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

May 21, 2002

37th Parliament, 3rd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2002-May-21 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Tuesday 21 May 2002 Mardi 21 mai 2002

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

SCHOOL SAFETY

BOWMANVILLE MAPLE FESTIVAL

HYDRO CORRIDOR LANDS

PONTIAN COMMUNITY

MEMBER FOR NIPISSING

HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATION DIPLOMAS

MARGARET LYON

EDUCATION FUNDING

GEORGINA AWARDS OF EXCELLENCE

VISITORS

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

VICTIMS OF IDENTITY

THEFT ACT, 2002 /

LOI DE 2002 SUR LES

VICTIMES DE VOL D'IDENTITÉ

LEGISLATIVE PAGES

MOTIONS

COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

VISITEUSES

ROSS MACKENZIE WHICHER

ORAL QUESTIONS

HOMELESSNESS

HYDRO ONE

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY

LIQUOR CONTROL BOARD

OF ONTARIO

HOMELESSNESS

MINISTRY SPENDING

ELDER ABUSE

MULTICULTURALISM

LONG-TERM-CARE FACILITIES

ABORIGINAL HEALTH CARE

LONG-TERM CARE

HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENTS

PETITIONS

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

LONG-TERM CARE

COMPETITIVE ELECTRICITY MARKET

PROFESSIONAL LEARNING

ONTARIO DISABILITY

SUPPORT PROGRAM

ABORTION

HYDRO ONE

CHILD CARE

EDUCATION FUNDING

PROFESSIONAL LEARNING

COMPETITIVE ELECTRICITY MARKET

HORSE RIDING SAFETY

NOTICE OF DISSATISFACTION

OPPOSITION DAY

HYDRO ONE

ADJOURNMENT DEBATE

LONG-TERM CARE

Tuesday 21 May 2002 Mardi 21 mai 2002

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

SCHOOL SAFETY

Mr Dominic Agostino (Hamilton East): I rise today to bring to the attention of the House a serious incident that occurred at a high school in my

riding of Hamilton East, and also to ask this government to act on potential solutions that could avoid these incidents in the future.

On Thursday, two female students, aged 17 and 19, were sexually assaulted inside Delta high school in Hamilton. The alleged intruder was a 20-year-old male who

walked into the school undetected.

Delta is an old school. It's 77 years old and has 27 entrances and exits. It's a school for which Dalton McGuinty's plan for dealing with safety in schools and

video surveillance cameras would work perfectly. Had cameras been available in this and other schools, this type of incident could be avoided.

Chris Murray, the chair of the school parent council, and Dave Hutton, the principal of Delta high school, have both come out and called upon this government and

the board to install video surveillance cameras in that school.

We have seen incidents in Toronto, we have seen incidents across Ontario, we have seen this very serious incident in Hamilton. The need is clear: our schools

need help. School boards can't afford it. Many schools only have part-time secretaries or part-time principals, which makes it even harder for them to detect intruders.

The plan that Dalton McGuinty has outlined, which would involve video surveillance cameras in schools where the schools need and request them, would go a long

way toward detecting some of these intruders and protecting the safety and the well-being of our students. I think we all agree with that goal. I would urge this government to move immediately to

implement that plan and give the school boards the funding to install video surveillance cameras where needed.

BOWMANVILLE MAPLE FESTIVAL

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): It's my privilege to share with the House a very successful event on May 4, the Maple Festival in Bowmanville.

The Bowmanville Business Improvement Area Association's Maple Festival has become a spring tradition. It attracts not only local families, but also visitors from

across Durham region and beyond. It's not just about flapjacks and sausages served outdoors, smothered in maple syrup with all the trimmings, although I can assure you that is reason enough to

attend the Maplefest. But there's a lot more. Bowmanville's main street was closed for the day so that you could enjoy a jazz festival and children's performances, plus an extensive display of

hobbies and crafts, as well as booths from community organizations.

I'd like to congratulate Ron Hooper, chair of the Bowmanville Business Improvement Area Association. I'd also like to congratulate BIA directors Edgar Lucas,

Lori Allin, Brian Purdy, Jamie Kennedy, Justin Barry, Michael Sullivan and, of course, municipal council representative Jim Schell. I would be remiss if I did not mention the BIA manager, a

tradition, Garth Gilpin, and his capable stand-in, Harvey Webster.

Also, I'd like to recognize volunteers like Rick and Barb Patterson. These are just a few of the local folks who have made it a great place to live and enjoy a

weekend with your family.

One thing that hasn't changed in Bowmanville is its pride in the history of the town. After over 150 years, it's still the heart of the community of Clarington,

and that's due to the commitments of the downtown business people and those who support events such as Maplefest. The same could be said for each of our downtowns in Durham riding generally. It's

my privilege to represent this area and to keep the House informed of these many special events in my riding on a regular basis.

HYDRO CORRIDOR LANDS

Mr Mario Sergio (York West): Last Thursday in this House the Conservative government was handed the opportunity to save and protect the hydro

corridor lands that criss-cross our city, the GTA and our province. The Tory members voted in favour of my private member's bill, the hydro transmission corridor lands Bill 13. Then the government

immediately killed the bill. This mean-spirited government can't have it both ways. On the one hand, they claim they are acting in the interests of the public, but given the chance, they put this

most valuable public resource at risk.

In failing to make a definite commitment on both Hydro One and the hydro corridor lands, the Premier is sending a clear message that both are to be privatized

and destined to fall into private hands. What a grave mistake. The corridor lands are of paramount importance for Ontario's present and future transportation needs, rapid transit, recreation use

and open green spaces.

I want to remind the Premier today to hold on to this precious public resource, for once it has gone into private hands, the public will never get it back. It is

my call to the Premier not to privatize Hydro One and definitely not to sell or privatize the hydro corridor lands.

PONTIAN COMMUNITY

Mr Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): It is my honour to stand today and to speak of a group in my community, the Pontian community, some of whom

are here in the gallery today. For those who may not be aware, the Pontian community is a group that traces its ancestry to an ancestral land called the Pontus, which is in modern-day Turkey.

Between the years 1914 and 1923, there were many disturbances there, and many of the Pontians were forced to flee for their lives, settling first in Greece and

most recently in Canada. They have flourished in this community. They have done wonderful work.

I rise today to talk about their continuing campaign to inform the world of the atrocities and what was committed in that homeland between 1914 and 1923. On

Sunday, there was a solemn gathering in East York, where they met at the only monument they have in Canada. They were there to remember the time of sacrifice and sorrow of their grandfathers, their

grandmothers, their great-grandfathers and the fact that they continue today throughout the world to talk about this time and to get people to understand it.

We have heard many times over the years of other atrocities committed around the world which are much better documented and which people understand and accept.

The Pontian community is here today to try to get the world to understand about what happened to them and hopefully one day to have the world understand their plight.

MEMBER FOR NIPISSING

Mr Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): It's with great pleasure today that I rise to welcome a special visitor to this House: the new member of

provincial Parliament for Nipissing, Mr Allan McDonald, who is over in the members' gallery.

Al was elected on May 2, and I know he's looking forward to getting to work for his constituents. As a fellow northern businessman, I am very pleased to see him

joining our government in working for economic prosperity across this great province and particularly in northern Ontario.

As the former deputy mayor of North Bay and a member of the city's economic development commission, Al is no stranger to the need for economic activity in the

north and the special challenges faced by northern Ontario.

Al has been a proud and enthusiastic booster of North Bay, and together with his 20 years' business experience he will be a real asset to this government.

I'm looking forward to working with MPP Al McDonald in promoting the north as a prime location to do business, creating employment and prosperity in northern

regions of this province. I can say it's been a real pleasure to have campaigned with him and to learn of all his great community experience and many organizations he's been involved with. I'd like

to welcome Avalanche Al here to the House.

HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATION DIPLOMAS

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): After being treated as Tory experiments for educational reform and massive funding cuts for the last five years,

Ontario's graduating high school students have now, once again, been given a severe blow: they will not receive their graduation diplomas on grad night.

After five years of no textbooks because of Tory ideology, after five years of limited extracurricular activities because this Tory government decided that they

wanted to demean our teachers, after five years of overcrowded classrooms because of massive funding cuts and after five years of upheaval in the high school curriculum, should it be any surprise

to any of us in the House or to Ontarians that these graduating high school students will not receive a diploma this year?

In fact, a directive from the Ministry of Education information management branch issued on May 19 states: "The ministry has been unable to print diplomas and

certificates and distribute them to schools. Diplomas for June graduates signed by Minister Elizabeth Witmer will be distributed to schools the end of August or early September 2002."

With all your resources, I say to the government across the way, ensure that our graduating students for once graduate with honour, with distinction. Make sure

they have their high school diplomas.

MARGARET LYON

Mr Bart Maves (Niagara Falls): I am sad today to inform the House of the passing away of a dear friend in Niagara Falls, Mrs Margaret Lyon. Marg

died peacefully with her husband Harry at her side on Thursday, May 9. My deepest sympathies go out to Marg's daughter Kimberley and her husband Ron Gibson. Marg will also be sadly missed by her

beautiful granddaughter Kaitlin Margaret.

Marg is survived by her sister Sarah Muirhead, nephew Brian Muirhead and niece Margaret McLean in Scotland.

At 76 years of age, Marg was an active member of the community. She was a lifelong, spirited member of the Progressive Conservative Party and a proud, active

member of the Niagara Falls Curling Club. She was also a past president of the Niagara Women's Club and served on several other charitable organizations.

As a member of the Progressive Conservative Party, Marg served on both federal and provincial executives for many years. Every campaign that the Conservative

Party has had in the past 40 years has had her input -- lots of her input.

She recently became very well known for running our riding's Breakfasts with Bart. Every few months I would ask a colleague to come down to the riding to meet

with members of the community, and Marg would do the rest. You could always count on Marg to pull off a successful event. Other MPPs now hold similar events in their ridings and have often joked

about borrowing Marg for her expertise to help organize them.

Margaret Lyon will be fondly remembered by her many dear friends and family in our community. Her memory we shall always hold dear.

EDUCATION FUNDING

Mr Gerard Kennedy (Parkdale-High Park): I rise today to speak on behalf of the people of Ontario, whose school boards, on behalf of students,

will be receiving notification from this government about whether or not the government is actually interested in public education. Sadly, as each one of them opened up their computer file on

Friday they found out the answer. The answer is that this government has put its priorities where it really matters to them: this year this government will give $1,400 more to every private school

student in this province. Every person in a private institution will receive $1,400 of public money, of taxpayer funds, courtesy of this government, for absolutely no requirement in return. This

government has decided that that is their priority.

But when it comes to public schools instead, they have shown us by contrast how little respect, how little commitment they have to the ideal of providing a

decent education for everyone in this province. When you shake out the announcement, what many of those boards are finding out on behalf of their students is that the net increase after inflation

in enrolment is $14 per student in the public system.

The members opposite have failed to fight for their constituents, for their special-needs students, for the double cohort students, for the students who have

trouble with the new curriculum and for the kids who can't wait for this government to change, who needed them to show some indication of priority. Instead, we find out that this government has 100

times the appreciation, 100 times the regard for private school students than it does for those for whom they have direct responsibility in public education.

GEORGINA AWARDS OF EXCELLENCE

Mrs Julia Munro (York North): I rise today to talk about the Georgina Awards of Excellence. This is an award system that was established three

years ago and it recognized the importance of businesses and the contribution they make in our own community.

It's sponsored by the chamber and by the town. It was designed specifically for recognizing the kind of work and contribution that individual businesses make to

our communities. They are examined on the basis of their overall proficiency in providing service to their customers as well as their contribution to the town as a whole.

The various categories include both small business and large business. There is also a category that deals with service delivery and, finally, agribusiness.

People don't recognize how important agribusiness is, and this gives us the opportunity to recognize both large and small agribusiness.

The importance of this recognition I think has earned the respect of members within the community as each year more and more people have been nominated for these

awards. I want to ask all members to wait until May 29, when the award winners will be announced.

VISITORS

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Just before we continue on, we have in the Speaker's gallery a former MPP, Mr David Warner, who was the member for

Scarborough-Ellesmere in the 31st, 33rd and 35th Parliaments. Also, of course, Mr Warner was the Speaker from 1990 to 1995. Please join me in welcoming our honoured colleague.

I offered Mr Warner the opportunity to take question period today but he declined, so he will be watching from up there. I wish I had been better behaved when I

was a member.

We also have today in the Speaker's gallery Mr Nikos Papadopoulos, who is a member of the Swedish Parliament, and he is joined by his son. Please join me in

welcoming our honoured guest.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

VICTIMS OF IDENTITY

THEFT ACT, 2002 /

LOI DE 2002 SUR LES

VICTIMES DE VOL D'IDENTITÉ

Mr Bryant moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 26,

An Act to provide civil remedies for the victims of identity theft / Projet de loi 26, Loi prévoyant des recours civils pour les victimes de

vol d'identité.

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

The member for a short statement.

Mr Michael Bryant (St Paul's): The bill provides that a person may apply to the Deputy Attorney General for the issuance of a certificate

establishing that they have been a victim of identity theft. The certificate shall contain such directions as are necessary to correct personal information held by public sector organizations,

financial institutions and credit-reporting agencies. The certificate may be issued even if there is no conviction of a person for identity theft.

The bill also provides that a person may bring an action for damages against the perpetrator of identity theft and against financial institutions and

consumer-reporting agencies that knowingly or recklessly accept personal information acquired by identity theft or, without lawful excuse, fail to take corrective action after a certificate has

been filed with them.

LEGISLATIVE PAGES

Mr Ernie Parsons (Prince Edward-Hastings): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: With your earlier welcoming announcements, I would like to share

with the House that my riding has always very strongly supported this Legislature through having a page present. An example of that is Melyssa Kerr, from Belleville, who is currently a page

here.

I would also like to recognize and welcome Laura Chapman, in the members' gallery, who was a page here 23 years ago and who has some photographs showing a much

younger Sean Conway, Jim Bradley and Norm Sterling.

I would also like to introduce to the Legislature, sitting to her immediate right, Don Shea and his wife, Marg, from Belleville. Don was a page here exactly 50

years ago, at a time when they were here for an entire year. He has with him his autograph book, signed by the Premier at that time, Leslie Frost, although in the background you can still see Sean

Conway. I would like the House to extend a welcome to them today.

MOTIONS

COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP

Hon John R. Baird (Associate Minister of Francophone Affairs): I move that the following amendments be made to the membership of certain

committees: Mr Chudleigh replaces Mr Wettlaufer on the standing committee on estimates; Ms Mushinski replaces Mr Ouellette on the standing committee on the Legislative Assembly; Mr Wettlaufer

replaces Mr Ouellette on the standing committee on government agencies; Mr Sampson replaces Mr Hardeman on the standing committee on finance and economic affairs; Mr Hardeman replaces Mrs Molinari

on the standing committee on justice and social policy; and Mr Stewart replaces Mr Gill on the standing committee on public accounts.

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

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

Hon John R. Baird (Associate Minister of Francophone Affairs): I seek unanimous consent to put forward a motion without notice regarding

private members' public business.

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

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

business: that Mr Christopherson and Mr Hampton exchange places in order of precedence; and that, notwithstanding standing order 96(g), notice for ballot item 44 now standing in the name of Mr

Hampton be waived.

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

VISITEUSES

M me Claudette Boyer (Ottawa-Vanier): Monsieur le Président, j'aimerais souligner la présence dans la galerie des

députés la maman et la grand-maman de Nicolas DesForges, un page du comté d'Ottawa-Vanier. Alors, bienvenue à Queen's Park.

ROSS MACKENZIE WHICHER

Mr Bill Murdoch (Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I believe we have unanimous consent for each party to speak a few

minutes on the passing of Ross Mackenzie Whicher.

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

Mr Murdoch: I rise today on behalf of the government to join all members of the Ontario Legislature in recognizing the passing of an esteemed

former member of this assembly and a friend of mine, Ross Mackenzie Whicher.

Ross passed away in Wiarton, Ontario, on Friday, April 19, 2002, at the age of 84. Born and raised in Colpoy's Bay, Ross served five years overseas while

serving with the 4th anti-tank regiment. Following the war, Ross came home to open the Wiarton Dairy, which remained a popular and successful business for decades.

Ross was the popular mayor of Wiarton from 1953 to 1955. He was first elected in 1955 to the Ontario Legislature as a representative for Bruce county and was

re-elected in 1959 and again in 1963.

As financial critic, he was always chastising the government for overspending. Ross used to joke about how much he enjoyed his years here in Toronto,

especially when he was always asked by the Conservatives to join their side. That was Ross. He was in every way a public servant who won the respect of his peers, no matter their political

stripe.

Having served as a member of provincial Parliament for 12 years, Ross won the 1968 election to become Bruce's federal member of Parliament and was re-elected

in 1972. Ross served Bruce for over 20 years, running in and winning seven elections until his retirement in 1974. As Ross said, "It has been a great life, and for the opportunity that has been

mine, I am most grateful."

He was proud of his riding and championed it, always boasting of its place as a great tourist attraction, a great rural area with a quality of life that was

unsurpassed. Ross was proud to represent its people. Ross always took the time to listen. He had a mind like a steel trap and a rapport with people that reassured them he was listening and, more

importantly, that he understood. Murray Gaunt, MPP for Huron-Bruce for 18 years, said of Ross, "He was a people person. No problem was too small, and that's why people elected him year after year.

He was a person very committed to his riding, and I think people sensed that."

I honour him here today as a good legislator and an astute politician. He will be remembered for his outstanding record of public service in our community, the

province and our country.

Ross was also a comrade of mine, as he was in the legion. He was my brother in the Masonic Lodge and, most importantly, Ross was my friend. We had many times

in his home when we would talk about things, and I want to tell you a little story about Ross.

He had in his room a chair he sat in when he sat in Parliament in Ottawa. As you know, a few years ago we redecorated this place and got rid of those chairs

that were so uncomfortable. Ross and I were talking and he wondered if he could get his old chair. We made a deal here and I delivered it to him at his place. He was really excited the day he got

his chair from here. When we went up to his room, Ross would say, "I've got three chairs in my room now. I have the one for the retired politician from Ottawa and the one for the retired politician

from the provincial government. I have that chair over there for present-day politicians. You sit there, Bill." It turned out that was the commode. That was Ross's little joke on me. He said,

"That's where the present-day politicians will sit."

As I say, I had many great talks with Ross, and I certainly will miss him. I want my condolences from this Parliament to go out to his wife and family. He will

be greatly remembered.

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): I'm pleased, on behalf of the Liberal caucus and Leader Dalton McGuinty and former members of the

Legislature, to pay tribute to Ross Whicher for his many years of service in this House, but also, we can recall, at the municipal and federal levels. He was one of those unique people who actually

served at three different levels.

When I want to recall somebody who's been in the Legislature before most of us entered the Legislature, I go to the ultimate source, the dean of the press

gallery, none other than Eric Dowd, who has files on everyone who has served for years and years. Eric is our resident historian and always has a story or two to tell about these individuals.

One of the things that was noted about Ross Whicher was that he was a very businesslike person in an era in this House when things were perhaps more

businesslike than they are today, much to the chagrin, no doubt, of the present Speaker. But he was also a person -- and we paid tribute to some of these individuals recently who have passed on --

who was very tied to his constituency, whose roots were in his constituency and whose primary purpose for being in the Legislature was in fact to deal with problems which were unique to his

constituency and which his constituency had in common with the rest of the province.

Also, you would find that he was not an ideological person in terms of his approach to politics. I think today we all observe that politics seems to be more

ideological. Although Ross, as Bill Murdoch has noted, was an ardent Liberal, he had among his close personal friends and greater group of friends a number of people who were not affiliated with

the Liberal Party and were in fact Tory partisans, and that prompted the government of the day, from time to time, to urge him to cross the floor.

He was also interested in some issues that keep recurring. I was looking at one of his speeches. I was going through Hansard, and fortunately we still have

these. He was talking about, believe it or not, Hydro and as it was then called, the Hydro-Electric Power Commission. He was noting that it allows a very obvious overcharge of the citizens of today

for the benefit of those tomorrow. So he was, perhaps, before his time in dealing with what we would now call Ontario Hydro, then called the Hydro-Electric Power Commission.

He was also an individual, much like many of the people in the House -- we try to follow his example, no doubt -- who spoke only when it was necessary to

speak. He didn't get up in the Legislature to give a speech simply for the sake of giving a speech, as perhaps some might be prone to do. Instead, he was an individual who spoke when he felt it was

important.

He had an expertise, as people in his riding and legislators of the day knew, in the field of the work of the Provincial Auditor. I was reading through one of

his speeches where he was asking questions about the use of government cars for personal purposes. Throughout history, people ask about this. But there he was, back in those days, asking these very

questions and being concerned about all public accounts of the day.

To show he was non-partisan, he once said Leslie Frost was the finest Premier Ontario had ever had. He liked Les Frost and Les Frost's business approach to the

Legislature, but also his personal friendships that he had with all members of the House.

He also served at a time, for most of his time, perhaps for all of his time, in a situation where there were no constituency offices. Today, those of us who

are members of the Legislature rely heavily upon our staff in the constituency office and here at Queen's Park in the provincial Parliament building. But in those days, people had to hold court --

as we've noted with others who have passed on from that era -- in their own homes or had to go to the homes of individuals or have town hall meetings. So it was a different era of politics in those

days. The proceedings of the House were not televised, so the importance of communicating one's message on a personal basis to people in the constituency was even more important than it is

today.

I note as well that he started out -- and this is true today to a certain extent, but I think much more so in those days -- in municipal politics, getting that

rounding, getting the level of the politics which is closest to the people themselves, getting grounding in that area, becoming aware of what the problems were in the constituency, and then

reflecting those problems to the provincial Legislature and the federal House of Commons.

I certainly join with others in paying tribute to Ross Whicher. He is one who will be remembered, in Bruce county in particular, for what he has done. He is

one who made many friends amongst all members of the House during his time as a member of the Ontario Legislature. Certainly, we all regret his passing, which is, for all of us in life, one of the

inevitable things that will happen to us. We regret that. We send along our very best wishes and our condolences to the family. We know that Ontario, in particular Bruce county, was a better place

because of Ross Whicher being a member of this Legislature and serving in so many capacities the people he represented in that part of our province.

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): It's an honour to stand among my colleagues today to pay tribute to the life and work of the former

member who made his maiden speech in this House almost 50 years ago.

Ross Mackenzie Whicher was born in 1918 in Wiarton, Ontario, in what was then called the riding of Bruce. Though we as parliamentarians take special interest

in his work at Queen's Park, there are many other aspects of Mr Whicher's life that deserve mention. I note that some of the other members mentioned those.

For example, as the owner of a dairy, he was very involved in the farming community in his riding throughout his life. During the Second World War, Mr Whicher

served in the 4th anti-tank regiment in Europe, an experience from which he would frequently draw while addressing this very chamber.

Upon returning to his home at the conclusion of the war, Mr Whicher decided to throw his hat into the ring of electoral politics. He became mayor of Wiarton in

1953 and served in that position until 1955.

It was the philosopher Hannah Arendt who once said that through our speech do we reveal our true nature to the world, and thus by our words do we provide

posterity with a sort of lasting impression. Mr Whicher was one who chose his words carefully, I've been told, demonstrating his awareness of their impact. In his maiden speech to the House, he

said, "I realize only too well that fundamentally all of us are here in this Parliament for exactly the same purpose -- to attempt to leave a little better place for our children and our

grandchildren, with better living conditions and an easier way of life." I think we can all safely say that Mr Whicher did indeed do that in his time.

Mr Whicher deeply appreciated his role in the socio-political community of this province and represented his constituents with great pride and determination.

He was an honest man who possessed an impressive intellect and a sharp wit. He used to say he admired the advertising campaign of Red Rose tea as it was short and to the point, that campaign being,

"Red Rose tea is good tea." "Likewise," he quipped, "The people of Bruce are good people; no more need be said."

I've heard it said that for every one of his speeches recorded in Hansard, he recorded three times as many interjections. Colleagues of his spoke with a spark

in their eye about how thoroughly Mr Whicher enjoyed the playful exchange of ideas across the floor. It's no surprise I've been told he was one of the best. Once during debate Premier Frost accused

Mr Whicher's comments of being prejudiced. To this he quickly replied, "I say to the Premier, since he is on his feet about half the time, I suggest he has as much prejudice as the rest of the

honourable members put together."

Though Mr Whicher worked tirelessly on many different subjects, he focused especially on the concerns of the constituents he represented. Many times in the

Legislature he brought forward their concerns about education, health care and farming. He took great interest in the relationship between the province and municipalities, and yes, as has been

mentioned, Mr Whicher even spoke about the Ontario Hydro commission from time to time.

It is humbling in a sense when we look back on the career of Ross Whicher. In many ways, his concerns then continue to be our concerns now, reminding each of

us of our place in the grand scheme of things. As we pass along our most sincere condolences to the entire Whicher family, may we assure them as well that in remembering the life of Mr Whicher we

are reminded of the value of acting as he did: with honesty, with respect and with a vision of how we may contribute to the benefit of those here now as well as those yet to come.

The Speaker: I thank the honourable members for their kind words, and I will ensure that copies of the Hansard are forwarded to the

family.

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I seek unanimous consent to move and pass the following motion

without debate:

That the Ontario Legislative Assembly encourage our federal government to ratify the Kyoto agreement.

The Speaker: Is there unanimous consent? I'm afraid I heard some noes.

ORAL QUESTIONS

HOMELESSNESS

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): My first question today is to the Premier. Today a video was released which captured the

desperate living conditions of some of our homeless right here in Toronto. I watched it and I urge you to do the same, Premier. Let me tell you what you are going to see: row upon row upon row of

people sleeping so close together that they were in fact touching one another. I don't know how they can move about inside the basement room in which they were sleeping without tripping over each

other; that's how little space was found between the floor mats.

Premier, your government's housing policies are an abysmal failure. If you ever needed more evidence of that, this video provides it. My question to you is,

what are you going to do for our most vulnerable, our homeless? These are people. These are our fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers. These are people in need of some basic accommodation. What are

you going to do for these people, our homeless, some of our most vulnerable?

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I would concur with the leader of the official opposition that the situation

as depicted in the video is unacceptable, not just here in Toronto and in the province of Ontario but anywhere in this country of Canada in today's age. I think there is the spirit of co-operation

among the municipal, provincial and federal levels of government now to deal with what is obviously a very important issue not only here in Toronto but across the country.

Mr McGuinty: These people are looking for more, and need more, than simply some kind of esoteric spirit of co-operation. They need better

housing, and they need it now. They need mental health supports, and they need those now. These living conditions, as portrayed in the video, are not humane and they are not safe. Healthy people

are going in there and they're coming out sick, because they're being exposed to diseases like scabies and tuberculosis, and lice.

A nurse tells us that these shelters violate the United Nations most basic requirements for refugee camps. I am embarrassed, as an Ontarian, to know that in my

province there are people who are homeless living in those conditions. I hope you too, sir, as Premier, are embarrassed to know that in our province there are people, our homeless, who are living

in those kinds of conditions. So I ask you again, on their behalf, what is it that you are going to do specifically for some of our most vulnerable, our homeless?

Hon Mr Eves: This is more than just a housing issue; this is, as the leader of the official opposition points out in his question, an issue

that deals with mental health in some cases; it's an issue that deals with providing accommodation --

Interjections.

Mr Gregory S. Sorbara (Vaughan-King-Aurora): All the stuff that you cut, Ernie.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Sorry for the interruption. Premier?

Hon Mr Eves: I'm glad to see the member for Vaughan-King-Aurora is taking a totally non-partisan approach and doesn't want to play politics

with a very serious issue in Ontario.

The province has several initiatives, obviously, that deal with homelessness.

Interjection: What?

Hon Mr Eves: Shelter allowances worth $1.7 billion a year, to name one.

Interjections.

Hon Mr Eves: Excuse me.

The Speaker: Order. Premier.

Hon Mr Eves: We have increased the hostel program. Last year we spent over $70 million with respect to the emergency hostel program. As you

know, municipalities determine what services they will offer to homeless people, and the provincial and federal levels of government automatically pay the money that's required for the spaces

determined by the municipality. But I do agree that there has to be a more concerted effort among all three levels of government to get to the root of the problem.

Mr McGuinty: Where were you, as finance minister, on this issue when you wielded your knife with wild abandon? That's what you did to the

homeless of Ontario. This is your record, in which you can take a great deal of pride, Premier, when it comes to our homeless. You cut the welfare allowance by 22%. You've now frozen it for seven

years straight. You have downloaded social housing on to municipalities, which simply do not have the financial wherewithal to carry out that responsibility. You have put in place rent decontrols.

You have cut mental health services and you have closed six out of 10 of our psychiatric hospitals.

When it comes to ensuring that our large corporations have another $2.2 billion in large tax breaks, we know exactly where you stand. You tell us you're going

to get the money and you're going to make that work. But when it comes to our most vulnerable, our homeless today in Ontario, you can tell us nothing more than that somehow you are going to inspire

governments to come together in some spirit of co-operation.

I ask you again, specifically, what are you going to do? We know what you're going to do for the large corporations. What are you going to do specifically for

our most vulnerable, our homeless?

Hon Mr Eves: The leader of the official opposition seems to be confusing several issues. He's confusing tax reductions with lack of revenue

when in fact reducing taxes has actually increased revenues in this province by some $12 billion to $15 billion a year.

We do in fact need a concerted effort among all three levels of government to deal with this issue. I understand that we are in the Ontario Legislature, but

this is a problem that is not peculiar to the province of Ontario or to the city of Toronto; it is a problem that exists in many provinces and many large urban centres across this country.

I would concur with him that the conditions that are depicted in the video are unacceptable for Toronto, they are unacceptable for Ontario and they are

unacceptable for anyplace in Canada.

HYDRO ONE

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): My second question is to the Premier as well. Premier, there is an interesting contrast in the

situation facing our homeless and the pay package given to your president and CEO at Hydro One, who's receiving more than $2.2 million on an annual basis. Her golden parachute totals in excess

of $6 million. The board you appointed hired the president and CEO and also made the decision to ensure that she received $175,000 as a car allowance and $172,000 for vacation pay.

Premier, ultimately this is about you and your standards. I'm not sure if you had the opportunity during the course of the long weekend to talk to some Ontario

families about this pay package and some of the challenges they have to grapple with, day in and day out.

But what I want to know from you, Premier, is, do you support this pay package? Could you not at least admit, sir, here and now, that there is something

fundamentally wrong with a pay package of in excess of $2 million, including $175,000 for cars and $172,000 for vacation pay?

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): In fact this issue was dealt with in the Legislature on Thursday. I made the

comment then that it was inappropriate, and I asked the Minister of Energy to look into the matter.

Mr McGuinty: Premier, asking the Minister of Energy to look into these gross expenditures is like asking Don Cherry to crack down on violence

in hockey. This is the guy who said he never knew there were any rules forbidding requiring the public to pick up his bar tab expenditures. That's the guy that you would have us take confidence in

in terms of investigating this matter.

What I want to know, more specifically, is about this $175,000 for cars. Do you know how many families are out there struggling to get by in some minivans with

150,000 or 200,000 kilometres on them? What I want to know is whether you think it's right or wrong for the president and CEO of Hydro One to be given $175,000 as a car allowance. By your

standards, Premier, is that right or is it wrong?

Hon Mr Eves: Again today I say to the leader of the official opposition, I regard those amounts as being inappropriate, and I've asked the

Minister of Energy to look into them.

Mr McGuinty: How could this happen? Have you asked yourself that question yet? How could this happen? The board at Hydro One is appointed by

your government. The board then hires the president and CEO of Hydro One. Your board confirmed her pay package. Your board approved this pay package, Premier.

One of the problems we've got to grapple with here is that your government has removed Hydro One from under the ambit of the freedom of information act. You

are in fact a co-conspirator to keeping these matters silent and away from public eyes. You can't say that's a problem connected with Hydro One and that it's inappropriate. By shutting that avenue

down to us, by shutting this down from public oversight, you in fact are co-conspiring.

Premier, this is not a matter that needs to be sent out to review. This is a matter that requires you to say, "Mea culpa. This will never, ever happen again.

It is wrong, it is entirely inappropriate and I will do everything in my power to make sure this never, ever happens again."

Hon Mr Eves: We are looking into the matter; I have said that. Neither I nor anybody on this side of the House, nor anybody on that side of

the House, for that matter, sits on the Hydro board. You surely don't expect the government to send a representative to monitor every single board decision taken at Hydro.

By the way, aren't you the one who wants to leave Hydro One the way it is? You think the board works just fine. You think it's working great.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): New question.

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Premier. Since you put your government's cronies in charge of Hydro One,

they've certainly done some outrageous things. First, the top four people over there get a $13-million pay package. Now we discover that your cronies at Hydro One have agreed to a $1-billion

contract to purchase payroll and customer services from a company set up by Cap Gemini Ernst and Young, even though this new company has "not previously provided the extensive range of services

covered by the agreement to any other electric utility company."

Premier, your cronies at Hydro One are involved in a $1-billion gamble involving the people's hydroelectricity system with a company that's never provided the

services before. Are you concerned about that, and what do you intend to do about it?

Hon Mr Eves: It is my understanding that the 900 employees who are part of this new company, as he describes it, are indeed Hydro One

employees who have provided these services in the past. As I understand it, they will be providing the services to Hydro One in the future through the new company that they've contracted.

Mr Hampton: Premier, you ought to be concerned about the $1 billion, but you ought to be concerned about something else as well. It works like

this: Ernst and Young is the auditor for Hydro One. Cap Gemini Ernst and Young now provides consulting services to Hydro One. This is a lot like what happened in the United States with Enron, where

the auditor couldn't keep straight whether they were auditing or whether they were providing Enron with business advice.

You may think this is all right, but yesterday in the United States, the Securities and Exchange Commission laid charges against Ernst and Young for creating

virtually the same kind of business situation with a company there, virtually the same kind of situation as you have going on at Hydro One.

Premier, you're the investment banker. You're the one who ought to know that this should be looked at very, very carefully. If it's not good enough for the

Securities and Exchange Commission in the United States, why is it good enough for you?

Hon Mr Eves: I believe the leader of the third party is quite aware that the Ontario Securities Commission is looking into the matter. It is

they who should be ruling on whether there is a conflict or not, and that is exactly what they are in the process of doing.

Mr Hampton: Premier, I'm quite interested in the securities and exchange part of it. It was I who wrote to the head of the Ontario Securities

Commission, asking him to review it. But I'm also asking you because, you see, we're dealing with the over 11 million people in Ontario who now have to purchase their electricity from your cronies

who inflate their own pay packages and then do $1-billion contracts with companies that have no experience, no track record, have never delivered these services before. So I want to know, what are

you going to do for the consumers of Ontario? We see what you're doing for your Bay Street friends. What are you going to do for the consumers of electricity in this province should this deal go

bad, as the prospectus said it very well might?

Hon Mr Eves: Every time there's an incident that comes up the leader of the third party relates it to Enron in the United States and the

Securities and Exchange Commission. As he points out, he himself has asked the Ontario Securities Commission to rule on the matter. They are looking into the matter. He talks about people who have

had no experience providing these services when he knows full well, I would suspect, that the 900 people who will be providing the services are the same 900 who have been providing the services as

employees of Hydro One in the past. They are the ones who have been hired by the new entity and they will be providing the services for the next 10 years through the contract, as I understand

it.

The Speaker: New question, leader of the third party.

Mr Hampton: Again to the Premier: I think virtually everyone in the province is outraged to learn that the people you have put in charge at

Hydro One since 1998 have awarded themselves what amount to $13-million pay packages, when you include all the bonuses and all of the excesses. What's really amazing, though, is if you privatize

Hydro One they get to walk away with $13 million; if you decide not to privatize Hydro One, they get to walk away with $13 million. These people take the consumers of Ontario, whether the door goes

in or the door goes out. You've had five days to figure out what everyone else in Ontario knows, that this is outrageous, this is disgusting, this is greed. What are you going to do about this

bloated executive salary payout?

Hon Mr Eves: The leader of the third party knows full well -- he was here on Thursday -- that the matter is being reviewed and investigated by

the Minister of Energy, as it should be.

Mr Hampton: Premier, the people of Ontario found out about this five days ago, but you must have known about this a long time ago. It was

under your watch as Minister of Finance that Hydro One was split off from Ontario Hydro. It was under your watch that the so-called private sector rules were put in place. You got to pick your

people to put in place at Hydro One. So you've known about this for a long time. We're told that you and members of your government reviewed the so-called prospectus which admits to all this

information. So you've had a lot of time to do something about this. What have you done about it? What have you done to protect the interests of consumers in Ontario rather than adding to the

inflated pay packages of your cronies at Hydro One?

Hon Mr Eves: They're not my cronies. To the leader of the third party, as I recall last week, you and the leader of the official opposition

were arguing for the status quo at Hydro One: you loved the board, you wanted it to stay the same, you didn't want it changed, you didn't want private sector discipline brought to the board. And

this week, when it suits your political purposes, now you want to turf the board: they're no good, you have to bring some private sector discipline to them. You can't have it both ways, Howard.

As a former Attorney General of this province, surely you should know above anybody else that this is a matter for the Ontario Securities Commission to look

into. They rule on exactly these types of conflicts and I presume that you'll be happy to live with the ruling that the Ontario Securities Commission brings down.

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): My question is to the Premier. First Mike Harris was for Kyoto and then he was against it.

Could you tell us now, where does your government stand on this fundamentally important environmental policy issue?

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I believe that my predecessor, Premier Harris, stated on several occasions,

as indeed I have, that the province of Ontario is in favour of the Kyoto agreement, provided that there's a level playing field as we go forward.

Mr McGuinty: Just a moment ago, Premier, were you not the guy who was lecturing the leader of the third party on trying to have it both ways?

Were you not doing that, or am I mistaken? Within the last 60 seconds, you did that.

Premier, if you are truly committed to doing something about reducing greenhouse gas emissions, then here are some of the things you could do in a positive and

concrete way: you could get into the business of funding public transit in a real and meaningful way; you could encourage renewable electricity generation in Ontario; you could phase out our

coal-fired hydro plants; you could begin to promote energy conservation in Ontario; you could begin to promote the use of renewable fuels such as ethanol and biodiesel. Those are all things you

could do, Premier.

The last time I checked, you were doing none of those things. Now, talk is cheap when it comes to these issues. When is it, Premier, that you are actually

going to do something in a real and concrete way, something that we could legitimately describe as "action" when it comes to reducing greenhouse gas emissions in Ontario?

Hon Mr Eves: We're doing every single one of those things that the leader of the official opposition talks about.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): New question. I guess we go to the NDP now. The member for Beaches-East York. Sorry, I apologize; the next

rotation was the Leader of the Opposition. The government misses it, they weren't ready, as one of the members was down. So the leader of the official opposition and then the NDP.

AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): I have a question to the Premier. Premier, it's a fact, an undeniable fact, that during your

seven-year reign as finance minister you took Ontario's auto industry for granted and that's now catching up with you.

Here are the facts. Of the 16 new assembly plants built or announced in North America since 1990, only one was located in Ontario. During that same period,

they closed the GM van plant in Scarborough and they have announced the closure of a Ford assembly plant in Oakville and a DaimlerChrysler plant in Windsor. I'm sure you will understand, Premier,

that when an assembly plant is shut down, the parts plants are sure to follow.

What specific actions -- and I want to be able to legitimately describe those as "actions," Premier -- are you taking to preserve and indeed enhance the over

half-million direct and indirect jobs the auto sector brings to Ontario?

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I refer the question to the Minister of Enterprise, Opportunity and

Innovation.

Hon Jim Flaherty (Minister of Enterprise, Opportunity and Innovation): As we discussed last week in this place, there have been some terrific

steps forward in the automotive sector in Ontario even in the last two weeks. UBE opened the most sophisticated technological wheel-producing plant in the world in Sarnia, Ontario, last week. That

will employ more than 100 people. It's an investment of $180 million over time. They chose to invest in Ontario because of low taxes, because of an investment-friendly environment, a welcoming

environment much heralded since 1995 by the work of the Conservative government in this province. That's just the first one.

Then Honda, in Alliston, in the riding of Jim Wilson, opened the line for the SUV Pilot. Again they chose to bring this new product to the province of Ontario.

Then, two weeks ago yesterday, as a matter of fact, General Motors of Canada Ltd announced a third shift to build the Impala automobile at the Autoplex in Oshawa, a thousand --

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): I'm afraid the member's time is up. Supplementary?

Mr McGuinty: I'm not going to argue, Minister, that there have been a few good-news stories, but they more than pale into insignificance as a

result of the loss of 15,000 full-time jobs. That's what we're talking about here.

Here are three specific actions that you should be taking on this front. First of all, let's do more with respect to developing research. Let's do more to

ensure that we have the necessary investment in research into fuel cells, for example. Let's get into the next generation of research for the next generation of locomotion.

Let's do more with respect to training. It's going to take more than simply your obsessive fixation with the lowest corporate taxes; it's going to take more

than that. What we're hearing from the auto sector these days is that we need to do more to ensure that we've got the necessary skilled workers in place.

Finally, we need more skills retooling. Some people have lost their jobs and this government has done nothing with respect to ensuring that those people get

back on their feet at the earliest possible opportunity.

What I put before you now, Minister, are three specific ideas. Will you act on any one of those ideas?

Hon Mr Flaherty: The automotive sector is a global industry; it's a highly competitive industry.

I met last week with Buzz Hargrove, the head of the Canadian Auto Workers union. The Canadian Auto Workers have put forward a very helpful paper and I commend

it to the Leader of the Opposition, that he read the paper and see what's being recommended by the CAW. I've certainly read the paper in my capacity with responsibility for that sector.

Tomorrow we're hosting an automotive round table here in Toronto being attended by leaders in the assembly business, leaders in the parts business, academic

experts from around the province of Ontario. We're co-operating with the federal government in developing a national auto strategy for Ontario and for Canada. These are steps forward. This is what

we need to do to meet the challenge of growth in the automotive sector in Ontario and in Canada.

LIQUOR CONTROL BOARD

OF ONTARIO

Mr Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): My question today is for the Minister of Consumer and Business Services. Minister, constituents in small

towns in my riding have been asking me why they have to travel so far, sometimes an hour or more, to the nearest LCBO store to purchase a bottle of wine for family gatherings. Frankly, I agree with

them. I think Ontarians in rural and small communities deserve more convenient access to beverage alcohol. I was so pleased, Minister, when I was allowed to visit an LCBO agency store just

yesterday in Severn Falls that had opened up on the weekend and the business owner was so pleased with the response he had received from that community, which borders Parry Sound-Muskoka and Simcoe

North. Is there anything else you're doing, Mr Minister, to resolve this issue?

Hon Tim Hudak (Minister of Consumer and Business Services): I appreciate the member for Simcoe North's question. He's a strong advocate for

small and rural Ontario who wants to see expanded services from government and government agencies to his constituents. In fact, I've begun, under my predecessor Minister Sterling, an expansion of

the agency stores across the province. By October we'll have 70 additional stores open in small and rural Ontario.

In fact, for Victoria Day weekend we had 13 new agency stores open in places like Eagle Lake and Turkey Point that will help bring more business to the small

community stores, provide better access to rural Ontarians and to develop economic development opportunities in those small communities.

I want to commend the member for Simcoe North, who has been a very strong advocate for communities in his riding to receive these agency stores.

Mr Dunlop: These new stores are great news for communities in my riding and of course in many of our ridings across the province. You

mentioned that these new outlets are placed in existing stores. I know my constituents will expect the same high standards as a regular LCBO outlet, such as product selection, excellent service

and, most importantly, checks to ensure that minors are not accessing alcohol. Minister, what are you doing to ensure that agency stores follow the same high standards as regular LCBO outlets?

Hon Mr Hudak: We want to ensure that people purchasing alcohol through the LCBO agency stores are going to receive the same high level of

service no matter what store they go to. We want to ensure that the high standards are there and that they have access to the wide array of products available at the LCBO or the Beer Store.

We also want to make sure that every participant in the program goes to the social responsibility training program of the LCBO to identify and prevent minors

from buying alcohol. We also ensure that the alcohol is physically segregated from other products to prevent minors from accessing it.

We also want to make sure that there are great job opportunities and that the quality of service is strong, whether you're in a small town like Stevensville,

Ontario -- also getting a store -- or in a larger city such as Toronto. I'm very pleased that the service is coming to at least three new communities in Simcoe North.

HOMELESSNESS

Mr Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): My question is to the Premier. Mr Premier, this morning I attended a shocking news conference at Toronto

city hall where people were packed in like sardines in a homeless shelter in conditions that would not even be tolerated in a United Nations refugee camp. You spoke earlier and you said that

homelessness was a complex issue. Yes, it is, but it has increased hugely since the election of Mike Harris and your government.

Outside of Trinity Church behind the Eaton Centre is a monument to the homeless, which lists all those 200-plus poor souls who have died on our streets since

the 1970s. The overwhelming majority of them died between 1996 and 2002.

Mr Premier, you like to say that these have been good years. Perhaps they have, but not for the homeless. We need something dramatic to be done. We on this

side are proposing that the lion's share of the land transfer tax be turned over to municipalities, some $650 million, to build low-cost, affordable housing. Will you commit yourself here today to

the same?

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I appreciate that this is indeed a problem. The situation depicted in the

video should not exist, not just in Toronto but in any community in this province or in this country.

Having said that, I don't believe his suggestion to remedy the situation is going to work. I believe that the three levels of government have to co-operate to

deal with this situation that exists not just here in Toronto but in other communities across this country.

Mr Prue: Mr Premier, Ontario won't even match the federal government's pathetic effort on housing. Today, your Minister of Community, Family

and Children's Services referred to these conditions, that is the homelessness and the video, and I quote, "They're certainly not Holiday Inns." The people in shelters can't even dream of a Holiday

Inn. There has been a 21% reduction in shelter allowances under your government. There has been a 20% increase in rents in Toronto and in other cities as a result of rent decontrols brought about

by your government.

You say you have a social conscience. Will you increase the shelter portion of social assistance so that these additional people do not swell the ranks of the

homeless and make an already bad situation worse?

Hon Mr Eves: I refer this question to the Minister of Community, Family and Children's Services.

Hon Brenda Elliott (Minister of Community, Family and Children's Services): To my colleague across the way in the opposition I again say, and

echo my Premier's comments, that we are very concerned about this situation. We are concerned when people are living on the streets. It is an issue that is brought to the attention of all three

levels of government. Co-operation must occur from all levels. It's complex and will only be solved when all three levels work together.

I want to assure my colleague across the way that we work very hard on this side to try and find solutions. It is complex. It's a mental health problem; it's a

housing problem. We have been working with the federal government. I know my colleague the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing would like to respond as well in indicating how far we've gone.

The city of Toronto receives $74 million a year in support of homelessness from our ministry. Our commitment to finding solutions to this very complex and troubling problem has never been

greater.

MINISTRY SPENDING

Mr George Smitherman (Toronto Centre-Rosedale): My question is to the Premier. Over a 15-month period Chris Stockwell and a handful of staff

racked up more than $25,000 in restaurants and bars. That was a pattern of abuse. Week after week, night after night, Stockwell and his staff drank the bar closed on the public's tab. Some of that

money is finally coming back to the public, but we have no idea if it's the full amount.

Chris Stockwell has been a minister since 1999, but all we know about so far are 15 months of those three years. Premier, will you commit today to do two

things: first, will you ask the Provincial Auditor to determine how much Chris Stockwell should return to the public for publicly funded boozing since 1999, and will you agree today to enforce the

rules you have established for your cabinet throughout your cabinet and outlaw once and for all these publicly funded booze-ups?

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): The minister came to me the very afternoon this question was asked in the

House last week. He told me he would take the appropriate action to reimburse the taxpayers of Ontario for any amount in any expenses he had -- and it included alcohol -- and his staff would be

doing the same. It is my understanding they have done so.

Mr Smitherman: The ooze of entitlement goes on on that side, Premier. If you knew anything from this morning's comments by the minister's

spokesperson, you'd know they decided that the only amount they need to repay is that which fell between 12 am and 2 am. That's what they've determined to be repayment of the appropriate

amount.

This is really just the tip of the iceberg for the Ernie Eves trough over there. You received $78,000 in severance when you left this place. Less than a year

later, you wander back in. While civil servants are expected to repay that, you have guarded your treasure rather aggressively.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander, Mr Premier. Despite the public outcry, you refuse to repay your severance. Mr Stockwell should pay back all

of his bar tabs, and the Provincial Auditor should figure out what the exact amount is. You should agree to enforce the regulations that are there for all of your ministers, and you should pay back

your severance. Will you?

Hon Mr Eves: Despite the fact that there is no requirement making me do so, the honourable member might be interested to know that on the

morning of April 15, the morning I was sworn in as Premier, I wrote a cheque to the Legislative Assembly fund for $78,007.

ELDER ABUSE

Mr Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): My question is for the Attorney General. One issue that comes up when I am going door to door is

elder abuse. Seniors have the right to live with dignity and safety. This situation, which is faced by many older Ontarians, is deeply unsettling for all of us and something we all find

abhorrent.

Recent studies have shown that between 4% and 10% of Ontario's seniors experience some form of abuse. That's 4% to 10% of our parents and grandparents who are

being taken advantage of. Financial abuse is the most common type, where unscrupulous crooks and scam artists bilk unsuspecting, trusting seniors out of their savings.

However, physical and emotional abuse are also sadly part of this tragic reality. Clearly, there is a need for government to continue to act. What support is

the government providing to seniors and community agencies to combat elder abuse?

Hon David Young (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs): I thank the honourable member for raising this very important

issue in the House. While I am on the subject of thank yous, let me also reference Minister Jackson, the current Minister of Tourism and Recreation, who was the minister responsible for seniors

when this important initiative went forward. Frankly, we wouldn't have the elder abuse strategy we do today but for the fact that Minister Jackson made this a cause that he wouldn't say no to, and

to which he wouldn't accept the answer no.

What we have in fact is an elder abuse strategy that is the first of its kind in North America. It is the envy of North America. We are getting inquiries from

all over this continent. What we have done is identify elder abuse as a problem that needs attention from governments, from agencies and from individuals. Too often this is a silent crime, and with

this strategy we will bring it out of the darkness and shed light upon it.

Mr Barrett: Thank you, Minister. I appreciate what our government is doing. One of the most terrible things about elder abuse is the abuser is

often a family member, someone trusted by the victim, someone who has control over their financial or personal affairs. Statistics Canada tells us that over two thirds of seniors who were

physically abused reported they were assaulted by a family member.

One of the most tragic parts of elder abuse is that it often goes unnoticed and unreported, as you indicated. Seniors may have no one to turn to, especially

when the person they should be relying on most often is the family member mistreating them.

I'd like to know how a recent action taken by our government ensures that this abuse will no longer occur in silence.

Hon Mr Young: The honourable member is quite right, and I appreciate the opportunity to speak to this again. Too often victims are too

embarrassed or too afraid or simply don't have the wherewithal with which they would be able to speak to the abuse that they experience. The abuse comes in various forms. We all of course

acknowledge that physical abuse exists on occasion and should not be tolerated, but it is also mental abuse and financial abuse.

What we are going to do is spend almost $5 million with this strategy to ensure that local officials and officials in the province and frankly family members

are all able to identify the type of abuse that may occur. I think this is very much akin to what we as a society did a number of years ago dealing with domestic abuse. A crime is not always just a

crime. Sometimes special attention, sometimes special resources are needed, and that is exactly what we are doing here.

MULTICULTURALISM

Mr Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): I have a question to the Minister of Citizenship, and at the same time I want him to know that we have a

fundamental disagreement with the way he's running his ministry, and his previous colleagues as well. But I want to congratulate him on his appointment.

Our late Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau left us a lasting legacy by proclaiming as policy the multicultural model of integration for all Canadians. In

1971 he followed that up by creating for the first time in our history a Ministry of Multiculturalism.

Since you are the new Ontario Minister of Citizenship and are responsible for multiculturalism, can you tell the people of Ontario how your view of

multiculturalism is different from the vision of our late Prime Minister -- or is it the same?

Hon Carl DeFaria (Minister of Citizenship, minister responsible for seniors): I thank the member for the question. As the member knows, I am

very active in the diverse communities of Ontario. I'm sure the member has seen me on many occasions in the different communities. I can tell the member that our vision of Ontario is that Ontario

is made up of diverse communities. We cherish that vision. We are proud of our multicultural heritage and we are proud of the contributions that people from different countries have made to

Canada.

Mr Ruprecht: That goes a long way, but it didn't answer my question. As you know, one of the raisons d'être or the reasons for existence

newcomers? Why did you sit on your hands and watch silently while the other ministers cut the heart out of adult education programs and job training programs? And for God's sake, why did you let

the Premier take $35 million that he got from the federal government for newcomer services and fold it into general revenue?

I'm asking you now as the Minister of Citizenship to stand up and tell us, are you going to cut any more programs or are you now having a review that says to

that going to be a new policy? If it is, we salute you for it.

Hon Mr DeFaria: I would like to indicate to the member that Ontario welcomes the majority of immigrants to Canada. We welcome approximately

60% of all immigrants to Canada and we get from the federal government, the federal Liberals, only 40% of their funding to immigration.

My friend opposite should consult with his federal Liberal friends on exactly why Ontario doesn't get a fair share of the funding. Why is it that Quebec gets

higher funding per immigrant from the federal government and we don't get that share? Why is it that the federal Liberals discriminate against Ontario when it comes to funding?

LONG-TERM-CARE FACILITIES

Mr Bert Johnson (Perth-Middlesex): My question today is for the Associate Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. I know that many constituents

in my riding of Perth-Middlesex have questions about the new placement regulations with respect to long-term-care facilities. I know these regulations came into effect on May 1 this year, but many

of my constituents want to know why they were necessary and what purpose they serve. Could you please explain to all members of this House today, for the benefit of all their constituents, why our

government has introduced these new placement regulations?

Hon Dan Newman (Associate Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I'd like to thank the hard-working member for Perth-Middlesex for this very

important question. Our government has demonstrated that we are committed to providing quality sustainable long-term-care services in our province. We recognize that as the population ages,

increased demands on long-term-care services will be felt. We want to ensure that patients who need long-term care are able to get it as quickly as possible. That's why we have worked with our

partners in the long-term care and community care sectors to bring in new regulations that will shorten waiting lists for long-term-care facilities as well as speed up the application process for

patients. Indeed, these changes mean that all bed vacancies in long-term-care facilities will be filled more quickly by persons who have the greatest need for facility care.

Mr Johnson: I want to thank the alert and effective Associate Minister of Health and Long-Term Care from Scarborough for his response. My

constituents in Perth-Middlesex will be pleased to note that these regulations will ensure that services are available to them when they need them most.

Minister, can you please expand on these regulatory changes, what they mean and how they compare with other jurisdictions in Canada?

Hon Mr Newman: The changes in the placement regulations with respect to long-term-care facilities may be summarized as follows: establishment

of a limit of three long-term-care-facility waiting lists per patient; establishment of a one-offer policy for offers of admission to long-term-care facilities; extension of the bed-holding period

in a long-term-care facility from three days to five days; mandatory reporting of all long-term-care facility bed vacancies to community care access centres; expansion of professionals permitted to

complete nurse assessment forms to include registered nurses and nurse practitioners; an increase in the notification period from eight weeks to 16 weeks for planned voluntary closure of a

long-term-care facility. There are new priorization criteria for admission to long-term-care facilities, and there is also the provision of information to long-term-care-facility applicants about

retirement homes and other alternatives.

These changes are consistent with other Canadian jurisdictions. For example, in Newfoundland, Manitoba, Quebec, Alberta and British Columbia, patients are

requested to choose three long-term-care facilities.

ABORIGINAL HEALTH CARE

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): My question is for the Minister of Community, Family and Children's Services. Today the Ontario

Federation of Indian Friendship Centres released two excellent reports on aboriginal child poverty and on urban aboriginal youth sexual health and pregnancy. Some representatives from the

organization -- quite a few of them in fact -- are here with us today. They are calling for your quick and urgent response as they try to break a damaging cycle that is hurting their young people.

Minister, will you work with the OFIFC to develop, fund and implement policies that address the very serious concerns that are outlined in these reports today?

Hon Brenda Elliott (Minister of Community, Family and Children's Services): I thank my colleague across the way in the third party for the

question. We believe that all children's best interests are a priority of this government. We do understand that social problems can be more complex in some of the aboriginal communities,

especially in the remote areas. We know that we have a role in trying to help children in these communities grow up strong and healthy and we take that very seriously.

Our ministry spends approximately $184 million each year on social services to the First Nations. This includes funding for a program called the aboriginal

healing and wellness strategy, as well as social assistance, child welfare, child and family services and indeed child care. This $33.3-million project provides a number of services, including

funding to provide education and referral services and funding for crisis intervention. We have taken steps, we think, to assist in addressing the needs of aboriginal children. We continue to work

to improve our programs and our services.

Ms Churley: Minister, I suggest you take a look at these reports. What they outline is that there are no adequate programs in existence now to

deal with the urban aboriginal youth and families who are mired in poverty and a vicious cycle that needs to be broken. They are telling you in these reports what some of the answers are. The

voices of aboriginal young people are heard loud and clear in these reports. They know what needs to be done and they want to be involved in the solutions.

Minister, I'll ask you again: will you commit to mandating a joint ministerial committee involving your ministry, the Minister of Health and OFIFC to develop

the framework and policies that address a health promotion strategy and a proactive approach to educate urban aboriginal youth about the lifelong effects of uninformed sexual activity? That's what

these reports are about today.

Hon Mrs Elliott: I thank my colleague again. As I said, we take these issues very seriously. When new information is brought before me or my

ministry staff, certainly we will read it and consider it and do our very best to respond.

But again, we have made a tremendous commitment toward the aboriginal healing and wellness strategy, a $33-million commitment. It is community-based. It is

driven by needs within the aboriginal community. Certainly, if the views in that community are different or if there's a different direction -- it should be taken at the view of the aboriginal

community -- then we will consider those views.

LONG-TERM CARE

Mrs Sandra Pupatello (Windsor West): My question is for the Associate Minister of Health and Long-Term Care, who just spent some time speaking

about the marvels of the long-term-care sector. My question for this minister is simple: I would like to know how many times a week this minister takes a bath.

Hon Dan Newman (Associate Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I'd just ask how this question is relevant there. It has nothing to do with

it.

Mrs Pupatello: I think it has a lot to do with it. All across Ontario today in the home care sector, which is under your purview, and in the

long-term-care sector -- these sectors have faced such cuts to services, and specifically to our seniors, our elderly and most vulnerable, that people in the home care sector receiving CCAC

support, in-home service, are cut back to one bath a week. Many of our seniors in long-term-care facilities are getting maybe one bath every 10 days.

I would like to ask this minister if he thinks that's appropriate when Canadians, on average, 80% of them, take a shower every day. Does this minister think

it's appropriate, given your inappropriate funding of the home care sector, that our elderly, our most vulnerable, should be getting a bath once a week?

Hon Mr Newman: Our government is committed to providing quality, sustainable long-term-care services in Ontario. Our primary concern is for

the patients, and we take concerns expressed about compliance very seriously.

That's why I would encourage the member opposite to look at the Nursing Homes Act, subsection (56)(

a) of regulation 832, that says, and I hope the member is

listening, "The nursing staff shall ensure that residents who are confined to a bed who are incontinent have a complete bath daily or more frequently where necessary to maintain cleanliness and

that ambulant residents have a complete bath at least once a week." That's what it says.

I say to the member opposite that if there's a concern about compliance with respect to our legislation or regulations pertaining to long-term care, she can

take one of the following actions: she can launch a complaint with the facility administration, she can launch a complaint with the local community care access centre or she can launch a complaint

with the appropriate Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care regional office. All formal complaints will be followed up by a compliance adviser from the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care.

Mrs Pupatello: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I have to tell the Speaker that's a completely inappropriate answer. I'd like to register my

dissatisfaction with the line taken with the appropriate papers.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): The member can do that.

HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENTS

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): My question is for my good friend the Minister of Transportation. As you will no doubt recall, I've been in touch

with you and your predecessors on several occasions to bring attention to the need for noise barriers along the 401, specifically in the village of Newcastle.

Highway 401 was widened at Newcastle many years ago, and residents who live close to the highway have brought to my attention the need for noise barriers. I

might add the village is growing rapidly, with more new subdivisions being built close to the 401. These noise barriers need your attention now more than ever, especially with summer approaching

and families spending more time in their backyards.

Minister, could you kindly advise me of the ministry's plans for this noise abatement project and when the residents of Newcastle can look forward to seeing

and hearing the barriers being installed?

Hon Norman W. Sterling (Minister of Transportation): Actually I travel down the 401 past Newcastle on many, many occasions going back to

Lanark-Carleton. I'm pleased to inform the member that through his lobbying with the former minister, who did specifically inform me of lobbying by the member for Durham not only on this issue but

on other issues as well, in fact my staff has gone out and actually reviewed the situation. We've worked up several design options for these noise barriers. For this particular noise barrier, we've

recognized that this area is a very, very high priority.

I hope that in the very near future I'm going to be able to provide the member for Durham and his constituents with a construction date for a start to remedy

this situation.

Mr O'Toole: Minister, it's certainly good news for me and for my residents. I'm a little disappointed that you're causing some of that noise

on your frequent trips back to your riding.

I just want to bring to your attention one more area, now that you're in a good mood. I understand that noise abatement is part of a study of improvements

needed on a stretch of Highway 35-115 in Orono. As you know, this is a very, very important

section of the highway, not only for local commuters and travellers, but also for people heading to

cottage country, like the city of Kawartha Lakes, which is the preferred destination, and also the city of Peterborough. Could you kindly provide an update of the ministry's

schedule for making the

necessary improvements on Highway 35-115, also in my great riding of Durham?

Hon Mr Sterling: Again I have the distinct pleasure of driving up that other way toward my riding when I'm going toward Perth at the other end

of my riding of Lanark-Carleton. I go by Highway 7 and then up this particular area. I always want to go by Orono, because they still have their fairgrounds there. My eyes look off to the racetrack

that's still there. I'm always interested in seeing if anything's going on in that particular area.

We have completed a study in that area because of the increasing traffic volumes. We've identified some safety improvements, including fully paved shoulders,

rumble strips along the side, lengthening the interchange ramps and improved lighting. I can tell you that after completing our design, I will be pleased to report to the member and we can get

along with the construction. I know this is very important to the member, and it's also important to me as I go back to my riding on a weekly basis.

Mr Steve Gilchrist (Scarborough East): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I'd ask for unanimous consent to let Mr Sorbara indicate whether he's

sent in his cheque or when he intends to do so.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Is there unanimous consent? I'm afraid I heard a no.

PETITIONS

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

Mr Dwight Duncan (Windsor-St Clair): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas the secondary students of the city of Windsor believe that the new curriculum is poor because it makes classes too difficult and students are dropping

out because their grades are going down;

"Whereas OAC has been taken away, leaving students to prepare themselves for post-secondary studies;

"Whereas students believing that adding grade 7 and 8 students to secondary schools will overcrowd schools;

"Whereas students believe that the French immersion program should continue;

"Whereas there is a lack of funding for textbooks and other important educational resources;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, demand that the Ernie Eves government review the policies adopted by Mike Harris and make the proper management and funding of

education a priority."

This petition, done by students in my riding, gained over a thousand signatures in two days and I'm pleased to affix mine to it.

LONG-TERM CARE

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

"Whereas the Ontario government abandoned the minimum requirement for 2.25 hours per day of nursing care for seniors in nursing homes; and

"Whereas the Ontario government's own study in January 2001 showed Ontario's long-term-care residents receive less nursing, bathing and general care than

elderly people in comparable jurisdictions in Canada, the United States and Europe; and

"Whereas poor management of residents leads to excessive acute care hospital stays and the added strain on staffing levels in long-term-care facilities;

and

"Whereas Ontario long-term-care residents now receive an average of only 2.04 hours of care per day, well below the level of care of 4.2 hours that even the

state of Mississippi provides; and

"Whereas US studies have indicated that total nursing care hours for long-term-care residents should be in the range of 4.55 total hours of care per resident

per day;

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

"We call on the Ontario government to regulate a minimum requirement of at least 3.5 hours of care per resident per day."

This petition, signed by thousands of people, has been sent to me by John Van Beek of the SEIU. I'd like to thank him and his members for gathering that. I

agree with them entirely.

COMPETITIVE ELECTRICITY MARKET

Mr Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, from many residents of my riding of

Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant, organized by Retired Teachers of Ontario, District 12-Norfolk. It's titled, "Petition to Halt Deregulation of Electrical Energy in Ontario":

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

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

including huge increases in hydroelectricity rates;

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

I affix my signature to this petition.

PROFESSIONAL LEARNING

Mr Monte Kwinter (York Centre): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Because we, the undersigned, believe in our responsibility as teachers to maintain a high degree of professionalism; and

"Because such professionalism is best served when professional learning is self-directed and based on teaching need, improves professional skills, improves

student learning, is based on best-practice accountability and is funded by the appropriate educational authority; and

"Because we oppose the government's teacher testing program in the College of Teachers' professional learning program because they do not meet the objectives

of effective professional learning;

"We, the undersigned, respectfully request that you repeal all clauses and references to professional learning from the Stability and Excellence in Education

Act, 2001."

It is signed by a number of my constituents and I've affixed my signature to it.

ONTARIO DISABILITY

SUPPORT PROGRAM

Mr David Christopherson (Hamilton West): I have a petition signed by citizens from Hamilton and as far away as Scarborough, Mississauga and

Oakville. It's addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

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

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

transportation, clothing and household goods; and

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I proudly add my name on behalf of my constituents in Hamilton West and my NDP colleagues.

ABORTION

Mr Gerry Martiniuk (Cambridge): I have a petition from hundreds of Cambridge residents, which reads:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas on October 31, 2001, in a submission to the federal House of Commons finance committee, Canadian Abortion Rights Action League executive director

Marilyn Wilson said that women who seek abortions do so for socio-economic reasons rather than a necessary medical procedure; and

"Whereas the results of a 1998 study using findings from 32 studies in 27 countries stated that worldwide the most commonly reported reason women cite for

having an abortion is to postpone or stop child bearing -- the second most common reason is socio-economic concerns; and

"Whereas the Ontario health system is overburdened and pregnancy is not a disease, injury or illness; and

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

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

"Whereas the funding of induced abortion requires an estimated minimum of 25 million Ontario health dollars annually;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to deinsure therapeutic induced abortion."

As required by the rules of the House, I sign my name thereto.

HYDRO ONE

Mrs Lyn McLeod (Thunder Bay-Atikokan): I have a petition to the provincial Legislature of Ontario:

"Whereas the Conservative government plans to sell off Hydro One and Ontario's electricity transmission grid to private operators; and

"Whereas Ontario Superior Court Judge Gans ruled it was illegal for the province to sell off Hydro One; and

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

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

for consumers; and

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

"Whereas selling Hydro One and the grid means the public sector will no longer be responsible for its security and protection;

"Therefore,

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

"To demand the Conservative government obey the law and immediately halt the sale or lease of Hydro One until the government has a clear mandate from the

owners of Hydro One -- the people of Ontario."

This is signed by 131 constituents, primarily from the small community of Atikokan. I affix my signature in full agreement with their concerns.

CHILD CARE

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I have petitions that have been sent to me by R. Martino of Mississauga and Maycourt Children's Centre in

Sault Ste Marie. They read as follows:

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

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

programs in Ontario;

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

family resource program budget on to municipalities;

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

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

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

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

"Therefore,

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

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

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

for family resource programs."

I agree with the petitioners and I have affixed my signature to this.

EDUCATION FUNDING

Mr Bert Johnson (Perth-Middlesex): I have a petition I want to present on behalf of the hard-working, energetic and effective member for

Oakville.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas we, the undersigned, believe a strong, broadly based and fully funded public education system is the basis for a vital and prosperous Ontario;

"Whereas we, the undersigned, as residents and taxpayers of the province of Ontario, are gravely concerned regarding the present state of financial support for

publicly funded schools in the province of Ontario;

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

"

(1) We respectfully request that immediate actions be taken to review the current education funding model in order to eliminate shortfalls currently being

experienced across the province.

"

(2) We further respectfully request that this review be conducted in full and open consultation with concerned parent groups, teachers and school boards

across the province.

"

(3) We finally respectfully request that the upcoming provincial budget be structured so as to provide funds to remedy current shortfalls in classroom-based

salaries and benefits, school operations and maintenance, transportation and special education funding as reported by school boards to the Ministry of Education."

I sign this.

PROFESSIONAL LEARNING

Association.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Because we, the undersigned, believe in our responsibility as teachers to maintain a high degree of professionalism; and

"Because such professionalism is best served when professional learning is self-directed and based on teacher need, improves professional skills, improves

student learning, is based on best practice accountability and is funded by the appropriate educational authority; and

"Because we oppose the government's teacher testing program and the College of Teachers' professional learning program because they do not meet the objectives

of effective professional learning;

"We, the undersigned, respectfully request that you repeal all clauses and references to professional learning from the Stability and Excellence in Education

Act, 2001."

I will be adding my signature to this petition.

COMPETITIVE ELECTRICITY MARKET

The Acting Speaker (Mr Michael A. Brown): Petitions, the member for Hamilton East -- Hamilton West.

Mr David Christopherson (Hamilton West): It makes a big difference, Speaker.

A petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"To the government of Ontario:

"We, the undersigned residents of Ontario, recognize that,

"

(1) Electricity rates in deregulated, private, for-profit markets such as Alberta and California fluctuate wildly in supply and price and are much

higher-priced than in comparable public power systems;

"

(2) Deregulation in California caused more blackouts than Ontario has suffered from ice storms or other natural disasters while public power has protected us

from market fluctuations in supply as well as price;

"

(3) At-cost electricity has helped build and support Ontario's economy, while deregulation would destabilize the economy, with soaring rates, reduced

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

"

(4) Soaring electricity rates would put a significant burden on school boards, hospitals, public transit and other public services which cannot afford to pay

double for their electricity;

"

(5) Seniors and other members of our communities on fixed incomes would be hard-hit by increasing rates, and the living standards of millions of Ontarians

will be harmed;

"

(6) Privatization will trigger NAFTA provisions, making it practically impossible to reverse this dangerous experiment and would cost us Canadian control over

electricity;

"

(7) Privatization, deregulation and loss of sovereignty would close the door on public accountability of the industry in regard to environmental safety and

energy security concerns; and

"

(8) An alternative exists in the form of a truly accountable, transparent and affordable publicly owned and controlled system operated at cost for the benefit

of all Ontarians;

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

I agree with my constituents and I add my name to this petition.

HORSE RIDING SAFETY

Mr Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): This petition comes to me from Gwyneth Rooke of Stouffville and it reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas an increasing number of Ontarians are turning to horseback riding as a recreational activity; and

"Whereas many of these inexperienced riders are children; and

"Whereas an unacceptable number of preventable injuries and fatalities have occurred while horseback riding;

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

"To amend Bill 12, the Horse Riding Safety Act, 2001, by amending:

"(1) the definition of `horse' to include those equines under 14.2 hands (considered to be ponies); and

"(2) the definition of `horse riding establishment' to include all commercial stables."

The Acting Speaker (Mr Michael A. Brown): This concludes the time allocated for petitions.

NOTICE OF DISSATISFACTION

The Acting Speaker (Mr Michael A. Brown): I will just bring this to the attention of members. Pursuant to standing order 37(a), the member for

Windsor West has given notice of her dissatisfaction with the answer to her question given by the Associate Minister of Health and Long-Term Care concerning home care. This matter will be debated

at 6 pm this evening.

OPPOSITION DAY

HYDRO ONE

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): I move the following:

"The Ontario Legislative Assembly calls on Ernie Eves to either keep his promise to take the sale of Hydro One `off the table' by abandoning his plans to

proceed with legislation which would enable the government to privatize Hydro One or call a general election on the issue."

Speaker, I am very pleased to have this opportunity to move a very important motion which speaks to a very important issue which we have been addressing during

the past couple of weeks in this Legislature, since its resumption of sittings. The people of Ontario have a right to feel secure about their electricity, they have a right not to worry about huge

price increases, and they have a right to expect that the people transmitting their power to them have their best interests, and nothing else, at heart.

Electricity is not just another commodity. People need it. They need it to run their businesses. They need it to heat their homes. They need it to feed their

families. We need it to run our hospitals and our schools. People need to feel secure about all those things, and that is what we over here are fighting for. It's what everyone in this Legislature

should be fighting for.

This is a motion that I would expect might get unanimous support in this House, and it certainly should. I know the NDP oppose the selling of Hydro One. It's

one of the few things on which we agree. As for my colleagues opposite, my motion would allow them to actually have an answer when people ask them what's going on with Hydro One. They could

respond, depending on how this thing unfolds, either that it is off the table, as was promised by the Premier on the morning of the recent by-elections, or they could respond that the matter will

be decided by voters at the time of the next provincial election. Imagine how liberating that would be for our friends opposite, to actually have an answer when it comes to the future of Hydro

One.

As things stand now, when the members opposite are asked about Hydro One, they pretty well have to consult a calendar. If it's Tuesday, they tell us that we

must be privatized. If it's Wednesday, they'll tell us that we are leasing and the status quo is definitely not on the table. Tomorrow, though, the status quo will definitely be on the table.

The spectacle of the last few weeks has been an embarrassment for this government and frankly an embarrassment for the people of Ontario. They've had to watch

their new Premier dreaming up policy on the fly while trying to keep his various ministers onside -- not an easy feat when nobody knows what side the government itself happens to be on.

This motion should clear things up nicely for the Premier, for the energy minister and for the rest of the members opposite. Don't sell Hydro One. It's a bad

idea. There is simply no good reason to sell off Hydro One. The energy minister himself admitted last week that there is no sound business case to support the sale of Hydro One.

I can't actually fathom contemplating a multi-billion dollar sale of anything without a good business case to back it up. We'll let that go for now, but the

fact is not only is there no good reason to sell Hydro One, there are numerous very good reasons not to. For a start, it happens to be making money. I want to say that again, because it doesn't

seem to register with the members opposite. Hydro One is making money.

What would possess the government, I mean any government, to sell an asset that generates 300 million some odd dollars every year? Furthermore, Hydro One is a

natural public monopoly. There are no other transmission grids. There exist no other means by which we can convey electricity from the source where it is generated into our homes, into our

businesses, into our schools, into our hospitals. There is just the one electricity highway. It's the only game in town.

This government should know that when you turn a natural public monopoly over to the private sector, it is the consumer who ultimately pays the price. Rates

would go up. Rates could in fact go up dramatically and there is nothing consumers could do because, as I said, it's the only game in town.

You cannot talk about the sell-off of Hydro One and not think about the sell-off of the 407. Today, at least when it comes to the 407, consumers, users and

drivers have the availability of an alternative route. If you don't like the tolls on the 407, you can at least get off the darned thing and use an alternative route. When it comes to our

transmission grid, when it comes to Hydro One, there is no alternative electricity highway. If the rates skyrocket, I guess the energy minister might suggest that we break out the candles. We think

there's something that we can do now. We can ensure that Hydro One is in fact not sold off.

One of the options the energy minister is tossing around is a straight sale to an individual. From our perspective, that represents a real security issue. I

don't want to sound alarmist, but isn't that effectively handing one person or company the power to shut this province down? Hydro One is the central nervous system of the Ontario economy. How

could this government possibly contemplate what they call a strategic sale: you turn ownership of Hydro One over to one individual or to one corporation. Just how sensible is that?

If the energy minister had spent a little more time listening to people during his so-called consultation hearings instead of telling them what they couldn't

say, he'd have heard that Ontarians are very concerned about the future of their transmission grid. I think it has taken us close to 100 years to cobble together this transmission grid.

I can recall one particular time -- I used to be our party's energy critic -- when an elderly gentleman came forward and made a presentation to this committee

which was considering a Hydro bill of some kind in the early 1990s. He recounted in some detail how as a boy in his small community the lines actually were sent into the community and they put up

Christmas lights for the first time in that community. I was thinking of that story and how we have developed this very strong dependence -- and that's the right word, it's a dependence -- on our

transmission grid, and it is absolutely essential, as we contemplate its future, that we do nothing to put our dependence on that grid at risk.

I was mentioning a moment ago how the energy minister should have spent a little more time listening to people and how people are now very worried about the

future of their transmission grid, and well they should be. This is, after all, news to them. Ontarians certainly didn't hear anything about selling off Hydro One during the last election campaign.

Wouldn't selling off a huge natural public monopoly, a multi-billion dollar transmission grid, be the sort of thing you'd somehow want to, at least in some oblique way, make reference to during the

course of an election campaign? Not one word was uttered at the time of the last election about the potential sale of Hydro One, not a single word.

I say to the Premier, and I say to the energy minister, if you really think this is the right thing to do, then put it to the people. Have an election on the

issue. That's the right way to proceed. That's the democratic way to proceed.

When you get right down to it, this is all about the next election anyway. The government members are a little tight for cash just now. When you're an

unpopular government trying to make up for seven years of incompetence, being tight for cash is not a good thing. The members opposite could use a few billion dollars extra to fund the promises

they're about to start making, promises they hope will make people forget about the sad state of our health care system, promises they hope will make people forget about the shambles this

government has made of our public education system, promises they hope will make people forget about Walkerton and Ipperwash.

I can tell you, these people opposite will be buying their way out of those things. They're certainly not buying their way out of this by selling this

province's transmission grid. It would be nice if this government had the courage to stand by what it believes, to defend it and to put it to the people of Ontario for their approval. It would be

nice if this government didn't make policy on a whim, saying one thing one day and another the next.

You might not agree with that government, but you could at least respect it. The soap opera that has played itself out over the past few weeks has not been

worthy of respect. It has been worthy of nothing more than a channel change. We have witnessed flip-flops. We have witnessed a consultation process in which people were told what not to say, and

from which the energy minister stormed out when he didn't like what people did say.

This government has variously committed itself, thus far at least, to the following: an IPO, an income trust, a not-for-profit corporation, some kind of

leasing arrangement, a strategic sale, the status quo, anything but the status quo. Then this government has the unmitigated gall to reveal that they are not going to announce their final decision

with respect to the future of Hydro One until after this House has recessed.

I refer you back to the recent throne speech when this Premier, through the Lieutenant Governor, told us that this marked the beginning of a new era. We were

on the threshold of a springtime in Ontario politics. Birds would sing, kids would play soccer and the sun would rise. He spoke about how listening would be seen as a mark of courage and no longer

as a weakness. He talked about a government that was going to be both responsive and responsible.

I ask you, Speaker, is it really responsive and responsible, is it really doing courageous listening when you say to the duly elected representatives of some

people of Ontario, and through us to them, "We're going to introduce a bill. We're going to drive this thing through. We're going to get this thing wrapped up by the end of June. You people are

going to go off to do whatever you do during the summer break, and then we will make the final decision with respect to the future of Hydro One"?

That does not speak to me of us finding ourselves in a new era here, on the threshold of a new springtime in Ontario politics. It speaks to me of the bad old

days of Mike Harris, when he rammed things through and did not give us due regard. More importantly, it's not about us; it's about the people of Ontario whom we enjoy the privilege of representing.

That's what this government is doing. They are one and the same. Are these people opposite so afraid of scrutiny, are they so afraid of questions? We say enough is enough. Either take this thing

off the table or let the people of Ontario know where you stand, and then let them tell you where they stand.

The Acting Speaker (Mr Michael A. Brown): Further debate?

Mr Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): Thank you, Speaker, for this --

Interjections.

The Acting Speaker: Order.

Mr Marchese: Dalton, they still can't get over your speech. That's so nice. You've got so many supporters.

Interjection: Where are your colleagues?

Interjection: Where's your support there?

Mr Marchese: We don't need so much support here on this side.

I'm happy to speak to this motion, and I want to say that it's so good that Dalton McGuinty, the Liberal leader, made reference to the fact that they agree

with the NDP on this particular issue. We're happy to have them agree with us.

Interjection: No, you agree with us.

Mr Marchese: Oh, is that the way it is? I thought we took this position quite a while ago, as long as a year or so ago. But some of you could

be right. You were dormant for quite a while, and now you have awakened to the issue. That's OK. It's good to have both opposition parties on the same side on the issue of Hydro One.

Interjection.

Mr Marchese: You're quite right, Dominic. You guys are doing well and you have more members, it's true. All I'm saying is that on this issue

I'm happy we are now on the same team.

For those watching, what we're talking about is Hydro One. Most of you don't have a sense of what this is all about, and it's true that most MPPs didn't have a

clue before this issue broke. There's this Hydro One issue and there's power generation on the other side, and nobody seems to understand the difference. In fact, many people link the generation of

power and Hydro One as being the same issue, and they're not.

For many years no one in Ontario had to worry about that distinction, because for over 100 years people in the province of Ontario got Ontario Hydro power at

cost without worry, without the insecurity of whether or not they would have it one day, without the insecurity of knowing that the price might be higher one day, lower another, jacked up another

day and so on. One hundred years ago Sir Adam Beck, this wealthy individual, felt it was in the interest of all Ontarians, both rich and poor, to have a public monopoly delivering hydro to our

homes. This man, 100 years ago -- he wasn't a poor guy; "Sir" is usually attached to people who are fairly well to do. Most poor people I know never acquire such a title. He was a rich guy. This

rich guy said everyone deserves to have hydro no matter where they live, and this is a big province. This province is three times bigger than Italy. Italy has 60 million people; we have 11 million

people. It's a big, big province. Our leader represents a riding that's just as big as some of those European countries. Sir Adam Beck felt and understood that there ought to be a state monopoly

that would deliver hydro safely to their homes, far and wide, north, east, west, south. It worked well.

I don't know anyone who complained about Hydro, really. I don't know anyone in Ontario. I'm not sure if some of you watching are those who called upon the

former Premier to change the status quo because it wasn't working. I certainly don't know anyone. People got hydro at cost and it worked.

Then of course the Tories began with Darlington. Darlington, by the way, was a Tory initiative and cost 14 billion bucks to build. It began with the Tories. By

the end of it, we held in our hands a very huge cost that, by the way, we never paid back at the same pace or in a way that we would be certain to have it paid off. So we have a huge debt as a

result of the construction of Darlington that was not paid in a very timely way. We could have asked the people of Ontario to pay their fair share and get rid of that debt, but we didn't. We put it

off year after year. But it was the Tories who did that one.

Hon Norman W. Sterling (Minister of Transportation): Give me a break.

Mr Marchese: Darlington was a Tory initiative, Norm.

Hon Mr Sterling: No, it wasn't. It carried on. It takes 15 years to plan a nuclear plant.

Mr Marchese: All right, Norm. You'll be up soon and you can have your say.

Harris, of course, the demagogue of Conservative politics, came along and he said, "A public monopoly is simply a bad thing." Who says that it is a bad thing?

Mike Harris said it was a bad thing. Does any Tory know anyone in the lower ranks, the lower echelons of society, who said to him or you, Tory MPPs, "The state monopoly is bad and it's got to go"?

I don't know anyone.

Harris and some of the gang across the way -- not all Tory MPPs, because not all are wealthy. Some are, but not all. Certainly they're all influenced by the

big-money-making boys, of course. But Harris is someone who believes in private enterprise, and so do the vast majority of Tory MPPs. They believe public ownership of anything is bad. "We cannot

improve public ownership. We improve it by destroying it." So Harris comes and glorifies the private sector, puts it on a pedestal next to godliness and says, "Privatizing Hydro is good."

So he decided to do two things: deregulate power generation -- and by the way, I'll just explain that, and then I'll try to get into Hydro One. Deregulating

hydro generation meant that we now rely on the marketplace to determine the price of hydro. No longer do we have the assurances we had in the past, where you paid what was fair and what was right

in order to pay off your debts. We now leave it to the market to determine the cost. We have the uncertainty of the private sector marketplace determining the price of hydro. Mike Harris says this

is good. Who says that's good? Mike Harris. Who else says it's good? Those who stand, of course, to profit from it: those who want to make a lot of money.

Remember, the generation of hydro is by and large now controlled by Ontario Power Generation; 60% to 80% of it is in their hands still. They will privatize

that slowly in the next 10 years. Twenty per cent of it is now in private hands, those who generate hydro privately. Then you've got all these retailers who buy from those who generate electricity

and they come knocking at your door saying, "I can sell hydro for cheaper than some other retailer who comes to the door saying he or she can sell it for cheaper," and so on and so on down the

line.

The Liberals support the privatization of the generation of power, which they call --

Mrs Marie Bountrogianni (Hamilton Mountain): So do you. Your leader said he supports TransAlta in Sarnia.

Mr Marchese: The Liberals support the privatization of power generation because they say that competition is good. They agree with the Tories

that the privatization of the generation of power is good, on some assumption, Marie Bountrogianni, that this is a good thing. The Liberals don't speak much about that because they'd rather keep

that hidden under the carpet, so to speak. We want to put this out to you, that you should ask the Liberals and the Tories --

Mrs Bountrogianni: And Howard Hampton.

Mr Marchese: -- and Howard Hampton what his views are, because we're opposed to it.

Marie Bountrogianni is supportive of the privatization of Hydro, but today --

Mrs Bountrogianni: No, we're not.

Mr Marchese: Marie Bountrogianni, you'll have your opportunity to speak for sure, and we're looking forward to your remarks, but you have

supported the deregulation of Ontario Hydro. Marie Bountrogianni, when you stand, tell the public of Hamilton what your views are on this matter, because I certainly am interested to hear them. I'm

interested to listen to any Liberal who has a position on this. I know you don't call it privatization; you call it competition, I think it is.

Mrs Bountrogianni: What does Howard call it?

Mr Marchese: Howard Hampton calls it that he is opposed to the privatization of the generation of power and we are opposed to the selling off

of Hydro One, the transmission lines, those line