionalism of Clarington's emergency and fire

services, along with the emergency responders. They include Durham Regional Police, Durham EMS members, and members of the RCMP and the Ontario Provincial Police. The Salvation Army was also on

hand to support those fighting the fire and those who had to evacuate their homes.

I would like to commend the mayor of Clarington, John Mutton, and all the municipal staff for their quick response in putting the municipality's emergency plan

into action within minutes. I'd also like to pay respect to Clarington Fire Chief Michael Creighton and all of his staff, including Division Chief Bill Hesson, who directed the emergency response

from the Durham Regional Police helicopter. I'd also like to recognize Inspector Bill Temple of the Durham Regional Police, and Chief Kevin McAlpine.

There were 50 firefighters and some 15 vehicles on the scene, as well as 60 police, including 10 RCMP officers and 10 members of the OPP.

I'm pleased to say that the residents evacuated during the incident were safely home the following day at the latest. The cause remains under investigation. I'm

confident that what we learn from this incident will further protect all Ontario communities in the future.

EID-UL-FITR

Mr Shafiq Qaadri (Etobicoke North): It is a great privilege for me to rise today and recognize one of the great Islamic celebrations, the

festival of Eid. Today, Muslims around the world observe the end of Ramadan, the month of fasting, which actually happened over the weekend. The Eid festival begins on the sighting of the first new

moon after Ramadan. It is a celebration of charity, forgiveness and family. It is also a time to give thanks for being granted the strength and discipline to have endured the previous month's

fasting.

It's a privilege to recognize this glorious occasion, because by doing so, we celebrate the Canadian traditions of multiculturalism, mutual respect and harmony.

The fact that I am able to stand before you today and share my culture is a testament to the tenor of a liberal society.

Our country leads the world in our commitment to multiculturalism. I'm proud to be a member of a government that enshrines values of understanding, respect and

harmony. Every day we take steps. For example, we are giving Canadian workers easy access to their rights by making employment standards available in 21 languages, we are helping foreign-trained

health professionals contribute to the health of Ontarians, and just last week we announced new programs to create employment opportunities for internationally trained medical graduates. These

programs are substantive evidence of this government's commitment to the ideals of multiculturalism.

I salute this House, this assembly and this government on this occasion of Eid-Ul-Fitr. Eid Mubarak.

ROYAL AGRICULTURAL WINTER FAIR

Mr Ernie Hardeman (Oxford): I rise today to recognize the grandest of all the fall fairs, the Royal Agricultural Winter Fair, which closed for

the 2004 season yesterday. The Royal is the largest indoor combined agricultural, horticultural, canine and equestrian event in the world and provides an excellent opportunity for the city to meet

the country. As the organizers say, "It's the show that puts November on the calendar, Toronto on the map and Canada on the world stage."

At the Royal, non-rural residents can learn about agriculture in Ontario and the challenges that farmers in this province face on a daily basis.

While I've been fortunate to attend the Royal for a number of years, this year I had the opportunity to visit the fair with John Tory, the leader of the PC Party

of Ontario, and CEO Bill Duron, who gave us a personal, guided tour. I was happy to attend the exhibits with Mr Tory, who wanted to get to know the real people who work the farm and hear about

their needs and concerns. He didn't want to rub shoulders with the elite at the opening ceremonies; he wanted to meet the people who are responsible for bringing Ontario products from farm to fork.

We met with a variety of different commodity groups and became informed about each one's farming experience, and we talked extensively with cattle farmers, who are presently facing the greatest

challenges of all.

On behalf of myself and our leader, John Tory, I'd like to take this opportunity to thank the organizers and participants of the Royal Agricultural Winter Fair

for once again putting on an impressive display, for taking the time to tell us their personal stories and for showing the world why Ontario continues to produce some of the highest-quality foods

in the country.

RELIGIOUS HOLIDAYS

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): Salam Alaykum. Namaste. Sat Sri Akal.

This weekend marks celebrations in three religious communities: The Muslim community celebrated Eid; the Hindu community celebrated Diwali; and the Sikh

community celebrated Bandi Chhor Divas.

I'm honoured to stand in the Ontario Legislature today on behalf of the New Democratic Party to wish the Muslim community Eid Mubarak, the Hindu community Shubh

Diwali and the Sikh community Bandi Chhor Divas Mubarak.

Eid marks the end of the holy month of Ramadan, a time of worship and contemplation. The month also teaches social consciousness and solidarity.

Diwali commemorates Lord Rama's return after 14 years in exile and the victory over darkness.

The Sikh community commemorates Guru Hargobind Sahib's return from being jailed as a political prisoner. When the Guru was released, he insisted on taking other

political prisoners with him.

All three of these communities have played and continue to play significant roles in my riding of Toronto-Danforth, and indeed throughout all of Ontario, both

economically and socially. I am asking the House to wish all three communities Eid Mubarak, Shubh Diwali and Bandi Chhor Divas Mubarak.

DIWALI

Mr Vic Dhillon (Brampton West-Mississauga): I rise today to offer my best wishes to the East Indian community on the occasion of Diwali. Diwali

signifies victory of light over darkness, victory of knowledge over ignorance, victory of goodness over evil and victory of life over death. It is a celebration of eternal light which also marks

the new year for the East Indian community.

There are over 800 million East Indians in the world and over half a million in Canada. The first settled in Canada more than a century ago, and they have

contributed to the growth and development of this country and continue to play a vital role in communities across the country.

I am sure every member of this House will join me in extending congratulations to this community on this occasion.

AWARDS

Mr Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): I rise today to recognize a number of businesses and individuals in my riding of Parry Sound-Muskoka.

Recently two significant awards ceremonies took place in Bracebridge and Huntsville.

The first awards ceremony was the Bracebridge Chamber of Commerce Outstanding Business Achievement Awards. This year, these awards focused on the retail sector.

The chamber voted to recognize George MacNaughtan of MacNaughtan's Home Hardware, Michelle Hallam of the Silver Bridge Gallery and Todd Jones of Muskoka Furniture.

The chamber's businessperson of the year was awarded to Don MacKay of Muskoka Highlands golf course. Muskoka Party Rentals, owned by Kim Rixon, was named the new

business of the year. Gord Smith accepted the award for the Rocky Island Tire Co as established business of the year. The 2004 award for outstanding contribution to Bracebridge went to Gord Durnan

for his work with the South Muskoka Memorial Hospital Foundation.

This year, 19 women were recognized for their accomplishments by the YWCA Muskoka Women of Distinction Awards. Jennifer Peake and Robin Stewart were the young

women of distinction. Both of these women are active volunteers in their communities. Gwendolyn Boyes-Sitler was honoured for her career as a nationally recognized artist and author. Barbara Dawson

was recognized for her commitment to the Muskoka Pioneer Power Association. Anne Cool of Huntsville was nominated for her commitment to promoting education for adults and children. Judith Moore of

Muskoka Ambulance Service was honoured for her commitment to emergency services.

I hope that you will all join me in congratulating these successful businesses and community leaders.

REPORT ON YOUTH VIOLENCE

Ms Laurel C. Broten (Etobicoke-Lakeshore): I rise today in recognition of an amazing group of youth who have been working on the issue of

violence. This group, brought together by the Office of Child and Family Service Advocacy and Voices for Children, released the report entitled Just Listen to Me: Youth Voices On Violence at 11 am

on the steps of the Legislature.

Just Listen to Me is the first report of its kind and it presents a picture of violence in the lives of Ontario's young people as told through their own voices

and experiences. Just Listen to Me is the result of round table discussions on violence that included input from 80 young people from six regions across the province. I am pleased to have had the

opportunity to meet with representatives of the Office of Child and Family Service Advocacy and Voices for Children, along with the Minister of Children and Youth Services, in preparation for

today's release.

I'm delighted to acknowledge today's speakers -- Stephanie, Jessie and Brad -- who introduced the report earlier today and spoke on behalf of all the young

people involved in the outcome of the report. I'm also happy to acknowledge Audrey, Kathy, Mark, Patrice and Andrew, who are also at Queen's Park today and in the Legislature this afternoon. I

thank them for their dedication and hard work.

The goal of the report is to explore the nature of violence in the lives of young people through firsthand experiences and to make recommendations for a starting

point to ongoing dialogue in order that we may collectively find solutions to the problems identified by youth in this groundbreaking report.

CONSUMER FRAUD

Ms Monique M. Smith (Nipissing): I'm pleased to rise today during Consumer Awareness Week to speak about an anti-fraud initiative based in my

riding of Nipissing. PhoneBusters is a national anti-fraud call centre jointly operated by the OPP and RCMP and based in North Bay. Established in 1993, this fully bilingual service handles

complaints about telemarketing, mail fraud, ID theft, Internet fraud and consumer scams with a Canadian connection. Over the past 10 years, PhoneBusters has contributed to the public's awareness

that it is often our most vulnerable citizens -- our seniors -- who are the targets and victims of telephone, mail and Internet fraud. Thankfully, there is SeniorBusters.

Operating in conjunction with PhoneBusters, SeniorBusters consists of over 60 volunteers from North Bay and area over the age of 50 who call back seniors who

have been victims of consumer fraud. SeniorBusters work with seniors, family members, local police agencies and elder abuse committees to alert the public to potential scams and frauds. Through

education, they equip seniors with the necessary tools to effectively fight this crime. By providing emotional and moral support to victims, they ensure that all seniors have a place to turn if

they need assistance.

I recently had the privilege of celebrating the various volunteers and coordinators. I was thrilled to acknowledge Detective Staff Sergeant Barry Elliott; Carole

Gilmour, the SeniorBusters coordinator; and all of the SeniorBusters volunteers. I am proud of this important work being done in my riding, and I salute them all.

EDUCATION

Mr Brad Duguid (Scarborough Centre): I'd like to take this opportunity to talk about education. Across this province, schools are benefiting

from this government's commitment to education.

The Toronto Catholic District School Board is a prime example of that commitment. Since we've taken office, the Toronto Catholic District School Board has been

able to hire 60 new full-time-equivalent teachers. The funding provided will ensure smaller class sizes for our youngest learners in junior kindergarten to grade 3. This will ensure that our

children get the attention they deserve.

This government understands the importance of a good start for all our children across Ontario, and that is why we're committed to these smaller class sizes.

This is a welcome change from the previous government's lack of attention to our schools. Where once our children went to schools in crowded classrooms with

limited supplies and crumbling facilities, we're ushering in a new era in education where our children go to schools with smaller class sizes, funding for resources, and structural upgrades.

We're tackling the rising dropout rate to ensure that our young people have greater access to the educational opportunities they will need to compete in an

ever-increasingly-competitive global economy. Test scores are already improving. I'm very proud to be part of this Liberal renaissance in education in Ontario.

VISITORS

Mr Jean-Marc Lalonde (Glengarry-Prescott-Russell): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: In the east gallery today I'm pleased to introduce two

prominent members of my riding -- a Stanley Cup winner and the new coach of the Atlanta Thrashers, Bob Hartley, and also a very prominent developer from Embrun, Robert Bourdeau. Please welcome

them.

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

We must caution members that rising on a point of order of that nature is not appropriate.

We have today in the members' gallery Mr Nino Aquilino, mayor from the province of Agrigento on the island of Sicily, in Italy. I would invite all members to

welcome him.

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

Hon Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): I move that pursuant to standing order 9(c)(i), the House shall meet from 6:45

pm until 9:30 pm on Monday, November 15, 2004, Tuesday, November 16, 2004, Wednesday, November 17, 2004, and Thursday, November 18, 2004, for the purpose of considering government business.

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

All those in favour, say "aye."

All opposed, say "nay."

I think the ayes have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1348 to 1353.

The Speaker: All those in favour, please rise and be counted by the Clerk.

Ayes

Arthurs, Wayne

Baird, John R.

Bartolucci, Rick

Bentley, Christopher

Berardinetti, Lorenzo

Bradley, James J.

Broten, Laurel C.

Brown, Michael A.

Brownell, Jim

Bryant, Michael

Caplan, David

Chambers, Mary Anne V.

Crozier, Bruce

Delaney, Bob

Dhillon, Vic

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duguid, Brad

Duncan, Dwight

Dunlop, Garfield

Flynn, Kevin Daniel

Fonseca, Peter

Gravelle, Michael

Hardeman, Ernie

Hudak, Tim

Jackson, Cameron

Jeffrey, Linda

Klees, Frank

Kular, Kuldip

Kwinter, Monte

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Leal, Jeff

Levac, Dave

Marsales, Judy

Martiniuk, Gerry

Matthews, Deborah

Mauro, Bill

McMeekin, Ted

McNeely, Phil

Meilleur, Madeleine

Miller, Norm

Mitchell, Carol

O'Toole, John

Orazietti, David

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Peters, Steve

Phillips, Gerry

Pupatello, Sandra

Qaadri, Shafiq

Racco, Mario G.

Ramsay, David

Rinaldi, Lou

Ruprecht, Tony

Sandals, Liz

Smith, Monique

Smitherman, George

Takhar, Harinder S.

Tascona, Joseph N.

Van Bommel, Maria

Watson, Jim

Wilkinson, John

Witmer, Elizabeth

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Yakabuski, John

Zimmer, David

The Speaker: All those against, please rise and be counted by the Clerk.

Nays

Churley, Marilyn

Horwath, Andrea

Kormos, Peter

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

Prue, Michael

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 64; the nays are 6.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

CANADA-ONTARIO MUNICIPAL RURAL

INFRASTRUCTURE FUND

Hon David Caplan (Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal): Today I have the honour and the great pleasure to inform the Legislature and all

the people of Ontario that our government has signed the Canada-Ontario municipal rural infrastructure fund. Ontario is the first province in Canada to enter into this agreement, and we are

extremely proud to do so.

Small urban and rural communities will be able to apply for COMRIF funding immediately. COMRIF is a key component of our strategy to upgrade Ontario's

infrastructure. You see, our province has fallen behind, and we have much work to do if we're going to remain competitive with the dynamic regional economies of our greatest competitors in the

United States.

This program targets the infrastructure needs of small urban centres and rural communities with a population of less than 250,000. Our federal partner has

agreed that we must work closely with small municipalities for whom COMRIF was designed. Through the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, known as AMO, municipal leaders have been involved in

the design of COMRIF from the beginning. Since announcing this program here in the Legislature last May, we have consulted extensively with municipalities through AMO.

These are the priorities that municipal leaders told us they wanted to see addressed: Municipalities wanted safe, clean drinking water for their residents,

they wanted sewage and waste disposal that didn't endanger the environment, and they wanted something done about the lamentable conditions of local roads and bridges.

Well, these are the key COMRIF priorities. Each of the three levels of government will contribute up to $298 million to COMRIF. We have programs to help

municipalities raise their share of the money.

To administer the program, we and our partners in Ottawa have set up a joint secretariat. This secretariat, the first of its kind in Canada, will consider all

applications as rapidly as possible. We will decide in a timely manner and fashion which applications will be approved.

We believe that COMRIF sets a new benchmark for co-operation amongst the three levels of government. It will help restore our public confidence in the fairness

and efficiency of public administration. It will bring real, tangible change to communities right across this great province.

We care about COMRIF, because in a healthy, strong Ontario, small communities must be as dynamic as larger ones. They need to retain their young people, offer

modern amenities to new businesses and welcome new citizens. COMRIF will let them identify their own priorities and give them the tools to get the job done.

It's a great pleasure to be here to announce this historic agreement.

WATER EXTRACTION

Hon David Ramsay (Minister of Natural Resources): It's my pleasure to stand in the House to advise the members on the steps this government is

taking to achieve the strongest possible protections for the waters of the Great Lakes basin.

This past July, the government released to the public drafts of agreements it had negotiated with Quebec and the eight American states bordering the Great

Lakes. The Ontario government has concerns about the level of protection provided in the draft agreements to the waters of the Great Lakes basin. This September, we held public open houses in

Thunder Bay, Sault Ste Marie, Windsor, London and Kingston, and the Council of Great Lakes Governors hosted meetings here in Toronto. We listened to the feedback from stakeholders, First Nations

and the general public, and they have spoken.

Ontario remains committed to its provincial law, which bans diversions. For the purposes of the annex agreements, Ontarians and the McGuinty government clearly

want a no-diversions agreement or the position of no net loss, as proposed by the International Joint Commission. In addition, we regard conservation measures as significant for the protection of

the Great Lakes waters. This precious resource should not be wasted. For these reasons, Ontario is not prepared to ratify the agreement in its current form.

Let me provide a bit of context for members on these agreements.

It was in the early 1980s that Ontario, Quebec and the eight Great Lakes states became concerned about the threats to the Great Lakes from proposals to divert

large quantities of water out of the basin. So in 1985, they signed the Great Lakes Charter, which was a good-faith agreement that aims to protect and conserve the waters of the Great Lakes

basin.

In 1998, the Harris government issued a permit to an Ontario company for the export of up to 600 million litres of water a year from Lake Superior for sale in

Asian markets. Public outrage on both sides of the border led to the signing of the Great Lakes Charter Annex in 2001. The charter annex committed the 10 jurisdictions to strengthen protection of

Great Lakes basin waters through binding agreements. Over the next three years, the parties negotiated the draft agreements that were released in July. Ontario took

part in those negotiations

because it was an opportunity for the province to have a voice in promoting stronger regulation of water uses on the US side of the border.

The Great Lakes are vital for the well-being of Ontarians, but these lakes are also a resource that we share with other Ontarians and among 40 million other

people on both sides of the border who use these waters for drinking, for food production, for work and for recreation. While Ontario bans water transfers out of its three major water basins, the

same is not the case in the United States. Clearly, water is a public resource that should not be traded as a commodity. Through the negotiations, Ontario was able to raise the bar on protections

for the Great Lakes basin waters, up to a point. The draft agreements strengthen regulation of water uses in many states, but they are not as strong as Ontario's laws, which prohibit water

transfers out of the province's three major water basins.

When Ontario released the draft agreements last July, I said Ontario would be seeking further dialogue with other jurisdictions on the diversion issue and on

other issues that might be raised by the public. We asked the public, stakeholders and First Nations to give us feedback on these agreements.

I'm pleased to inform this House that I have instructed my officials who are meeting today in Chicago with representatives of Quebec and the Great Lakes states

to discuss the results of the public consultation. The McGuinty government will not sign the current drafts of the Great Lakes Charter Annex agreements unless changes to enhance the level of

protection for the waters of the Great Lakes basin are made.

I will also be discussing the feedback from our consultation with my federal colleagues and Ontario's negotiating partners from Quebec. We will be considering

our position carefully before resuming negotiations in January. I want to assure Ontarians that we will continue to seek input on the charter annex agreements from stakeholders and First Nations,

and I would also like to address today a related issue concerning these negotiations.

Some stakeholders have raised the legitimate question of who should be leading these negotiations on behalf of our citizens. If the federal government were to

direct the negotiations, it would have to deal directly with the US federal government, which would have to represent the interests of water users across the continental United States and not just

the Great Lakes states. Ontario believes the US Great Lakes states share with us many common interests on the use and protection of this valued resource. We are concerned that other US states may

have an interest in accessing Great Lakes waters that will conflict with our desire to prevent diversions from the basin. This is a highly complex issue, and we will continue discussions with

Quebec and the Canadian federal government before we make any final decisions.

I want to assure Ontarians that, above all, the Ontario government is seeking the strongest possible protections for the waters of the Great Lakes basin to

ensure future generations can enjoy the Great Lakes.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Responses?

Mr Jerry J. Ouellette (Oshawa): It's good to see the continuation of the discussions in regard to the 1985 annex agreement, with the express

concerns as stated by the minister regarding the diversions.

Since the original agreement in 1985, many jurisdictions have changed governments, and we know that there were many grey areas in the original agreement. But

the agreement had to start somewhere, and as the governments changed, so did the grey areas, especially as the world's thirst for fresh water has grown.

As in 2001, Minister Snobelen expressed his concern regarding the cumulative effect of small-scale diversions of water, the 2001 agreement did not allow for

the removal of any water that would endanger the integrity of the Great Lakes basin ecosystem. As I mentioned, the grey area is, what is the integrity of the Great Lakes and what is a diversion?

That is one of the grey areas we need to address.

Also, we see this as an opportunity for the minister to direct his staff to discuss and review with the other jurisdictions the impact of ballast water

discharge. You see, there are about 2,000 ships that come into Ontario every year throughout the Great Lakes. They can take up to 11,000 tonnes of water annually in ballast. These ships go to

various jurisdictions, with little or no consideration for the impact of moving species throughout the Great Lakes and certainly affecting the ecosystems within the Great Lakes. Not only that, but

we need to address the invading species that come along with the ballast water that comes in with the ships.

Certainly, when you talk about the number of litres of water removed from the province, when you equate 2,000 ships and up to 11,000 tonnes of ballast water,

that equates to a significant amount of water. Personally, I know that when I met with the US Senate committee, they were more than willing to discuss the impact on the ecosystems found within the

Great Lakes as a result of ballast water discharge. I know that Michigan and other jurisdictions wanted to sit down, and hopefully the minister will move forward in directing his staff to address

this issue as well. As the minister stated, all are concerned about the ecosystems and the water quality found in the Great Lakes.

CANADA-ONTARIO MUNICIPAL RURAL

INFRASTRUCTURE FUND

Mr Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln): I'm pleased to respond to the minister's address with respect to the COMRIF program. I congratulate him for

getting the news out and an application date forward now. The speech does seem a bit like déjà vu all over again, very much like the one from May. But I know it does take time to get

things through the Dalton McGuinty cabinet because they have that big test: There's no promise that can't be broken. I'm sure that for many, many months they have been trying to figure out a way to

break this promise, but the minister struggled on and brought it forward.

But I want to address the minister's arguments, and those of the Minister of Municipal Affairs, that somehow COMRIF is an adequate substitute for the 340

municipalities whose citizens pay the full gas tax but will not receive a single penny of gas tax money from the McGuinty government. When you compare the two programs, the gas tax is

overwhelmingly a larger program than COMRIF, which actually amounts to $60 million of provincial funding on an annual basis. It's not exclusive as a substitute to those 340 municipalities. It's

open to all municipalities up to a quarter million population. So you have those that apply to both programs; it's not exclusive to those 340.

It's application-based,

whereas the gas tax is automatic, flowing to municipalities annually. Here, they go through an application process, so there's no

guarantee of funding, or a limit. This is short-term,

whereas the gas tax program, if I understand, is to be permanent. So the smaller municipalities are getting a short-term, application-based

program where they are asked to put forward one third of the funding.

I think the Dalton McGuinty government has to realize that real, hard-working taxpayers live in rural Ontario -- they are not simply the flyover counties as

Dalton McGuinty makes his way in a jet from Toronto to Ottawa -- with real concerns and real infrastructure needs for bridges and roads, real needs for agriculture, job creation and education.

Sadly, the COMRIF program, while welcome and very much like the old OSTAR program with a red ribbon tied upon it, is a poor cousin to the gas tax program, and sadly, that's the approach of the

Dalton McGuinty government to rural Ontario: sad, poor cousins to the rest of the province. We are going to fight against that and we're going to continue to call on the Dalton McGuinty government

for a real infrastructure program.

No doubt transit municipalities welcome that gas tax funding; it's going to go a long way to help transit in some municipalities. But 340 municipalities are

out of the loop. We're going to continue to call for a substitute program to help those municipalities with their infrastructure needs.

WATER EXTRACTION

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): In response to the Minister of Natural Resources, he will recall that I raised this issue in the

Legislature in the form of a question a few weeks ago. At that time, he wasn't sure whether or not he was going to go ahead and sign the agreement. I'm pleased that he has announced today that

they're going to review it further before signing it.

The minister referred to some of the problems today, but I want to clarify to the Legislature once again why this is so important, because there's some concern

that the whole compact, as it now stands, undermines the integrity of the Great Lakes and our water. For instance, there are no set limits to how much water can be diverted; there is no time limit

on these diversions. As the minister stated, there are experts like the Council of Canadians, legal experts like Steven Shrybman, the Sierra legal fund, First Nations and others expressing grave

concern about the agreement as it now stands.

One of the things that most alarmed me, and still does about this agreement, is the fact that Ontario and Quebec would not have the same veto powers over those

diversions as the American states would. That just seemed insane to me, that we would sign such a document, because Ontario just can't allow itself to be a doormat for the Americans. They may try

to divert water from the Great Lakes to service sprawl across the border, and that is a very big concern that has been expressed. As it stands now, we have no veto over that, and it's very

important that we take a look at it and take a look at the whole problem of osmosis, you might say, because some say, "Well, what we're talking about here only affects water from those Great Lakes

bordering the US," but if the water only comes from one place, the water will flow via the principle of osmosis. It doesn't matter where you take it from; it's going to be reduced inside our

borders as well.

I'm very, very pleased that the minister is going to review that. I'm glad that he's listening. I hope that he'll take all of those concerns that I and others

raised into consideration before signing off on any agreement this vital. I would add, while I have this opportunity, that he should be talking to the Minister of the Environment about the huge

water-taking diversion that's happening as a result of the government allowing the big pipe to go ahead. Because of this interest in water-taking and diversions, that would certainly undermine our

position in those negotiations while we have a proposal that has been approved by the Minister of the Environment to allow that huge diversion to go ahead in that area.

CANADA-ONTARIO MUNICIPAL RURAL

INFRASTRUCTURE FUND

Mr Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): I will be responding to the statement made by the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal.

Although one can say that some of what you are doing is welcome, one can also have some very serious questions. The first is that you have isolated communities

of 250,000 or less to get this money. That's virtually every community in Ontario, which may be your plan. There are only eight that have 250,000 people or more. So that means a whole body of

communities out there are not going to get this money -- the very, very large ones -- and some of them do have farms and agricultural pursuits around them. I think that maybe you should look at

this number, and maybe the number is not exactly right.

The one third of the cost: I also have to bear this in mind for some of the smaller communities -- the really, really tiny ones. Where are they going to come

up with the money they need in order to make the necessary repairs? The federal government has huge pockets. The provincial government has huge pockets. But when you get into some of the very small

towns -- and I'm thinking about where my own parents live, in Cardiff, Ontario -- where are they going to come up with the one third to match all of the provincial and federal monies in order to

protect their water supply? I just don't see that they are going to have the wherewithal or the ability to do that.

There's no discussion here about you having gotten rid of the municipal outlet draining program, which you disbanded -- the ministers and the people on that

side of the House -- on July 28. Is this supposed to replace that? If so, this is not such a great announcement after all, because all you're doing is replacing something that you disbanded in July

with a new program that ostensibly is going to do exactly the same thing.

You have decided, or the Treasurer has decided, to reduce the Ministry of Agriculture's budget by 15% in this fiscal year. Is this money to replace that? I

have to ask that question.

Last but not least, I'm very worried that some of these municipalities are going to be pushed toward P3s; I think that's the hidden agenda.

ELLEN FAIRCLOUGH

Hon Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): I believe we have unanimous consent for each party to speak for up to five

minutes to pay tribute to an historic trailblazer, the Right Honourable Ellen Fairclough.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): The government House leader has requested unanimous consent for five minutes for comments. Agreed? The member

from Hamilton West.

Ms Judy Marsales (Hamilton West): I am absolutely honoured to be able to rise today to pay tribute to a great Hamiltonian, a great lady and a

great parliamentarian -- a local icon in our community, after whom a Hamilton government office is named as a permanent memorial to this great woman.

Long before I personally became involved with politics, I had occasion to visit Ellen Fairclough's home. As I walked through, admiring the framed memorabilia,

I was struck by the enormity of the accomplishments of this amazing woman. Row on row of historical figures, giants of history, meeting with Ellen, honouring Ellen at a time in history when women

were not so honoured: one woman fighting for the principles she believed in. One of those principles was equal pay for women. Her principles, as some of her colleagues found out, were not to be

compromised.

"She was an accountant by education. She was reputed to be tough in business and tough in politics, but always compassionate and caring with people." This is a

quote that I took from the Spectator, which ran a wonderful tribute to Ellen today. That image of toughness and caring was a universally held description of the Right Honourable Ellen Fairclough,

who made Canadian political history by becoming the country's first female cabinet minister.

Ellen passed away on Saturday, two months shy of her 100th birthday. Her niece, Dr Joan Heels, described her as "a great lady full of wit and charm."

Ellen Fairclough was born on January 28, 1905, at her parents' home on Hunter Street West in Hamilton, just a couple of blocks away from where her home was on

Stanley Avenue. Her determined nature became evident very early in her life. In a 1995 autobiographical account of her life entitled Saturday's Child: Memoirs of Canada's First Female Cabinet

Minister, Ellen Fairclough wrote that she got her first job during the Christmas season of 1917 at Robinson's department store, opposite Gore Park in downtown Hamilton. How did she get it? By

misrepresenting her age. We still do that today.

She served on Hamilton city council for five years, and was a member of the board of control and deputy mayor under Lloyd D. Jackson. In 1950, she won a

federal by-election in Hamilton West as a Conservative, and was re-elected in 1953 and again in 1957 when John Diefenbaker won a minority government. She was named Canada's first ever female

cabinet minister in June 1957, when Diefenbaker made her Secretary of State.

In her memoirs, Ellen noted that she became a Canadian political pioneer more by accident than by design: "Although I never started out to be the `first' of

anything, it turned out that I was the first woman in many areas of political life. There were not many others to follow, so I followed my own instincts.

"And when all is said and done, it has been a pretty satisfying life."

Mr Speaker, it has also been a very satisfying experience for anyone associated with Ellen Fairclough over the years. This is one political pioneer who will

never be forgotten. She will be sorely missed, but her legend will live on to guide other women to follow her lead, to go forward with confidence in their endeavours, whether they be politics or

business or their life's mission, to go forward with dignity, to go forward to follow their dreams. Her legacy is that other women will use their leadership and their talents to build a better

world through active involvement.

On behalf of my colleagues in the Liberal caucus and of all Hamiltonians and Ontarians, I would like to extend my sincerest condolences to the family of the

Right Honourable Ellen Fairclough. We also would like to extend our gratitude for the life and times and the wonderful leadership demonstrated by this truly great Hamiltonian.

Mrs Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener-Waterloo): I'm certainly pleased to rise on behalf of the Conservative caucus to pay tribute to the Right

Honourable Ellen Fairclough. Born in Hamilton on January 28, 1905, she passed away this weekend at the age of 99, just two months shy of her centennial birthday.

Ellen Fairclough will always be fondly remembered as a trailblazer who broke the gender barrier in government and cleared the path for many female politicians

to follow. She served on Hamilton city council for five years before she was elected to Parliament as the Conservative MP for Hamilton West in a 1950 by-election. She was the only female MP in the

House of Commons until she was joined by three more in the 1953 election.

While an MP, Ellen Fairclough introduced a private member's bill for equal pay for work of equal value. She was way ahead of her time. She also averaged 150

speeches a year in the House of Commons, focusing on housing, income tax, unemployment insurance, the post office and, of course, the status of women.

On June 21, 1957, Ellen Fairclough made political history by becoming Canada's first female cabinet minister when she was sworn in as Secretary of State by

Prime Minister John Diefenbaker. When the Diefenbaker government was re-elected a year later with a majority, she was appointed Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. In fact, it was in that

position that I feel I have a little bit of a link with Ellen Fairclough. When I became a Canadian citizen, I'm honoured and pleased to say, my citizenship paper was signed by Ellen Fairclough

during her time as Minister of Citizenship and Immigration.

As Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, she made significant contributions to eliminating racial discrimination from Canada's immigration policy, and she

changed Canada's policy of not accepting refugees afflicted with tuberculosis. In 1962, she was appointed Postmaster General. Her career ended in 1963. However, in 1995 her autobiography, entitled

Saturday's Child: Memoirs of Canada's First Female Cabinet Minister, was published.

An accountant for 22 years, Ellen Fairclough served on the boards of many foundations and charities, including the Girl Guides and the Consumers' Association

of Canada. She received numerous honours over the years, including being named an Officer of the Order of Canada in 1978 and a Companion of that order, the highest level, in 1995.

Today Ellen Fairclough is being remembered, and I quote, "in her professional, voluntary and political life, as a pioneer, trailblazer and role model,"

according to Stephen Harper; as a cabinet minister who, according to Joe Clark, "tried and succeeded in bringing a sense of compassion to those offices"; and, according to her niece, Dr Joan Heels,

as "a great lady full of wit and charm."

Yes, Ellen Fairclough was a woman who advanced the role of women in public life. She certainly, to this day, has inspired many other female politicians to

follow in her footsteps. On behalf of our caucus, I would like to express our sincere condolences to her family.

Ms Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): It is an honour to speak today to give witness to the great parliamentary career of the Honourable Ellen

Fairclough.

Ms Fairclough was born in Hamilton in 1905 and was first elected to the House of Commons in a by-election on May 15, 1950, as the member for Hamilton West.

Coincidentally -- or perhaps there were higher forces at work -- 54 years later to the day, on May 15, 2004, another woman, also born and raised in Hamilton, was elected in a by-election, this time

in Hamilton East, and that woman was me. It's because of the breakthrough work that was done by women like Ellen Fairclough that women like me have had the courage and the opportunity to enter

political life and to succeed. Quite frankly, to even consider a career in politics is as a result of trail-blazing women like Ellen Fairclough.

In the House of Commons, Ellen Fairclough averaged 150 speeches a year, especially on her favourite topics, such as housing, income tax, unemployment

insurance, the post office and, of course, the status of women. She introduced private member's bills for equal pay for work of equal value. She was a member of Parliament for 13 years, winning one

by-election and four general elections. She served in such high-profile cabinet posts as Secretary of State, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, and Postmaster General.

Every day, Hamiltonians are reminded of Ellen Fairclough, as our community has a government building that bears her name and celebrates her considerable

contributions. In Hamilton, Ellen Fairclough has been, and will continue to be, a household name.

During her time in office, and for a decade or two thereafter, women made considerable gains in the Canadian and Ontario Houses of Parliament. But today, the

number of women representatives is stalling and, in some cases, even falling. Canada ranks 36th in the world, far behind most other democracies, in the number of women members of Parliament.

We know that gains are possible. Wales has over 50% women; Quebec is up to 30% women. Gains in Canada and other jurisdictions are, however, correlated to

reforms in campaign financing, nomination processes and electoral systems. The NDP will continue to fight for these kinds of changes. Women and men across Ontario and in the rest of Canada need to

keep fighting and working to make sure that the representation of women becomes a reality and stays that way. As I look around the chamber today, I see the pages we have among us, and I see there

are many bright women in their ranks.

Every March, we celebrate International Women's Day. I know that young women across our province and across our nation are aspiring to participate to their

fullest in every profession, every trade, every type of business, every workplace and every position of electoral office.

We're grateful to Ellen Fairclough, Canada's first female cabinet minister and a strong Hamiltonian, for setting such a strong example for us all to follow. In

marking her passing, we should all commit to bringing about the changes that will lead to the equal representation of women in all professions, as well as in this and our federal House.

On behalf of my NDP colleagues, I would like to extend my sincere condolences to her family and to all Canadians and Hamiltonians whose lives she touched.

The Speaker: All tributes paid today will be forwarded to members of the family. We all salute this great Canadian.

ORAL QUESTIONS

TAXATION

Mr Jim Flaherty (Whitby-Ajax): My question is for the Premier. In election campaign promise number 226, you said, "We will hold the line on

taxes," and in promise 227, "We will not raise the debt." Then there was the whopper, super-sized promise, the taxpayer protection promise, where you said, "I, Dalton McGuinty, leader of the

Liberal Party of Ontario, promise that if my party is elected as the next government, I will not raise taxes or implement any new taxes without the explicit consent of Ontario voters; and not run

deficits." You signed that last September in Toronto.

Today, we have the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, the people with whom you signed this pledge, in court trying to get you to honour your promise to the people

of Ontario. The bargain was clear: You would not raise taxes, the people of Ontario would vote for you, and you would be the Premier and the government.

Well, you got what you wanted. The taxpayers of Ontario fulfilled their part of the bargain for you. Now it's your turn to fulfill your side of the bargain,

but you didn't do it. You raised taxes.

What instructions have you given government lawyers going to court today in Toronto? Have you told them to say that you kept your promise?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I'm delighted to have the opportunity to speak with the member opposite

on this issue.

It's really hard to figure out, from one day to the next, where the Tories are going to land on a host of issues. I want to remind the member opposite that

today, apparently, he champions the Taxpayer Protection Act, but on June 27, 2002, he and so many of his colleagues voted in favour of breaking that very same law. So it's perhaps a little bit

surprising over on this side that on one day they are champions of the Taxpayer Protection Act, but, apparently, on other days they are not.

Mr Flaherty: It is the now Premier's promise, with his signature on it, signed at the Sheraton Centre in Toronto. Not only did he do that, he

had his Liberal Party have a series of ads on television and on radio. What did they say? They quoted today's Premier as saying, "I won't raise your taxes, but I won't cut them either." That was

the pledge made by the now Premier of Ontario when he was running for office. It was in his platform. He had his party pay for the ads. Now he has not Liberal Party lawyers in court, not his own

lawyers in court; no, he has a fleet of government lawyers in court.

Assure the people of Ontario, Premier, that you will not spend one penny of taxpayers' dollars, one dollar paid in taxes by the working families of Ontario, to

defend your broken promise in court.

Hon Mr McGuinty: The assurance that I will provide to the people of Ontario is that because of our new legislation, the first of its kind in

Canada, the Fiscal Transparency and Accountability Act, no government in this Legislature will ever again be able to hide a deficit from the people of Ontario, especially a $5.6-billion

deficit.

Mr Flaherty: I'm asking you about today. I'm asking you about using government lawyers, paid for by taxpayers, to defend what you said when

you were running for public office.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): It's pretty early in oral questions for us to be shouting like this. Final supplementary?

Mr Flaherty: Your Liberal Party has got lots of money, Premier. They've got enough money to buy you a house in Rosedale. You've got the

president of the Liberal Party sitting right here. Why don't you tell the president of the Liberal Party today, why don't you tell the corporate people paying for your house in Rosedale? Let them

pay for the lawyers who are defending your broken promise that helped get you elected as Premier of Ontario. Tell us why the taxpayers of Ontario should pick up your tab for your broken promise.

Tell us why the taxpayers of Ontario should foot the bill for you putting your foot in your mouth at their peril.

Support the working families of Ontario. Stand up and say that their tax money will not be used to foot the bill for your broken promise.

Hon Mr McGuinty: Well, it's always a lot of fun, I can tell you, perhaps just a little bit too delicious, getting a lecture from one of the

champions of the Magna budget, the first of its kind in the country to deliver a budget outside this Legislature.

I also understand why they don't want a reminder of their own particular record. The Conservatives want us to forget that they actually promised to outspend us

on both health care and education. They also promised, at the time of the last election, to cut another $5 billion in taxes and make $5 billion in debt repayments. The only thing that they have

been consistent at, since the time of the election and in fact prior to the election, is hiding the fact from the people of Ontario that they hid a $5.6-billion deficit. We had some choices to

make, we made those choices, and those choices are in the interests of the people of Ontario.

STUDENT DROPOUT RATE

Mr Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): My question is to the Premier, in the absence of the Minister of Education. The Minister of Education has made

himself the official parent of Ontario. He started off by telling us that he is going to tell kids what they're going to eat. Now, his latest announcement: He's making himself the Big Brother of

Ontario. He is, under your blessing, now going to ensure that our youth, to 17 and 18 years old, are going to be forced to stay in school. Premier, can you tell me --

Applause.

Mr Klees: The applause that you just got from your colleagues tells me that either you or they have never had a discussion with a 16-, 17- or

18-year-old about their struggles in school. Premier, can you tell me what steps you will take to enforce the fact that these young people will be forced to stay in school?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Let me take the opportunity, first of all, to say that I'm very proud of

the work our Minister of Education, Gerard Kennedy, is doing on behalf of all Ontario students.

Secondly, I am surprised by the position being adopted by Mr Klees and his party. Close to 30% of Ontario high school students are not completing their

certification. They're not getting a high school diploma -- 30%. We think that is unacceptable. He may be prepared to write off 30% of the younger generation and allow them, at the beginning of the

21st century in a knowledge-based economy, to somehow seek out some kind of meagre existence on the basis of a grade 10 or 11 education. We are saying that this may not be an easy challenge to

overcome, but we are prepared to take it on. We feel we owe it to those young people in particular.

Mr Klees: There isn't a parent in this province who would disagree that it's not appropriate and helpful for students to complete their

education. But let's deal with what is practically and realistically possible in this province.

I want to know from the Premier what specific apprenticeship programs he will commit to implement in this province to ensure that those 30% who are not

academically inclined and cannot in fact deal with the current academic requirements will have a meaningful curriculum to pursue. Will you today commit to funding for specific apprenticeship

programs for those young people in this province? Let us hear the specific commitment.

Hon Mr McGuinty: One of the things we have made perfectly clear is that these students do not necessarily have to complete their learning

inside the traditional classroom setting. I think we've all had colleagues in high school with whom we made friends along the way who found it very difficult to learn in that particular kind of

setting. One of the things we've committed to is to create 7,000 new apprenticeship spaces. Beyond that, we have, through our first budget, a proposal to create a tax credit: We're going to pick up

25% of the cost for a business to take on apprenticeship. There is a fundamental, practical, pragmatic way, just one of many ways that we are putting forward, to ensure that young people in Ontario

continue to learn until the age of 18.

Mr Klees: In this province, children can leave home at the age of 16 and avoid parental control. This Premier is now saying that he and his

government and his Minister of Education will go after those young people in our province today who are not under parental control -- who, for their own reasons, have taken upon themselves a role

of independence -- force them into school and, if they don't stay there, he'll throw them in jail. I want to know --

Interjections

Mr Klees: That's exactly, precisely what you have said.

Premier, I want to know, first of all, what you are going to do to ensure that those young people comply with the new McGuinty Ontario, where kids up to 18 are

forced to be in school. You are going to punish them --

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Thank you.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order.

Hon Mr McGuinty: This is just plain silliness on the part of the opposition. We understand, and I can tell you as the father of four kids, now

between the ages of 19 and 23, that I have some basic understanding of some of the challenges connected with motivating young people and getting them into places where they might not naturally be

inclined to go.

To repeat again, we're not insisting that young people remain in the traditional classroom setting. We want to create more apprenticeship opportunities; we

want to create more job placement opportunities where young people can, in a real and meaningful way, learn on the job; we want to create more co-op programs. The idea here is not to come in with a

typical Tory approach and threaten jail; it's to find ways to engage young people, to help them understand that it is in their enlightened self-interest that they continue learning until the age of

Our mothers have been telling us for centuries that generally those things that are worth doing aren't easy to get done. We understand that with respect to

this matter in particular. We are determined to move ahead and ensure that young people in Ontario continue to learn until they reach the age of 18.

PICKERING NUCLEAR

GENERATING STATION

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Premier. Under the former Conservative government, we saw cost overrun after

cost overrun at the Pickering nuclear generating station unit 4. You were very critical of the former Conservative government's hydroelectricity policy. During the election, you said to the people

of Ontario, "Choose change." Well, today we learned that under the McGuinty government, unit 1 of the Pickering nuclear station is now $175 million over budget. My question is, can you tell all the

people of Ontario who believed you when you said, "Choose change," can you tell all the people of Ontario who are worried about being able to pay their hydro bill, where the change is?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): The Minister of Energy.

Hon Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): First of all, the project is not $175 million over budget. Today the board

reported that there's a projected overrun of between 7.5% and 10%, which is due to the time to get the plant started up. The project is 54% complete and is ongoing. It needs to be noted that the

current forecast is just that; it's a projection. The board still believes there's an opportunity to come in under that projected cost and time frame.

Mr Hampton: It was the Premier who said, "Choose change," and I would hope that the Premier would answer this, because the project is in fact

$175 million over what you said. This is the report by your good friend John Manley, a long-time Liberal -- not some Conservative insider -- who said that Pickering unit 1 would cost $825 million.

He gave you this report on March 15. Here we are now, on November 15, eight months later, and the chair at OPG, Jake Epp, says that it's going to cost $1 billion. That's a $175-million cost

overrun; 20% in eight months.

You said, "Choose change." Can you tell me where the change is when the cost overrun is 20%, $175 million in eight months, under the McGuinty government?

Hon Mr Duncan: When we announced the Pickering A1 refurbishment, we announced the projected cost at the time as $900 million. That was in

June. Mr Epp did not say that the project would come in at $1 billion today; what he said is that there is a 7.5% to 10% variance projected, based on results today.

The change is that, for the first time, a government is making that information public, unlike the Tories, unlike the previous government. When faced with

similar circumstances, they chose not to reveal it. They had 13 project delays and 11 cost overruns.

This project is 54% done right now and there's a potential variance of 7.5% on $900 million, which was the figure this government put out in June.

The real change is a government that's committed to fixing the mess in the energy sector. We're doing it, we're doing it prudently, and we're going to ensure

that the lights stay on in Ontario for years to come.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): The member from Nepean-Carleton, could you just come to order, please.

Mr Hampton: I just want to quote someone who said on July 7 of this year, "Rest assured, we will not allow a repeat of these mistakes. This

government will not write blank cheques.

"We will be vigilant in observing the progress of this project. Rigorous public scrutiny will ensure that the project stays on track and on budget."

Who said that? Dwight Duncan. Now we're $175 million over budget.

It doesn't end there. The Conservatives were going to privatize any of our river sites that have the potential to generate hydroelectricity. What did the

McGuinty government announce last week? They're going to privatize any of our remaining river sites that have the potential to generate electricity. This is exactly the same agenda that the people

of Ontario had under the Conservatives.

Dalton McGuinty said, "Choose change." What the people of Ontario are getting are sky-high hydro bills and the same electricity policy that failed under the

Conservatives. Where's the change, Premier? Where's the change?

Hon Mr Duncan: At Pickering A unit 1, there is a projected overrun of 7.5% at this point. On Pickering A unit 4, it was 400%.

We have kept our commitments in June and July. We've brought full accountability. We've appointed a new board with people who understand the industry. That's

number one.

Number two, the project is now 54% complete. It was at this point in the last example that the cost overruns were considerably higher.

I said at the time -- and the member conveniently left it out -- that this is a high-risk project, but it's one that had to be undertaken to ensure that the

province's electricity supply in the short term remained full.

There are no easy solutions to this problem. What this government has done to change the past is, number one, we're addressing the problems; number two, we've

provided openness and accountability; and number three, we have a plan that's working to ensure that the people of Ontario have continued access to reasonably priced electricity.

AUTISM TREATMENT

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I have a question to the Premier. Premier, the Provincial Auditor has recently released a --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Order. Let us see if we can get some control here today. The member from Nickel Belt.

Ms Martel: I have a question for the Premier. Premier, the Provincial Auditor has recently released a scathing report of the government's

intensive early intervention program for autistic kids. He reported at the end of March 2004 that some 1,200 children were languishing on a waiting list hoping to get IBI treatment. At the same

time, by the end of March 2004, a total of $16.7 million had not been spent, even though it had been budgeted for the program, and some of the money wasn't spent under your government, Premier. As

a result, there are hundreds of autistic children who waited on a list, turned six and never got a day's worth of IBI treatment because this program is so grossly mismanaged, first by the

Conservatives and now by your government.

Tell me, Premier, for all of those parents to whom you said, "Choose change," where is the change when their children are languishing on a waiting list just

like they did under the Conservatives?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I want to begin by thanking the auditor for his work. You may know that

we fully supported this audit. We welcome the recommendations. I can tell you that the minister made me aware that there were a number of challenges connected with her portfolio, including

these.

I'm delighted to tell the member opposite about some of the things that we have done to address -- we did not wait for the auditor's report. We have improved

reporting requirements of our service agencies so that programs are now managed more efficiently. We're improving the clarity and consistency of information we receive from service providers so

data is comparable and able to track the progress of programs. They tell me that before we got this responsibility of forming the government here, if you can believe this, there were no regular

meetings between the ministry's regional staff and the service providers. We have now insisted that those take place on a weekly basis. So we are in a much better position now to know exactly what

is happening.

Ms Martel: Premier, you haven't read the report. You don't understand how serious it is. You don't even understand that the report was just

recently finished and that it's a condemnation of what's happening now in your government with respect to this program. The auditor reported that those children who were lucky enough to get IBI are

regularly shortchanged of the hours of treatment they are promised. Many therapists are providing, on average, 15 hours a week of treatment, when the average for that agency is supposed to be 23.

In one agency alone, every child lost, on average, over four hours of IBI treatment every single week. And the worst

part is that each agency got paid fully for the treatment that they promised to

provide but didn't deliver. You were the government that said to people, "Choose change." What do you say to these parents whose children are regularly being shortchanged of the treatment that they

need?

Hon Mr McGuinty: Again, to make it perfectly clear, all the government money that was committed to this did in fact flow. It ended up in the

hands of our service agencies and there was a disconnect between ministry oversight and those service providers. I've just detailed some of the things that we have done to ensure that we are paying

much closer attention to what our service providers are doing. We look forward to doing more. And again, I welcome the auditor's report.

Ms Martel: That's a strange answer, because do you know what your minister said in response to the release of the report? She said that she

was going to do another review to get to the bottom of what is happening in the program. Here's the review that the Ombudsman did of this program, which was released in June. He was very critical

of the program. Here's the review that was released last week by the Provincial Auditor, who is very critical of this program. We don't need any more reviews. We need your government to live up to

the recommendations that were put forward both by the Ombudsman and the Provincial Auditor.

Look, Premier, no more reviews, no more stalling, no more delays, because it will mean that children will go without treatment and it will mean that the

children who do get some treatment will never get the hours of treatment that they have been promised. I ask you again: You told parents of autistic children to choose change. Where's the change

for autistic children in Ontario?

Hon Mr McGuinty: I just don't think the member wants to take yes for an answer. Again, we supported the audit. We supported making the audit

public. We've taken specific steps, even before the release of the report. I've just detailed some of those, and I'm pleased to list them again if that's what the member seeks. But I can tell you

that in addition to that change, which provides for a much closer oversight mechanism between ministry staff and our service providers, I'm also pleased to report -- the member asks what we have

done by way of change and what we're doing to help children. We have hired 40 new therapists and psychologists to provide IBI treatment to 20% more preschool-aged children. We've hired 80 new

autism consultants to help teachers support children with autism in the classroom. We've been doing a great deal. We know there's more to be done and we look forward to doing it.

PHOTO RADAR

Mr Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): My question today is for the Minister of Transportation. Minister, we learned this weekend that your office

was working with an agency called the National Campaign to Stop Red Light Running, which in this case was promoting photo radar, what we call the tax grab. Your office was aware that this group is

a front for photo radar camera manufacturers, who stand to make outrageous amounts of money if photo radar is brought back to our province. Do you support this action and do you believe that big

photo radar companies should be using your office as a promotional tool to promote photo radar and make outrageous amounts of money off of the citizens of our province?

Hon Harinder S. Takhar (Minister of Transportation): Let me tell you, I am always interested in any initiative that will improve safety on the

roads.

The other thing is, I want to point out for the record that -- the red light cameras were in fact initiated by the previous government. What we did was make

them permanent at the request of the municipalities, and we will consider any initiatives that will improve safety on our roads.

Mr Dunlop: I want to let you know that we cancelled photo radar on this side of the House.

Minister, this e-mail originating from your office refers directly to someone who works for Affiliated Computer Services, Inc as the person organizing the

event in question. The person is not a registered lobbyist, contrary to the Lobbyist Registration Act. This is clearly more than stakeholder relations and relations around public safety. This is

allowing your office to be used by a company that stands to make outrageous amounts of money. When we opened the properties on the electronic version of the press release being issued, we learned

that the author was a staffer in your office. Minister, why and for how much longer will your government continue to act as an agent for this company?

Hon Mr Takhar: Maybe this will come as a surprise to this member, but I want to tell you that we are always interested in working with all of

our partners to improve safety on the roads, and we will continue to do so.

STUDENT DROPOUT RATE

Mr Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): My question is to the Premier. Premier, last week you announced you will force students to stay in

school until the age of 18 and that you would promise $70 million to school boards to implement your law. Last October your ministry estimated that to keep 75% of the students from dropping out, it

would cost approximately $200 million. Your funding covers a mere third of that. Parents and teachers suspect that this is little more than a public relations exercise, and I have to tell you, I

agree. If you believe in your plan, why are you funding only a quarter of students to stay in school?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Now we've learned that both the Conservatives and the NDP are opposed to

requiring that young people continue to learn until the age of 18 in the province of Ontario. They are wed to a very, very old law -- I think it's 50 or 60 years old -- that requires that young

people stay in school only until the age of 16.

We are going to require that young people continue to learn until the age of 18. They do not have to do so within the confines of a traditional classroom

setting. One of the things that we've already done is begin to unfold our plan to create 7,000 new apprenticeships. This budget specifically provides for a new apprenticeship training tax credit

that enlists employers of every kind in the province of Ontario to take on an apprentice, and we'll pick up 25% of the cost of those apprenticeship wages. That's the kind of practical, pragmatic

thing that we are doing as we begin to do something that should have been done, frankly, a long time ago: take a real interest in young people and make sure they continue to learn.

Mr Marchese: Now we learn that the Premier can't, or is unwilling to, answer the question.

According to your funding formula, boards get $4,771 to provide each student a place in school. Simple math dictates that the cost of providing classroom space

for 25,000 students is $119 million, $49 million less than your commitment. If they have special education or ESL needs, as indeed most of them do, the cost increases by a potential 57 million

bucks more. You've only allocated a fraction of that amount.

Can you explain how you plan to have 25,000 dropouts when your plan won't even cover the cost of keeping them in class, much less providing the new programs

and improved support that will help them to graduate?

Hon Mr McGuinty: To adopt the approach promoted by my good friend opposite would be to say that you can't improve student achievement, so just

give up on that. You can't shorten wait times when it comes to health care, MRIs, CTs, cataracts, so throw up your hands and just give up on that. Apparently, we cannot and should not even bother

trying to require that young people continue to learn until the age of 18.

Well, we are going to do that. We are determined to do that. It may not be an easy thing to do. We may encounter a few bumps along the road, but that does not

relieve us of the responsibility to ensure that young people are equipped to succeed in this new knowledge-based economy. We are determined to ensure that they realize their potential, and we will

do what it takes to get it done.

CANADA-ONTARIO MUNICIPAL RURAL

INFRASTRUCTURE FUND

Mr Jeff Leal (Peterborough): My question is for the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal. The Canada-Ontario municipal rural

infrastructure fund is a big step forward in enabling small communities to improve their infrastructure. As you know, my riding was devastated this summer by flooding and there's a lot of

infrastructure in need of repair and enhancement. Minister, can you tell me how my constituents can best make use of this fund and what this means to the city of Peterborough?

Hon David Caplan (Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal): I want to thank the member for the question, and I want the member to understand

that we understand the unique challenges that exist in the city of Peterborough. In fact, our government was on the job, quick to respond with relief funding when it was needed to address those

needs. In fact, the Premier was in Peterborough within 48 hours of that tragic circumstance.

COMRIF is yet another way that our government is able to help with the specific needs of small urban and rural Ontario. COMRIF is an investment in small urban

and rural municipalities to support capital projects to help build safe and clean, livable communities in this province.

I was in Peterborough this morning and I handed Mayor Sylvia Sutherland the very first application for COMRIF. I would encourage all of the members and all the

municipalities to go to www.COMRIF.ca for an on-line application. In fact, it is a fabulous program and it's creating a great deal of excitement in Ontario today.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Supplementary?

Mrs Carol Mitchell (Huron-Bruce): It's very good to hear that COMRIF will benefit small cities such as Peterborough. But what about small

communities in very rural areas? Small communities in my riding, such as Blyth, Bayfield and Kincardine, are also very much in need of sound infrastructure. Agriculture, which is the mainstay of

the communities in my riding and many other ridings in Ontario, requires good roads and bridges to be efficient. These small communities, and many others across Ontario, are also in need of good

waste water treatment. Mr Minister, can you tell me and the people of Ontario what COMRIF will do to enhance waste water treatment for small communities across the province?

Hon Mr Caplan: In fact, COMRIF was designed by municipalities for municipalities. AMO was a big

part in the program design for the very first

time in the province of Ontario's history.

Our government recognizes the unique challenges of small communities in dealing with some of the large infrastructure deficits left behind by the previous two

governments, particularly in the areas of water and waste water and roads and bridges. That's why COMRIF, in association, by the way, with the Ontario Strategic Infrastructure Financing Authority

or OSIFA -- the combination is a powerful tool to be able to meet some of those infrastructure needs. By ensuring the strength of our small and rural municipalities here in Ontario, we ensure a

strong province. It's a very proud day for all of us here in this Legislature.

COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTRES

Mr Norman W. Sterling (Lanark-Carleton): My question is for the Premier. You have been giving inadequate increases to local hospitals in

Ottawa. Your answer to that charge is that you're going to provide health care in a different way: through means such as community health centres. That's why local residents were stunned recently

when you ignored the city once again, refusing to include it in the announcement of new community health centres. The consequences will be longer wait times at our hospitals and reduced access to

care in our Ottawa communities.

Premier, your Minister of Health knows of the merits of the excellent proposal put forward by the Western Ottawa Community Resource Centre. We have

demonstrated that with its rapidly growing population, west-end Ottawa should top the priority list when it comes to expanded health care services. Can you inform the citizens of Ottawa why you

have denied them any access to new community health centres?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): The Minister of Health.

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I suspect that the people of Ottawa would want to know why for eight years your

government deprived all communities in Ontario of an expansion of community health centres. We are a government, one year in office, that has moved forward with a $21-million expansion of community

health centres.

It's particularly interesting that on the very same day that a colleague of the honourable member, who represents the riding of Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke,

came across the way and said, "Thank you very much for the expansion in the form of a satellite community health centre," that this member, for eight years in cabinet, did not deliver for his

community, nor for any community in Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Supplementary?

Mr John R. Baird (Nepean-Carleton): I want to ask the supplementary to the Premier. He is the senior member opposite representing, at least

last I heard, a constituency in Ottawa. The association representing community health centres across Ontario a number of years ago developed a list of 10 priorities, among which was the western

Ottawa community health centre proposal and the proposal that was advocated by the Nepean Community Resource Centre. South Nepean is bursting at the seams, and the Premier owes it to explain to

people in Ottawa-Carleton why their proposal, an excellent proposal, was so rejected by him and his government. Could he do that?

Hon Mr Smitherman: I wish I had more time, because I could ask the honourable member about his record as a member of the government: what they

did in Ottawa to Montfort, what they threatened, what they did to CHEO and the like. All the community health centres in Ottawa, like all other community health centres in Ontario, got a

substantial increase to their budgets. But way more than that, what we're in the midst of, as a government, is bringing forward family health teams, which find their roots in the interdisciplinary

way that community health centres operate.

In Ontario, before the end of this fiscal year, 45 additional communities will receive family health teams, and those that will have the first shot at these

are the very same communities that have made application for community health centres. That's our commitment to meaningful primary care.

Interjections.

The Speaker: The member from Hamilton East, let me just wait until discussion between some members here quietens down.

New question, the member from Hamilton East.

CONSUMER PROTECTION

Ms Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): My question is for the Minister of Consumer and Business Services. Your colourful calendar, marking

Consumer Awareness Week, offers tips on how to avoid being defrauded by shady companies. But in the meantime, you're not doing your share to protect people from fraud in the fitness club industry,

particularly.

Consumer complaints about fitness clubs in Ontario now number in the thousands. The number grew by almost 400 during your first year in office. More than 700

complaints and inquiries were lodged with your ministry against one single company alone between 1999 and 2003.

Minister, if you've known for years about the hundreds of consumer complaints against Premier Fitness, why is it still taking money from consumers' bank

accounts without authorization? Why aren't the banks being told to keep a closer eye on withdrawals by Premier Fitness and other companies with poor track records? When are you going to start

really protecting consumers by holding these companies to account?

Hon Jim Watson (Minister of Consumer and Business Services): Of all the members to ask that question, the member from Hamilton East wasted

more time calling recorded votes and adjourning the House when I had Bill 70 before this Legislature. Bill 70 would have given greater protection to those people she talks about in the Hamilton

Spectator series on fitness clubs.

I would ask the honourable member to apologize to this House and to the people who have been ripped off by fitness clubs for stalling Bill 70. I ask her to

pass it speedily at committee and then back here at third reading so we can help protect consumers in the province of Ontario.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Order. We get fewer questions if we continue like this. Final supplementary?

Ms Horwath: Notwithstanding the government's inability to get any legislation passed, I guess I'm doing a very good job here, as a matter of

fact.

But, Minister, you're the one who told the Hamilton Spectator that the only thing you could think of to deter disreputable firms is a fine. That's just a slap

on the wrist. That is not consumer awareness. You're hiding behind a law that puts the so-called privacy rights of these shady businesses above the right of consumers to know what they're getting

into. Don't you think a better deterrent would be to post these corporate bad apples in some type of public forum? Consumers shouldn't be the vulnerable ones in these situations. The companies and

banks need to be held accountable.

In the spirit of Consumer Awareness Week, will you publicly post the charges and convictions against these fitness clubs so consumers can decide for

themselves?

Hon Mr Watson: Let me set the record straight. We've laid over 40 charges against some of the bad apples in the fitness industry. I'm proud of

the three convictions my ministry has helped to secure to protect Ontario's consumers.

The fact of the matter is, the honourable member clearly did not even read the bill. If you look back at Hansard on June 22, 2004, she said, "This bill is

scratching the surface of a lot of different things without really making significant changes in any one area." She clearly hadn't even read the bill. I would encourage the honourable member to

read the bill and participate in the debate. I would urge the member, as I would urge the Conservatives, who are great fans of negative-option billing, to pass Bill 70 unanimously.

Mr Speaker, I ask for unanimous consent that Bill 70 -- a bill that is going to help protect consumers, which the McGuinty government has considered a priority

-- pass right away.

Interjections.

The Speaker: We seem to have many speakers here. They're running the show here. I don't even know what I'm asking unanimous consent for,

because I could hardly hear what was being said.

Interjection.

The Speaker: You're asking for unanimous consent to move third reading of the bill. Do I have unanimous consent? I heard a no.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. We can't get a point of order if we don't have any order.

Hon Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): On a point of order: I seek unanimous consent to put a motion to call Bill 70

for third reading today, with a vote on third reading at 6 o'clock this evening.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. I understand that Bill 70 is now in committee and you'd have to have a discharge order from the committee before --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. I would have to have a discharge order from the committee.

Hon Mr Duncan: On a point of order: I seek unanimous consent for a discharge from the committee and third reading this afternoon, with a final

vote on third reading at 6 this evening.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. The government House leader has asked that Bill 70 be discharged from the committee, bringing it back to the House, and

that we have third reading of the bill here, to be finalized at 6 o'clock. Do I have unanimous consent?

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): On a point of order, Mr Speaker --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. I've heard your point.

Mr Hampton: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: Since this is in committee, and since we would be doing away with committee, I ask for unanimous

consent to bring the bill forward for third reading debate this afternoon and this evening and vote on it at the end of this evening.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. There's a point of order that I'm trying to deal with. If you were concerned about the time in question period, you'd have

all listened to the point of order, voted and moved on it. It was before the House and, as has been stated, everyone has a different view. I want to deal with that matter now.

Does the government House leader have a point of order?

Hon Mr Duncan: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I seek unanimous consent to discharge Bill 70 from committee and bring it back to the House

for third reading debate at this afternoon's session, for third reading vote at 6 pm. I remind the leader of the opposition that he voted against sitting tonight.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Let me just say this again. The government House leader has moved that Bill 70 be returned from the committee and be voted

on on third reading by 6 o'clock this afternoon.

I heard a no.

New question.

FOREIGN-TRAINED DOCTORS

Mr Bill Mauro (Thunder Bay-Atikokan): My question is for the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities. Minister, last week you

announced two new funding programs for internationally trained medical graduates. Ontario is the fortunate recipient of talented immigrants from all over the world. Minister, up until now, many of

these graduates have been unable to practise their profession because of communication and cultural barriers. They do not have a full understanding of how best to communicate with patients in their

new home of Ontario, and they also require greater knowledge on legal and ethical issues surrounding health care in our province. How will last week's announcement help to change that?

Hon Mary Anne V. Chambers (Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities): I appreciate the question from the member from Thunder

Bay-Atikokan.

I was very pleased last Friday to join with my colleague the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care to announce two new initiatives for internationally trained

physicians. I'm happy to say that the first initiative is, indeed, a communications and cultural competence project, which we are working with the College of Physicians and Surgeons to deliver.

This will enable internationally trained physicians to prepare for the licensing examinations, and this will complement the IMG Ontario program that the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care

announced earlier this year. We, in fact, more than doubled the number of residency spots for internationally trained physicians, and this will help those physicians to qualify for those

placements.

Mr Mauro: Minister, I know that as part of your announcement you also announced a new program that takes a further step toward addressing the

unemployment and underemployment of internationally trained medical graduates. As you know, Thunder Bay and many other communities like it have been underserviced for many years when it comes to

health-related professions, not just family doctors. We know that a variety of health professionals will have an important role to play in a successful, integrated health care system.

Minister, could you provide further details on this new project, and explain how such a program will help to address shortages we have in health-related

professions in cities like Thunder Bay?

Hon Mrs Chambers: This is another example of our government working in consultation with the people of Ontario. This is an initiative that we

are funding to the tune of $1.5 million, with the Association of International Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario. They will help to address shortages that we're experiencing throughout health care

and provide informed options, if you like, for individuals who could practise in a variety of health care professions throughout the province of Ontario. We anticipate that this will serve

something in the order of 1,000 internationally trained physicians and ensure that their skills are brought to bear for the benefit of the people of Ontario, and also for their successful

integration into the province.

PIT BULLS

Mr Joseph N. Tascona (Barrie-Simcoe-Bradford): My question is for the Premier. Premier, I'm sure you have an issue note dealing with your

government's decision to ban pit bulls. I just hope it wasn't written by your Attorney General, given his inability or unwillingness to provide accurate information on this issue. In fact, the

Attorney General has made a string of comments that don't bear up to investigation. Virtually every organization that the Attorney General claims supports the legislation is opposed. These include

the Humane Society of Canada, the Ontario Veterinary Medical Association, Canadian Kennel Club, Canadian Federation of Humane Societies, Toronto Humane Society, Winnipeg Humane Society, Canadian

Safety Council, the Dog Legislation Council of Canada, the Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council, the Animal Alliance of Canada, and the list goes on.

Premier, it appears that your Attorney General, in the interest of grabbing headlines and not public safety, has introduced legislation that does not

adequately address the issue of dangerous dogs and has done so with claims of support that were either misunderstood or worse. Will you withdraw this flawed legislation and initiate real and

meaningful consultations to address the problem of dangerous dog attacks?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): The Attorney General, Speaker.

Hon Michael Bryant (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs, minister responsible for democratic renewal): We have an

interesting debate underway, there's no doubt about it, in the province of Ontario on this subject. We've heard from many sides. The member lists some people who have many questions about the bill.

He may also, in his supplementary, want to list the many mayors and chiefs of police who support the bill and also the victims of pit bull attacks. It was just a couple of weeks ago that, sadly, a

pit bull killed a small dog here in Toronto. It was just the latest in the litany of attacks that we've had. This government is intent on ensuring that we have safe communities. We're doing that

through this bill that addresses not only pit bulls but all dangerous dogs. We certainly are on the side of making our communities safer and protecting victims of pit bull attacks. I'd like to know

whether the official opposition supports the bill or not.

Mr Tascona: What you're suggesting with respect to this pit bull issue -- you have put out to the public that you are going to be changing the

Dog Owners' Liability Act when, in fact, you're not. All you're doing is increasing fines. People out there think you're actually doing something new.

The reality is that the Attorney General cited a US study that said one third of fatal dog attacks between 1979 and 1998 were caused by pit bulls. In other

words, we're going to deal with one third of the problem and ignore the other two thirds. Premier, your Attorney General, in his rush to get his mug on TV, failed to consult the experts in the

field and used false claims of support to justify his actions. In short, he has botched this badly. Once again, will you stop this public relations game and deal with a serious issue in a serious

and meaningful way? Pull this legislation and bring in comprehensive and effective dangerous dog legislation.

Hon Mr Bryant: Again, this is an interesting debate. I'm still not clear where the Progressive Conservatives are on this issue. Are they in

favour of the bill? Are they in favour of protecting Ontarians from pit bull attacks, or are they against that? I get the impression that they're opposed to this bill, so we're having a debate in

this Legislature on that very subject.

It is absolutely the case that we have spoken with every expert that we can try and speak to, that we've heard from all sides on this. But let's be clear: We

are going to proceed and we are going to advocate for this because we feel it is in the interests of protecting victims, not only victims of pit bull attacks -- human beings -- but their pets as

well. We're on the side of the victims; they're on the side of pit bull rights. Let the debate begin.

ASSISTANCE TO DISABLED

Mr Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): My question is to the Minister of Community and Social Services. Last month I asked you about a family in

eastern Ontario that was looking for the rebate, and you know all the mess that was there. I want to ask you, have you done anything to help that family yet?

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

question today. Each time that this particular MPP brings forward a question in the House, we go back to this individual's office to look for the details on those specific cases. We have a hard

time getting that kind of information from his office to do the follow-up.

What we committed to do in the area of the home and vehicle modification program is to take all of these requests that we have, to see if we can still manage

it, because there are people out in our communities who did miss a deadline, who didn't know about information that was out there. We are trying to be very reasonable about this so that we can help

as many people as possible. So we'd appreciate, with each question, if you would follow up with us when we call you, give us the information we need so that we can help people in your

community.

Mr Prue: My office informed your office of everything. Mr Chenier has written a complete letter and your officials have sent him to the March

of Dimes, back to the same agency that refused him in the first place.

Madam Minister, with the greatest of respect, what you have just said in this House is not correct. It is absolutely not correct. Our office has contributed,

Mr Chenier has contributed, and what I want to know from you now is, why are you sending him back to the same agency where the answer will be identical to what it was before, when you yourself

promised that you were going to help him? You yourself promised you were going to intervene, and you have done nothing.

Hon Ms Pupatello: I find that astounding, to this MPP. I think that most MPPs in this House have realized by now that this is a McGuinty

government that is intent to help people actually in need. When we have made policy changes, we have done it to benefit people, not to make life more difficult. When this particular member asks a

question in the House, I would just ask you politely to please follow up with our office with the detail, because we try to do that. We try to fix things. We actually try to help people. When we

talked about this revamping of the HVMP, we said, "Please get us information if there are people who we know have missed deadlines." We'd appreciate that. We're actually trying to help people on

this side of the House.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Thank you. That brings us to the end of oral questions.

I'll just wait a few seconds until members who are leaving depart from the House.

It's time for petitions.

PETITIONS

HEALTH CARE

Mr Bill Murdoch (Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

Whereas the Liberal government has announced in their budget that they are delisting key health services such as routine eye exams,

chiropractic and physiotherapy services;

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

"To reverse the delisting of eye exams, chiropractic and physiotherapy services and restore funding for these important and necessary services."

It was signed from all over my riding, many signatures, and they keep coming in.

REFUNDABLE CONTAINERS

Mr Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario and the Minister of the Environment. It reads as

follows:

"Whereas we find lots of pop cans and beer bottles in our parks and children's playgrounds;

"Whereas it is, therefore, unsafe for our children to play in these parks and playgrounds;

"Whereas many of these bottles and cans are broken and mangled, therefore causing harm and danger to our children;

"Whereas Ontarians are dumping about a billion aluminum cans worth $27 million into landfill" sites "every year instead of recycling them;

"Whereas the undersigned want to see legislation passed to have deposits paid on cans and bottles, which would be returnable and therefore not found littering

our parks and streets;

"Whereas the province of Quebec already has legislation obligating the vendors to accept the refund on all pop drinks, whether bottles or cans;

"Therefore, we, the undersigned, strongly urge and demand that the Ontario government institutes a collection program that will include all pop drinks, bottles

of beer, wine, Tetra Pak juices and can containers to be refundable in order to reduce littering and protect our environment."

Since I agree wholeheartedly with this, I am inclined to sign it as well.

CHIROPRACTIC SERVICES

Mr Jerry J. Ouellette (Oshawa): Before I begin, I wish to wish a certain someone a happy birthday, and I know the Speaker knows exactly whom

I'm speaking about.

I have a petition to the Legislature:

"Whereas

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

need;

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

physician offices and emergency departments;

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

health care costs; and

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

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

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

I affix my name in support.

PIT BULLS

Mr Bob Delaney (Mississauga West): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario from a group of residents of Mississauga and

Toronto. It reads as follows:

"Whereas pit bulls are dangerous dogs, showing as a breed a tendency for vicious attacks on adults, children and other animals out of all proportion to their

numbers; and

"Whereas jurisdictions where bans on pit bulls have been enacted have seen dramatic reductions in pit bull attacks on people and other animals; and

"Whereas residents of Mississauga and community leaders and law enforcement officials all across Ontario have supported a ban on pit bull ownership;

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

"That the government of Ontario enact legislation banning ownership of pit bulls in the province of Ontario, enact specific measures to require existing pit

bulls to be muzzled while in public, and require existing pit bulls to be spayed or neutered."

This petition reflects the feelings of those writing in to my constituency office, and I'm pleased to affix my signature.

CHILDREN'S HEALTH SERVICES

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

"Whereas there are approximately 23,000 children and youth in Simcoe county and York region who have special needs; and

"Whereas approximately 6,000 of these children have multiple special needs that require a range of core rehabilitation services; and

"Whereas children with multiple special needs (and their families) throughout the province access ongoing rehabilitation services that are critical for their

development at children's treatment centres in their area; and

"Whereas there is no children's treatment centre in Simcoe county or York region. For families that can travel, the closest services are in Toronto; and

"Whereas Simcoe county and York region is the only area left in the entire province that does not have access to children's treatment centre services in their

own area; and

"Whereas the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care provided funding to the Simcoe York District Health Council for implementation planning for an integrated

children's rehabilitation services system in December 2001; and

"Whereas the implementation plan was submitted to the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care in December 2002; and

"Whereas the proposal was reviewed and approved by the appropriate ministries in 2003, and in August the Ministry of Health advised the Simcoe county and York

region district health council that the funding had been committed and would be available shortly;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislature of Ontario to release the funding for the children's treatment centre in Simcoe county and York region so that

core rehabilitation services can be delivered to the children and youth in Simcoe county and York region."

I'd like to add that there is a rally at my office next Monday morning at 10:30 to help this, and I support this as well and will give it to Katharine.

CHIROPRACTIC SERVICES

Mr Wayne Arthurs (Pickering-Ajax-Uxbridge): A petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

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

"Whereas,

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

need;

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

physician offices and emergency departments;

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

health care costs; and

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

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

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

ADOPTION DISCLOSURE

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): I have a petition about adoption disclosure once again.

Mr John R. Baird (Nepean-Carleton): Let's pass that bill today.

Ms Churley: Let's pass that bill. It reads:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas four bills regarding the Adoption Disclosure Statute Law Amendment Act have been introduced between 1998 and 2003;

"Whereas one of the aforementioned bills received committee hearings in November 2001;

"Whereas Bill 14 addresses privacy concerns for those who wish to avoid or delay contact;

"Whereas adoptees are dying from genetic diseases in the absence of their family medical history;

"Whereas birth mothers were never promised confidentiality,

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows: Immediately call Bill 14, the Adoption Disclosure Statute Law Amendment Act, for

second reading, third reading and final vote."

I will sign this petition because I fully support it.

CHIROPRACTIC SERVICES

Mr Phil McNeely (Ottawa-Orléans): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Re: Support for chiropractic services in Ontario health:

"Whereas,

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

need;

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

physician offices and emergency departments;

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

health care costs; and

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

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

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

HEALTH CARE SERVICES

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the McGuinty Liberal government is cutting provincial funding for essential health care services like optometry, physiotherapy and chiropractic

care;

"Whereas this privatization of health care services will force Ontarians to pay out-of-pocket for essential health care;

"Whereas Ontarians already pay for health care through their taxes and will be forced to pay even more through the government's new regressive health tax;

"Whereas the Liberals promised during the election that they would not cut or privatize health care services in Ontario;

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

"We demand the McGuinty Liberal government keep its promises and guarantee adequate provincial funding for critical health services like eye, physiotherapy and

chiropractic care."

I'll affix my signature, because I support this petition.

TTC RIGHT-OF-WAY

Mr Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): I still receive petitions from very irate residents who are dead set against the dedicated TTC right-of-way on

St Clair Avenue West.

The petition reads as follows:

"Whereas an environmental assessment is underway on St Clair Avenue West to study potential `transit improvements,' including the possibility of installing a

dedicated TTC right-of-way;

"Whereas the consultation process so far has been in bad faith, top-down and rushed, which has disappointed and angered the local community almost entirely,

and not been up to any acceptable public standards;

"Whereas comments by the chair and the members of the Toronto Transit Commission have made it clear that there is a predetermined outcome to the EA process,

regardless of the objections of the local community;

"Whereas a dedicated right-of-way would force significantly more traffic on to local streets;

"Whereas the right-of-way would lead to a reduction or elimination of on-street parking;

"Whereas traffic bottlenecks at certain intersections and underpasses are already terrible;

"Whereas the underpass and the right-of-way will have substantial negative economic impacts on the local business community;

"Whereas there is no guarantee that a dedicated right-of-way will improve transit service substantially;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, strongly urge the Minister of the Environment to order a full environmental assessment on St Clair Avenue West, one that

genuinely consults and takes into consideration the views and opinions of the local community."

Since I agree, I'm delighted to sign it as well.

CHIROPRACTIC SERVICES

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): This petition reads:

"To: Legislative Assembly of Ontario

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

"Whereas,

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

need;

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

physician offices and emergency departments;

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

health care costs; and

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

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

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

I will affix my signature to this petition, because I support it.

GO TRANSIT SERVICE

Mr Bob Delaney (Mississauga West): I have a petition from a number of residents in northwestern Mississauga and Milton, including our local

member of Parliament. It reads:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the city of Mississauga has, within a generation, grown from a linked collection of suburban and farming communities into Canada's sixth-largest city,

and tens of thousands of people daily need to commute into and out of Mississauga in order to do business, educate themselves and their families and enjoy culture and recreation; and

"Whereas gridlock on all roads leading into and out of Mississauga makes peak period road commuting impractical, and commuter rail service on the Milton GO

line is restricted to morning and afternoon service into and out of Toronto; and

"Whereas residents of western Mississauga need to commute to commute, driving along traffic-clogged roads to get to overflowing parking lots at the Meadowvale,

Streetsville and Erindale GO train stations;

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

"That the government of Ontario, through the Ministry of Transportation and highways, instruct GO Transit to allocate sufficient resources from its 2004-05

capital budget to proceed immediately with the acquisition of land and construction of a new GO train station, called Lisgar, at Tenth Line and the rail tracks, to alleviate the parking congestion,

and provide better access to GO train service on the Milton line for residents of western Mississauga."

As one of those residents, I'm pleased to affix my signature and to ask Ellen to bring it down for me.

ADOPTION DISCLOSURE

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): It's my lucky day. I want to read another petition about adoption records. It reads:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas four bills regarding the Adoption Disclosure Statute Law Amendment Act have been introduced between 1998 and 2003;

"Whereas one of the aforementioned bills received committee hearings in November 2001;

"Whereas Bill 14 addresses privacy concerns for those who wish to avoid or delay contact;

"Whereas adoptees are dying from genetic diseases in the absence of their family medical history;

"Whereas birth mothers were never promised confidentiality;

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

"Immediately call Bill 14, the Adoption Disclosure Statute Law Amendment Act, for second reading, third reading, and final vote."

I will sign this petition.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

GREENBELT ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004 SUR

LA CEINTURE DE VERDURE

Mr Gerretsen moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 135,

An Act to establish a greenbelt area and to make consequential amendments to the Niagara Escarpment Planning and Development Act, the Oak Ridges

Moraine Conservation Act, 2001 and the Ontario Planning and Development Act, 1994 / Projet de loi 135, Loi établissant la zone de la ceinture de verdure et apportant des modifications

corrélatives à la

Loi sur la planification et l'aménagement de l'escarpement du Niagara, à la Loi de 2001 sur la conservation de la moraine d'Oak Ridges et à la Loi de 1994

sur la planification et l'aménagement du territoire de l'Ontario.

Hon John Gerretsen (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, minister responsible for seniors): Mr Speaker, I will be sharing my time with

my parliamentary assistant for rural affairs, the member from Lambton-Kent-Middlesex, who earlier today became a grandmother once again when her daughter gave birth to her seventh grandchild. I

don't know whether it's a boy or a girl --

Mr Ted McMeekin (Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Aldershot): A girl.

Hon Mr Gerretsen: It's a girl.

Interjection: What's her name?

Hon Mr Gerretsen: What's her name?

Mrs Maria Van Bommel (Lambton-Kent-Middlesex): Grace.

Hon Mr Gerretsen: Grace. So congratulations to the parliamentary assistant.

I would like to begin by asking my colleagues a very simple question. There are three questions, as a matter of fact. What do you want the Golden Horseshoe to

look like in the future? That's a good question for the member from Toronto-Davenport and the member from Erie-Lincoln. What do you think our province is going to look like 30 years down the road,

particularly in the GTA? Do you want to see strong communities, thriving centres, vibrant rural towns and villages and idyllic hamlets? Do you want a healthy natural environment, where our

wetlands, streams, waters and forests and the wildlife that depends on them can thrive? Do you want to see safe streets, clean air, safe water, congestion-free roads, plenty of parks, trails and

farmlands?

We all envision the very best for our future and for the future of our children and grandchildren. We also all know that it takes more than just wishing to get

there. To quote the poet and philosopher Ralph Waldo Emerson, "The future belongs to those who prepare for it," and that's what we're doing here today. We are preparing for the future. The McGuinty

government is preparing for the future for the people of Ontario, especially those who live in the GTA. For the first time ever, an Ontario government has set out a vision that is needed to

accommodate future growth in the Golden Horseshoe. We are pulling together environmental protection and growth planning and are dealing with them as one whole entity. We are building the strong,

healthy and prosperous Ontario that we all foresee in the future and, with this legislation, can now rightfully expect.

Today I'd like to tell you about one of the key elements of our government's plan to balance Ontario's growth with the protection of our environment. As you

know, the area from Niagara Falls in the southwest to Rice Lake near Cobourg in the east is home to some of the most important environmental features, the best agricultural lands and most lovely

countryside in the province. As you also know, these same lands are under some of the most intense development pressure in Canada. As Ontario grows, the public is becoming more and more concerned

that urban sprawl will consume these lands and that they will simply disappear with development.

Our government will not allow this to happen. We are committed to putting in place permanent greenbelt protection to curb sprawl and protect environmentally

sensitive and agricultural lands in this significant area of our province. We're well on our way to meeting that goal. With Bill 135, our Greenbelt Act, 2004, and with our draft greenbelt plan,

which is an integral part of the legislation, we want to know that, 30 years from now, the ecosystem will be preserved, water resources protected, and wildlife will exist in its natural

habitat.

We think we're on the right track, and we're not the only ones who think so. I'd like to quote some experts in the environmental field who also clearly think

that this government is on the right track with our proposed greenbelt legislation and plan.

Dr Rick Smith, the executive director of Environmental Defence Canada, calls the greenbelt "a breath of fresh air." He adds, "After years of poorly planned

growth and unfettered urban sprawl, declining air quality and disappearing farmland and forests, we're finally seeing a green vision for southern Ontario that makes sense."

Jim Faught, the executive director of Ontario Nature, said that Premier McGuinty's greenbelt announcement is "a great day for nature." Mr Faught also called

the proposed greenbelt "an important measure toward protecting vital green space in the Golden Horseshoe and ensuring the health of the province's citizens."

Dr Riina Bray, chair of the Ontario College of Family Physicians' environmental health committee, said, "We congratulate the McGuinty government for containing

urban sprawl and creating a permanent greenbelt. The creation of the greenbelt will improve air quality, curtail the obesity epidemic, decrease traffic accidents and fatalities and alleviate mental

health problems related to sprawl."

I could go on, but I think these three quotes tell the story of how experts in the area of environmental protection and health feel about our plans for

permanent greenbelt protection.

Environmental protection, while vitally important, isn't the only thing that our proposed greenbelt will do, if approved by this Legislature. It will also

permanently protect some of the most important farmlands in Canada and ensure that they remain productive farmlands. Ontarians want to know that the fertile agricultural lands of the Golden

Horseshoe will still be producing the food that our growing population needs, and that decades from now, parents will still be able to take their children to a local farm to pick apples from an

orchard, to learn how farmers raise the cows that give us milk, or to know how good fresh, home-grown produce can taste. Children need to know that food doesn't grow in the grocery stores, and

that's why we're proposing agricultural protection as a cornerstone of Bill 135 and the greenbelt plan.

Once again, I think the experts can say better than I can what our proposed greenbelt legislation and plan have the potential to deliver. To quote Elbert van

Donkersgoed of the Christian Farmers Federation of Ontario, "We believe the plan is the beginning of a legacy of stewardship of our best farmland."

His collea