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

April 17, 2007

38th Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2007-Apr-17 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Tuesday 17 April 2007 Mardi 17 avril 2007

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

TOWING INDUSTRY

FOOD DRIVE

ONTARIO FARMERS

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

CHARITY HOCKEY GAME

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

YORK SUBWAY EXTENSION

INVESTMENT IN SAULT STE. MARIE

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

LOI DE 2007 SUR L'ÉRECTION DE PANNEAUX DANS LES PARCS PROVINCIAUX ET À L'EMPLACEMENT D'IMPORTANTES ATTRACTIONS TOURISTIQUES PROVINCIALES /

PROVINCIAL PARKS AND MAJOR PROVINCIAL TOURIST ATTRACTIONS SIGN ACT, 2007

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION

AND PROTECTION OF PRIVACY AMENDMENT ACT

(SPEAKER OF THE ASSEMBLY), 2007 /

LOI DE 2007 MODIFIANT LA

LOI SUR L'ACCÈS À L'INFORMATION ET LA PROTECTION DE LA VIE PRIVÉE (PRÉSIDENT DE L'ASSEMBLÉ

E) VISITORS

EDUCATION AMENDMENT ACT

(PROGRESSIVE DISCIPLINE

AND SCHOOL SAFETY), 2007 /

LOI DE 2007 MODIFIANT

LA

LOI SUR L'ÉDUCATION

(DISCIPLINE PROGRESSIVE

ET SÉCURITÉ DANS LES ÉCOLES)

RECOGNITION OF SIGN LANGUAGE

AS AN OFFICIAL LANGUAGE ACT, 2007 /

LOI DE 2007 RECONNAISSANT

LA LANGUE DES SIGNES

COMME LANGUE OFFICIELLE

VISITORS

MOTIONS

ORDER OF BUSINESS

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

SCHOOL SAFETY /

LA SÉCURITÉ DANS LES ÉCOLES

CANADIAN CHARTER OF

RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS /

CHARTE CANADIENNE

DES DROITS ET LIBERTÉS

DANIEL BURNHAM AWARD

SCHOOL SAFETY

CANADIAN CHARTER OF

RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS

DANIEL BURNHAM AWARD

SCHOOL SAFETY

DANIEL BURNHAM AWARD

JUNE CALLWOOD

ORAL QUESTIONS

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

NORTHERN ECONOMY

MANUFACTURING JOBS

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR GENERAL

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

SCHOOL CLOSURES

SERVICES FOR THE DISABLED

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

MANUFACTURING JOBS

TFO

LONG-TERM CARE

PETITIONS

LONG-TERM CARE

REGULATION OF ZOOS

ENDANGERED SPECIES LEGISLATION

REGULATION OF ZOOS

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

REGULATION OF ZOOS

POPE JOHN PAUL II

ORDERS OF THE DAY

BUDGET MEASURES AND INTERIM

APPROPRIATION ACT, 2007 /

LOI DE 2007 SUR LES MESURES

BUDGÉTAIRES ET L'AFFECTATION

ANTICIPÉE DE CRÉDITS

ELECTORAL SYSTEM

REFERENDUM ACT, 2007 /

LOI DE 2007 SUR LE RÉFÉRENDUM

RELATIF AU SYSTÈME ÉLECTORAL

BUDGET MEASURES AND INTERIM

APPROPRIATION ACT, 2007 /

LOI DE 2007 SUR LES MESURES

BUDGÉTAIRES ET L'AFFECTATION

ANTICIPÉE DE CRÉDITS

ELECTORAL SYSTEM

REFERENDUM ACT, 2007 /

LOI DE 2007 SUR LE RÉFÉRENDUM

RELATIF AU SYSTÈME ÉLECTORAL

SAFEGUARDING AND SUSTAINING

ONTARIO'S WATER ACT, 2007 /

LOI DE 2007 SUR LA SAUVEGARDE ET LA

DURABILITÉ DES EAUX DE L'ONTARIO

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

TOWING INDUSTRY

Mrs. Julia Munro (York North): Last month, a severe winter storm caused a massive traffic accident on Highway 400 in Innisfil. Many cars, trucks and buses were involved. Many serious injuries were inflicted, but no loss of life occurred.

No loss of life occurring is a tribute to the fire, police and ambulance services that responded to the scene. However, there is one other responder who deserves our tribute.

Tow truck drivers worked bravely in terrible conditions to make rescues possible. One such driver was Glenn Currie of Currie Heavy Towing. He was at the controls of the biggest, strongest, most versatile heavy wrecker that day. He was assisted by others, but his role was central in lifting a tractor-trailer off a trapped driver, allowing the fire and ambulance personnel to remove that driver and save his life.

This is not the first time that Currie Heavy Towing has performed a task like this, and it will not be the last. They, like many other towers, do this without compensation. The Currie family does not request and will not accept any payment for life-saving emergency work. Glenn Currie, like his father, Alex Currie, is a humble man who does great things and is an inspiration to all residents of Ontario.

FOOD DRIVE

Mr. Khalil Ramal (London–Fanshawe): I rise in the House today to say thank you to all the generous people of London, Ontario, who have contributed to the London Food Bank's most successful annual spring food drive. The London Food Bank's annual spring food drive ended with a 17% increase in donations compared to previous years.

I'm proud that London is a community that pulls together to assist those who are in need. The food bank's 17% increase will result in 800 more people in London who will be helped by the food bank.

The generous contributions were not only from individuals in the London community but also from corporations like Freedom 55 Financial and others.

I am proud to stand up in this House as one of the four representatives elected by the people of London. London is a wonderful community to represent here at Queen's Park.

I would like to again thank everyone in London for their contributions, and I would also like to encourage all Ontarians to give back to their communities.

ONTARIO FARMERS

Mr. Tim Hudak (Erie—Lincoln): I'm pleased to rise to bring to the attention of the government members, ministers particularly, the great challenges currently facing farmers in the greenbelt area.

We all know that anybody can draw a green line on a map and colour it in. Real leadership requires making the tough but necessary decisions to invest in projects to ensure that initiatives in the greenbelt are successful.

Today we find ourselves with grape growers who grow juice grapes facing tremendous challenges with the closure of the Cadbury plant, meaning that at the end of this year those crops will not find a market. There are hundreds and, spreading out into the community, thousands of individuals broadly impacted by this decision. If the government is truly going to put taxpayers' money where its mouth is, they will invest and help our grape growers move on to other markets, particularly through a grape replant program, which I'll note did not receive a dime in this budget despite $50 million going to Magna Corp., which is about to purchase Chrysler, I guess.

Secondly, Ontario beekeepers, particularly those in the Niagara Peninsula, are experiencing significant challenges. You may have seen the Toronto Star story today indicating 90% bee losses in many of the hives. This is important not only to the beekeepers themselves and their families but it has a tremendous impact on the tender fruit industry and the horticultural industry in general, not only in Erie—Lincoln but in St. Catharines, Niagara Falls, Niagara Centre and across the greenbelt area.

If the government stands behind its legislation, it needs to invest in these two projects.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

Mr. Peter Tabuns (Toronto—Danforth): It's clear that the Minister of the Environment is neither familiar with the Kyoto Protocol nor with the full implications of climate change. She has misread the NDP's climate action bill, which passed second reading last week, but that's not the main problem. The main problem is that she does not have a sense of urgency. She is not bringing forward her own climate change plans. According to an

article in the Globe and Mail by Murray Campbell, she's looking at a target of 10% below 1990 levels by 2020—far too slow.

The scientific community is generally agreed that haste and urgency are required. Last fall the World Wildlife Fund put out their paper noting that at a two-degree increase in world temperature, we were looking at massive disruption of ecosystems, spread of world hunger and loss of fresh water. The earth has already warmed 0.8 degrees since 1900, and we're looking at going to two degrees—that red line—as early as 2026.

The minister should expedite the passage of the NDP climate act bill. The minister should make sure it goes through committee, goes to third reading and is adopted. If we're going to deal with this problem, we can't wait till 2020. We need to move it forward today. We need to move it forward now.

CHARITY HOCKEY GAME

Mr. Mario G. Racco (Thornhill): This past weekend, I was a witness to a historic event that took place in my riding of Thornhill. The B'nai Brith Youth Organization succeeded in breaking the Guinness world record for holding the longest floor hockey game ever played. The previous world record for the longest floor hockey game was held by the B'nai Brith youth

chapter in Edmonton, which played for a total of 24 hours.

The event this past weekend took place at Rosedale Heights Public School in Thornhill, officially began at 8 p.m. on Saturday, April 14, and went uninterrupted until 8:30 p.m. on Sunday, April 15. The game was a resounding success. The brave group of 30 youths, which included players from Thornhill, Markham, Aurora, Richmond Hill and Toronto, played floor hockey non-stop for a total of 24.5 hours.

While the feat of breaking a world record is impressive in its own right, this occasion was made even more meaningful because proceeds were raised for two very worthwhile charities: the Shoot for a Cure Foundation, which raises money for spinal cord research, and Rebuild Homes, Rebuild Lives. The latter foundation is sending as many as 15 of the players who participated to New Orleans to help with the ongoing reconstruction from the devastation of Hurricane Katrina.

I would like to commend Ryan Bernkopf of the B'nai Brith Youth Organization, Lake Ontario chapter, for organizing this event and inviting me to participate as a witness.

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

Mr. John O'Toole (Durham): I rise today because Premier McGuinty and David Caplan have refused to act on the suggestion to clean up the Lottogate scandal.

One constituent, Bob, said to me that he feels cheated, and he went on to say, "What is the Premier doing about it?" Here's the list since the CBC report and the Ombudsman's report. To date, we have had 145 questions on the OLG insider-winning scandal. That's 145 questions and zero answers. Dalton McGuinty will not accept responsibility or hold accountable his lottery minister, David Caplan. He fails the very test of ministerial responsibility, which his mother indeed followed.

His government has also refused to answer our freedom-of-information requests. His government refuses to answer our order paper questions. And yesterday, the McGuinty government voted unanimously against an opposition day motion calling for an all-party committee of the Legislature to investigate this serious scandal.

"What are Dalton and David afraid of? What are they trying to cover up?" people are asking. "Will they ever do the right thing and take real action to restore confidence in the provincial lottery system?" My advice to them and to my constituents is, don't bet on it. You can't trust the policies coming from McGuinty.

But John Tory and the PC caucus will continue to press for accountability and integrity. The citizens of Ontario deserve no less, and they are looking for leadership they can trust.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): I'd just remind members early that the use of proper names isn't appropriate, that it should be the member's riding or the minister's position.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

Mrs. Carol Mitchell (Huron—Bruce): I rise in the Legislature today to remind Ontarians how the McGuinty Liberals have effectively moved forward to protect our natural environment and repair the damage that was done under the former Conservative government. Not only did the Tories increase emissions from coal by 127%, they also slashed the environment ministry budget, privatized water testing and left Walkerton residents with a horrendous water tragedy that residents will pay for for the rest of their lives.

The Leader of the Opposition is no different. Yesterday, he fell flat with a Harper-style announcement stating that he would reduce greenhouse gases 43 years from now. But don't worry, he would start the reduction somehow, in some way, in 13 years.

We appreciate his endorsement for our plan to start replacing government vehicles with alternative fuels, to introduce energy efficiency in government buildings and to improve the building code to make homes more efficient, although there was one thing he was dead silent on yesterday, and that's the commitment to close the remaining coal-fired generating plants, which would be the single biggest way to reduce greenhouse gases. That's because the Liberals are the only party committed to closing those plants. Both opposition parties want to keep the plants open. We are going to close them.

I put this to the Legislature: If John Tory is really committed to the environment, why did his party vote against clean water, protecting green space, energy conservation, fighting toxic spills, expanding transit and renewable fuels?

YORK SUBWAY EXTENSION

Mr. Mario Sergio (York West): I rise in the House today to speak on the extension of the Spadina-York subway to York University and the third party's desire to slow down progress for GTA students, commuters and the business community as well. While the McGuinty Liberals are committed to ensuring that the subway moves forward, there are some in this Legislature who are opposed to progress.

We have worked with all levels of government to put the framework in place so this vital project can indeed be realized. We have committed the funding and we refuse to pull out. The McGuinty Liberals recognize the positive effects that this project will have for those in the surrounding region, but we also recognize that this will be a positive step towards keeping our air clean and our traffic moving.

Through investing in important initiatives like public transit, the McGuinty Liberals are demonstrating our commitment to fighting climate change and to working to curb the problems associated with urban sprawl. While the leader of the third party would like to kill the York subway extension, the McGuinty Liberals see its importance for commuters, students and Ontarians who want to begin to move towards a more environmentally sound Ontario.

We know there is always much more to be done, but the McGuinty Liberals, unlike the third party, are working to ensure that this vision is quickly realized.

INVESTMENT IN SAULT STE. MARIE

Mr. David Orazietti (Sault Ste. Marie): Last week the Leader of the Opposition, John Tory, was in my riding of Sault Ste. Marie, and he said that residents were not seeing results under our government, proving that, once again, he and his party have no idea what's happening there. Let's look at the record.

We're investing $100 million and have built the Northern Ontario School of Medicine, the first one built in Canada in more than 30 years. We're providing an unprecedented 90% funding for the new Sault Area Hospital, which we'll break ground on this year, while under the Conservatives the number of communities underserviced by physicians grew from 63 to 142. They closed 28 public hospitals after promising not to cut health care spending. Now the Leader of the Opposition promises to take out the chainsaw and cut another $2.6 billion from health care.

Education funding has increased in Sault Ste. Marie by over $18 million, while the Conservatives closed 25 northern schools and underfunded education by $2 billion.

Speaker, after five years of NDP mismanagement and eight years of Conservative indifference, we're getting results in Sault Ste. Marie. Our renewable energy program has allowed Algoma Steel to invest $135 million in a cogeneration plant. We've helped Flakeboard expand with a $5.2-million investment. We've provided $15 million for a waterfront project, $7.8 million for the new youth justice centre and $4.7 for the Steelback Centre.

When the Conservatives were governing, they left us with a $5.5-billion deficit that we've balanced.

The Conservatives can talk all they want about what they're going to do for Sault Ste. Marie, but we've delivered.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

LOI DE 2007 SUR L'ÉRECTION DE PANNEAUX DANS LES PARCS PROVINCIAUX ET À L'EMPLACEMENT D'IMPORTANTES ATTRACTIONS TOURISTIQUES PROVINCIALES /

PROVINCIAL PARKS AND MAJOR PROVINCIAL TOURIST ATTRACTIONS SIGN ACT, 2007

M. Lalonde propose la première lecture du projet de loi suivant :

Projet de loi 207, Loi exigeant l'érection de panneaux bilingues dans les parcs provinciaux, dans les parcs sous le contrôle de la Commission des parcs du Niagara et à l'emplacement d'importantes attractions touristiques provinciales / Bill 207,

An Act to require bilingual signs in provincial parks, parks under the control of the Niagara Parks Commission and at major provincial tourist attractions.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

Does the member wish to make a short statement?

Mr. Jean-Marc Lalonde (Glengarry—Prescott—Russell): The bill proposes that unilingual signs be replaced by bilingual signs in provincial parks, parks under the control of the Niagara Parks Commission and at other prescribed provincial tourist attractions in Ontario as it becomes necessary to replace unilingual signs.

Last August, I just happened to be touring with a group from Belgium, France and Africa. We know there are over 13 million people, according to 2004 stats, visiting Niagara Falls every year, and out of that at least three million are francophones. During that tour, they were telling me that there were no signs in—

The Deputy Speaker: Thank you. The time to debate the bill is during private members' business.

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION

AND PROTECTION OF PRIVACY AMENDMENT ACT

(SPEAKER OF THE ASSEMBLY), 2007 /

LOI DE 2007 MODIFIANT LA

LOI SUR L'ACCÈS À L'INFORMATION ET LA PROTECTION DE LA VIE PRIVÉE (PRÉSIDENT DE L'ASSEMBLÉ

E) Mr. Kormos moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 208,

An Act to amend the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act respecting the Speaker of the Assembly / Projet de loi 208, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur l'accès à l'information et la protection de la vie privée en ce qui a trait au président de l'Assemblée.

Mr. Ernie Parsons (Prince Edward—Hastings): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: It is my understanding that this bill will make the Speaker's budget available so the public can access information on the association budgets. I question whether the bill is correct in that it is my understanding that association budgets are in fact part of the Legislative Assembly budget—

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): I'm not sure what the bill contains, the member for Prince Edward—Hastings, but at this point in time I don't believe it's a point of order.

Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry?

All those in favour, say "aye."

All those opposed, say "nay."

In my opinion, the nays have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1350 to 1355.

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

Ayes

The Deputy Speaker: All those opposed, please stand and be recognized by the Clerk.

Nays

Hon. Mike Colle (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker—

The Deputy Speaker: Usually we don't have points of order during—no, no. I thought it was in relation to your vote.

The Clerk of the Assembly (Ms. Deborah Deller): The ayes are 68; the nays are 1.

The Deputy Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

Hon. Mr. Colle: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker—

The Deputy Speaker: Perhaps the member for Niagara Centre would like to make a short statement.

Mr. Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): This bill amends the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act to provide that the act applies with respect to records in the custody of the Speaker, with the exception of records that pertain to his or her role as a member of the assembly.

The Deputy Speaker: Now, the point of order: the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration.

VISITORS

Hon. Mike Colle (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration): I would like to welcome in the gallery Paolo Ponti, the Italian trade commissioner, who is with us here today. Mr. Ponti, welcome.

EDUCATION AMENDMENT ACT

(PROGRESSIVE DISCIPLINE

AND SCHOOL SAFETY), 2007 /

LOI DE 2007 MODIFIANT

LA

LOI SUR L'ÉDUCATION

(DISCIPLINE PROGRESSIVE

ET SÉCURITÉ DANS LES ÉCOLES)

Ms. Wynne moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 212,

An Act to amend the Education Act in respect of behaviour, discipline and safety / Projet de loi 212, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur l'éducation en ce qui concerne le comportement, la discipline et la sécurité.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

Would the minister like to make a short statement?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne (Minister of Education): During ministerial statements, Mr. Speaker.

RECOGNITION OF SIGN LANGUAGE

AS AN OFFICIAL LANGUAGE ACT, 2007 /

LOI DE 2007 RECONNAISSANT

LA LANGUE DES SIGNES

COMME LANGUE OFFICIELLE

Mr. Parsons moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 213,

An Act to recognize sign language as an official language in Ontario / Projet de loi 213, Loi visant à reconnaître la langue des signes comme langue officielle en Ontario.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

Would the member like to make a short statement?

Mr. Ernie Parsons (Prince Edward—Hastings): Many of our fellow citizens who are deaf, deafened or hard of hearing at times experience difficulty accessing public services. This bill, if passed, would recognize sign language as an official language in Ontario in the courts, in education and in the Legislative Assembly.

VISITORS

Mr. David Zimmer (Willowdale): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I would like to introduce two representatives of the Toronto Professional Fire Fighters' Association: Scott Marks, who is the president; and Rick Berenz, who is the executive director.

MOTIONS

ORDER OF BUSINESS

Hon. James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism, minister responsible for seniors, Government House Leader): I believe we have unanimous consent to move a motion respecting the modification of two government orders.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Do we have unanimous consent? Agreed.

Hon. Mr. Bradley: I move that the order of the House dated April 11, 2007, allocating time for proceedings on Bill 187,

An Act respecting Budget measures, interim appropriations and other matters, and the order of the House dated April 16, 2007, allocating time for proceedings on Bill 155,

An Act to provide for a referendum on Ontario's electoral system, shall be modified to the extent necessary to provide the following:

The standing orders for second reading of Bill 187 and third reading of Bill 155 shall be called consecutively at the outset of the orders of the day today and any required divisions on these bills shall be deferred and taken in succession, the members called in once, the division bells limited to 10 minutes and the chamber doors unlocked for 30 seconds between the two divisions; and

All the other provisions of the two time allocation orders shall otherwise continue to apply, and this afternoon's debate on the motion for second reading of Bill 198,

An Act to amend the Ontario Water Resources Act to safeguard and sustain Ontario's water, to make related amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act, 2002 and to repeal the Water Transfer Control Act, shall be considered a full sessional day for the purposes of standing order 46.

The Deputy Speaker: Mr. Bradley has moved that the order of the House dated April 11, 2007, allocating time for proceedings—

Interjection.

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

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

SCHOOL SAFETY /

LA SÉCURITÉ DANS LES ÉCOLES

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne (Minister of Education): Mr. Speaker, I would like to acknowledge David Clark, who is the chair of the Guelph Police Services Board and chair of the Community Task Force on Youth Violence, and Inspector Mark Allen, who is with the crime prevention

section of the OPP, who are both here at the introduction of this legislation.

In December 2004, the McGuinty government directed the safe schools action team to review the safe schools provisions of the Education Act and related policies and programs. Through its review, the safe schools action team found serious discrepancies in consistency and fairness in the application of the safe schools provisions of the Education Act. It is clear from its report that a one-size-fits-all approach does not work when it comes to student safety and discipline. The McGuinty government believes that all students and staff have the right to feel safe at school and on school grounds.

Des écoles sûres sont une condition préalable au rendement des élèves et l'une de nos plus hautes priorités.

That is why I'm pleased to rise in the House today to highlight steps we are taking to build on our safe schools strategy. Earlier today, I announced proposed amendments to the safe schools provisions of the Education Act that would more effectively combine discipline with opportunities for students to continue their education. These amendments would ensure that there are strong consequences for inappropriate behaviour and provide programs so students can earn their way back into the classroom and complete their education.

Notre objectif est d'avoir une meilleure sécurité dans les écoles et une discipline qui marche.

The proposed legislative amendments would include adding bullying as an infraction for which suspensions must be considered. We also propose using a progressive discipline approach to choose the appropriate punishment in each case of inappropriate behaviour. For example, punishments could include in-school suspensions, referrals for consultation and other options, and this would be done before suspension or expulsion.

Another change would include replacing mandatory suspensions and expulsions for students, except in limited circumstances, with the requirement that principals and school boards consider and respond to all infractions that occurred in the most appropriate way. For infractions which currently carry a mandatory suspension, consideration will now be given to suspension as one measure along a continuum of progressive discipline.

Cela nous permettra d'assurer la sécurité de tous les élèves.

We will invest $31 million in 2007-08 to make Ontario's schools safer. Our government's investment will help build capacity in school boards to address inappropriate student behaviour, and provide training to principals and vice-principals on how to apply discipline in a non-discriminatory manner, including considerations for anti-racism, cross-cultural differences, and accommodating students with disabilities. Mr. Speaker, I'd like to just acknowledge the Ontario Human Rights Commission and Chief Commissioner Barbara Hall, who is with us today and who has worked with us on these provisions.

That investment includes $23 million for supports to address inappropriate behaviour, including programs for all expelled students and students serving long-term suspensions. These programs would be designed to address the causes of the problem behaviour that has led to students being suspended or expelled and allow them to continue learning outside the classroom.

These proposed improvements follow up on the recommendations made by the safe schools action team, which was led ably by Liz Sandals, parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Education. I want to thank Liz Sandals and all the members of the safe schools action team for their important work on this issue.

Today's announcement builds on significant steps the McGuinty government has already taken with our education partners to make Ontario's schools safer, important steps such as bullying prevention training for teachers, principals and vice-principals, model projects to promote positive student behaviour, a partnership with Kids Help Phone to provide more resources for bullying prevention, including cyber bullying, and security devices for schools as part of a safe welcome program to help monitor school visitors.

Nous savons que la sécurité dans les écoles est un élément clé de la réussite des élèves dans leurs études et dans leur vie.

That is why the McGuinty government is doing more to make Ontario schools safer for our students in school and for the rest of their lives.

CANADIAN CHARTER OF

RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS /

CHARTE CANADIENNE

DES DROITS ET LIBERTÉS

Hon. Michael Bryant (Attorney General): Happy anniversary to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I rise in the House today to celebrate the 25th anniversary of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Twenty-five years ago, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II gave royal assent to the Canada Act, 1982. In doing so, she brought Canada into a new era of sovereignty and self-determination.

In its last act in relation to Canada, the British Parliament permanently gave up its ability to amend the Canadian Constitution and placed this responsibility in the hands of Canadians.

Pour la première fois, les droits et les libertés fondamentaux de tous les résidents du Canada étaient énoncés clairement et concrètement.

The charter constitutionally guarantees freedoms and rights that had long been considered integral to the Canadian way but were never formally recognized as such. The first 25 years of the charter saw the development of constitutionally protected rights and freedoms through a series of decisions that sometimes radically changed our laws and legal processes. The charter is a vital source in our society because of the principles that it embodies, but also because it allows anyone to call on its protections through ordinary courts and tribunals.

Charter challenges have helped to shape our laws and our country, leading to the end of legal discrimination based on sexual orientation,and ended discrimination in the areas of gender equality, ethnicity, religion and a number of other areas involving immutable characteristics. It led to the end of legal prohibitions against abortion. It led to the end of mandatory denominational prayers in public schools, the end of Sunday shopping prohibition and much, much more.

The charter asks us, as lawmakers, to go the extra mile, to take extra steps when writing laws and formulating policy in order to meet higher standards guaranteed by the charter. This improves our laws and improves us as a democracy.

Over the years, the principles of the charter have come to represent the very essence of being Canadian. A 2002 survey found that 82% of Canadians believe that the Charter of Rights has a major positive impact on the protection of their rights and freedoms; 81% believe that the charter has become an important symbol of Canadian identity. Double-doubles, the maple leaf, hockey tape, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms: these are the touchstones of our Canadian identity.

The Charter of Rights has evolved into a unique Canadian

interpretation of rights. This model has come to be seen as an international leader. If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, Canadians should all be proud of the charter and what it represents.

It's been a key instrument used to build the multicultural fabric of our nation. Pluralism does not equal relativism, but the charter has promoted respect for the religious rights of others and helps to ensure that cultural heritage is accommodated in a reasonable fashion. By encouraging tolerance and respect for the differences among us, it brings our society together.

Having the courts act as the ultimate arbiters of charter disputes promotes a more just society. The independence of our courts, not subject to political pressure, whim or the sometime tyranny of the majority, ensures the rule of law. This promotes the peaceful and productive resolution of legal conflicts and questions.

In the first 25 years of the charter, great attention was paid to the judges' decisions and how they interpret the charter. I have no doubt that in the next 25 years, focus will be upon their hopefully unassailable independence.

Speaking of the courts, I would be remiss if I did not mention the important historic role that the former Attorney General and soon-to-retire Chief Justice of Ontario, Roy McMurtry, made in the creation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I should also mention that the role that Ian Scott made in expanding the constitutional law branch across the government—the constitutional law branch that had been created by Roy McMurtry—has meant that every single ministry in the government has, for some time now, been infused with its charter of responsibilities.

So, ladies and gentlemen, members of the Legislature, the charter is out of its infancy and adolescence. A still-young nation celebrates a great anniversary today. Happy anniversary to the charter. Happy anniversary to all Canadians.

DANIEL BURNHAM AWARD

Hon. David Caplan (Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal, Deputy Government House Leader): I rise today to share news about how the McGuinty government has been recognized as a leader on the world stage for our work in promoting strategic sustainable growth in this province.

Representatives from Ontario's growth secretariat are currently in Philadelphia as part of the American Planning Association's annual conference. Today, Assistant Deputy Minister Brad Graham of the OGS received on behalf of the government of Ontario, indeed the people of Ontario, the 2007 Daniel Burnham Award for comprehensive planning for our government's growth plan for the greater Golden Horseshoe. The Burnham award is considered by planners across North America to be the profession's highest distinction. I'm proud to say that this marks the first time in the history of the APA planning awards that a jurisdiction outside the United States has won this award.

The plan was created under the leadership of Premier McGuinty, but a large and diverse group of people across this province can also take credit for the accomplishment. Stakeholders, policy-makers, professional planners, government officials, local elected officials, environmentalists, developers and many, many engaged citizens of the province participated in the development of the growth plan. Indeed, members from across the way in past governments have led much of the foundational work, and we should all be proud of the recognition that comes with winning the Burnham award.

I'm proud to report that this plan has received unprecedented support from our partners in municipal government right across the greater Golden Horseshoe. In fact, His Worship David Miller, mayor of Toronto, said, "The greater Golden Horseshoe plan puts Ontario on the map as an international leader in sustainable community development."

One prominent planner, Carol Rhea of the American Institute of Certified Planners, has said, and again I quote, "This plan is a landmark comprehensive plan that is both visionary and pragmatic. It provides a strategic, innovative and coordinated approach to sustainable growth and development for 110 different municipalities."

Our province is booming. Nearly four million more people will be arriving within the greater Golden Horseshoe over the next quarter-century. Planning for growth means creating opportunity, complete communities with vibrant and diverse urban centres, while reducing development pressures on our important agricultural and natural areas. The people who are going to live in this area are going to need the right form of transit and transportation to help them to get around, the right kind of public amenities and communities to live in, and a clean and sustainable environment. In short, we are planning complete communities where people want to live, work and play.

The award-winning growth plan that the McGuinty government has developed will help to ensure we can continue to prosper. We're going to ensure that all this growth happens in a strategic way, a way that strengthens our economy and sustains our development while keeping the environment at the forefront of our planning efforts.

Our government has developed the growth plan in concert with many other key initiatives, such as ReNew Ontario, a multi-year, multi-billion dollar infrastructure investment plan to support the implementation of the growth plan; a legislated plan brought forward by my colleague John Gerretsen, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, that permanently protects a 1.8-million-acre greenbelt in the heart of the greater Golden Horseshoe—congratulations to Minister Gerretsen on that; major reforms to Ontario's laws governing how land use planning takes place; as well as efforts across various government ministries in brownfields redevelopment and planning.

I am indeed proud of the recognition that we have received from the American Planning Association's 2007 Daniel Burnham Award for a comprehensive plan.

"Innovative," "progressive," "groundbreaking," "cutting-edge": Those are some of the words that others are using to describe the work of the McGuinty government, and this is yet another example of Ontario being a leader on the world stage. As Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal, I want to express to all of our partners involved in this historic, and indeed now award-winning, growth plan for the greater Golden Horseshoe my sincere and heartfelt congratulations.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Responses?

SCHOOL SAFETY

Mr. Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): In response to the Minister of Education's tabling of amendments to the Safe Schools Act today, I want to be clear that we support any measures to enhance school safety, to ensure that suspensions and expulsions, if necessary, are administered fairly and without prejudice or discrimination, and that the appropriate supports are in place for those students who have the need.

With regard to the proposed bill, however, we have serious concerns about the government's priorities and ability or commitment to implement this bill. Unfortunately, today's announcement is vintage McGuinty: long on rhetoric, short on substance. What concerns me most is that the minister appears not to know what's in the bill. On the one hand we are told, and the minister would have us believe, that this bill would put an end to mandatory suspensions, yet the bill makes suspensions mandatory for the same list of activities as in the existing bill.

When asked in the press conference if suspended students would be required, on a mandatory basis, to attend alternative programs to help them, she said, "No, it would be voluntary," yet the bill states that it would be mandatory for a student expelled to be assigned to a program for expelled students, and we support that. We support that students should have the appropriate supports, that the appropriate resources would be provided to our schools and our school boards to help those students who are having challenges within the school body.

We are disappointed that not one cent of the $31 million committed in her announcement today goes to those programs that would help students—not one cent.

We would also suggest, finally, that there was nothing in today's announcement to respond to the Ontario Principals' Council safety concerns in our schools, that the Ontario Principals' Council says safety is in jeopardy in our schools today because of a lack of supervision created by this government's policy.

We will support whatever it takes to ensure safety in our schools. We'll support changes to the legislation that are necessary. But we are going to monitor very carefully this government's ability to implement the objectives that it has stated.

CANADIAN CHARTER OF

RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS

Mrs. Christine Elliott (Whitby—Ajax): I'm pleased to rise today on behalf of the Progressive Conservative caucus to join the minister in celebrating the 25th anniversary of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The charter guarantees freedoms and protections that reflect the fundamental principles of justice rooted in our country's collective conscience. In enshrining equality rights, language rights, minority language and education rights among other such protections, Canada became a true leader on the world stage with respect to honouring our commitment to freedom.

It is our essential responsibility as legislators to ensure that the practices and policies of government indeed reflect and uphold the rights guaranteed by the charter, and I would question this government's commitment to this responsibility, given the fact that it has taken them three years to allocate any meaningful funds to a starving legal aid system and, after having muzzled the vulnerable by cutting off public hearings in a rush to pass Bill 107, the human rights reform legislation, they have indicated that they will not proclaim this legislation until well after the next election.

DANIEL BURNHAM AWARD

Mr. Tim Hudak (Erie—Lincoln): I'm pleased to respond to the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal's statement about Brad Graham, the ADM, being in Philadelphia to receive an award.

Minister, this sounds a lot like the statement you made on December 19, 2006, about Brad Graham on his way to Philadelphia to receive this award. We certainly look forward to the announcement of Brad Graham's safe return to Pearson International Airport, bringing his award home. I do hope the minister this time—as I asked him to correct the record last time—recognizes the role of the previous Progressive Conservative government in the Smart Growth strategy that underlines this plan.

I would say to the minister that hopefully, though, he knows that I asked in estimates back in November for a list of the infrastructure projects that underline this plan, the funding assigned and the start dates. I remind the minister that he has not yet responded to my estimates request.

Secondly, there is an order paper question asking for the public infrastructure investments, the time frames and the dollars assigned to them. I hope the minister responds to this, because he knows a plan with lots of coloured pictures and diagrams is all well and nice on a bookshelf; it's the infrastructure investments that count.

So I hope Brad Graham sees the Liberty Bell; maybe catches a Sixers game; maybe goes to the Philadelphia Museum of Art, sees the Rocky Balboa poster, puts his dukes in the air, does a little dance and then comes back here, kicks the minister in the butt and says, "Get on with the infrastructure announcements or the actual programs. Put the dollars where your mouth is, aside from the same announcements over and over again."

SCHOOL SAFETY

Mr. Rosario Marchese (Trinity—Spadina): In response to the Minister of Education, in 2003, during the election campaign you said you would scrap the Safe Schools Act. In December 2004, you said you would have a report by the spring of 2005. In the spring, you said you'd have something by the fall. In the fall, you said the report would be complete by 2006. Now, in 2007, you add another safe school guideline: anti-bullying as it relates to cyber-bullying, and we support that. My worry is that you've introduced it at such a time that it is quite possible you will not have the time to debate it, and these amendments are likely not to pass. We'll—

Interjections.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): When the ministers spoke, I seem to recall that we had the attention of all the members. I would hope that the same courtesy is extended during the responses.

Mr. Marchese: We'll be here until the end of June and beyond, and we hope you will as well. That will give us the opportunity to debate the bill and discuss its merits and lack of. But I want to tell you: You did this review, and the review focused on a number of topics, including consistency. We've known for a long time it could never be consistent, but you had to study that.

Fairness: Some groups were seen to be more likely to be suspended or expelled. We've known for years. It wasn't a perception that some groups were seen to be more likely. The human rights commission told you on a number of occasions through its studies. It's a fact that students of colour and students with disabilities were being discriminated against, expelled and/or suspended. You talk about discipline. There was a perception that there should be more judgment, as if we didn't know that, but you had to study that. Okay.

Prevention: There was a perception that the safe schools legislation focused more on discipline than on preventing behaviours leading to suspensions. As if we didn't know that. Okay, but you had to study that. For years we've told you, "Keep students in the school system." Provide alternative programs, such as the Toronto board did and York was doing at the time. We've told you for four long years, but you had to study it again, knowing what the human rights commission said, knowing what the NDP was telling you. But yes, okay, you had to do a thorough study of the matter.

Then you come up with this, and do you know what's missing, Minister? I suspect you know but you don't want to say. And you won't say, but I'm going to help you. What's missing is the following: What we need in the schools is adult supervision. What we need are youth workers who actually deal with students at risk, youth workers whom we used to have in the educational system and who disappeared under the previous regime and you have not brought back. They helped students at risk. There's nothing here that deals with that. We have no youth counsellors. We have no social workers. We're losing them.

Interjections.

Mr. Marchese: We're losing educational assistants, for the rump over here that doesn't listen very well. We're losing educational assistants who help in the special education classroom and deal with special needs. We are missing these people who work with students who've got mental illness, who've got a special education problem, who've got serious problems that need people with whom to work. If you don't have that, we won't solve these problems.

So we're looking forward to the debate. We want to be here until the end of the June to be able to discuss these issues with you.

DANIEL BURNHAM AWARD

Mr. Peter Tabuns (Toronto—Danforth): I'm going to address the remarks of the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal. Very simply, the Liberals' growth management plan will not curb sprawl. It will not stop gridlock on our highways. When this issue came before estimates, I asked the minister—

Interjections.

Mr. Tabuns: Mr. Speaker, what can I say? I know the truth hurts and that's why there's so much bellowing from the other side. But the truth is that the minister cannot say to what extent his plans are going to reduce congestion or gridlock. He cannot say—

Interjections.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Stop the clock. I'll ask once again that the attention and courtesy be given to the speaker who has the floor. The ministers had that courtesy; I think the responses should as well.

The member for Trinity—Spadina—or Toronto—Danforth.

Mr. Tabuns: A Toronto member nonetheless. As I was saying, the minister cannot say to what extent this will actually improve the situation. In fact, when you look at Canadian think tanks—the Neptis Foundation and the Pembina Institute—they say that the plan as written will not be different from business as usual. The projections of increased travel time for people in the greater Golden Horseshoe are there for everyone to see. We will spend more time in our cars, more time away from home.

That's because the plan that was put forward has been weakened and weakened and weakened, and the roads that are being built to facilitate sprawl that were not in the initial plan that are going forward—the extension of Highway 404 to Ravenshoe, an extension that will allow sprawl to leapfrog the greenbelt—mean that what the minister has brought forward is simply a recipe for more sprawl and congestion.

JUNE CALLWOOD

Hon. James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism, minister responsible for seniors, Government House Leader): I believe we have unanimous consent for all parties to speak for up to five minutes to recognize the passing of social activist June Callwood.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Do we have consent? Thank you.

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): It is somewhat of a daunting task to find the words that capture a spirit as vibrant as June Callwood. In fact, so many come to mind and to heart: courageous, committed, caring, crusading, passionate, persistent, unselfish, undeniable and, most certainly, unstoppable. But today I'm going to choose one word above all others to capture June, and that word is "defiant." June defied convention. At a time when society still debated whether women should make a home or make a living, she set out to make a difference.

June defied tragedy. She turned the loss of her youngest child, Casey, into a miracle called Casey House.

June defied fashion. When society mistrusted street kids, she housed them. When it hid spousal abuse, she shielded its victims. When it met AIDS with fear and ignorance, she embraced those ravaged by the disease with love and understanding. And when each of these endeavours seemed impossible, she defied the odds and succeeded.

Even now, June defies description. She was a journalist who wouldn't settle for the sidelines. She was a writer, but a doer. She was a champion of the underdog who believed in enlisting the rich and powerful. She was a rabble-rouser who held the country's highest honour, Companion of the Order of Canada. She was a small-town girl who won over our biggest city. She was absolutely convinced that she could change the world, and yet she displayed no ego.

June even defied gravity. Her refuge was to soar in a glider high above the earth, which seems somewhat fitting, for she rose above private tragedy, public obstacles, petty disputes and even, on occasion, personal attack.

Most of all, June Callwood defied cynicism. She refused to believe that nothing could be done. She was resolute in the belief that everything was possible.

Son message était très clair lorsqu'elle a dit : « À partir du moment où vous constatez une injustice, vous cessez d'être un simple témoin. Vous avez l'obligation de faire quelque chose; sinon, vous participez à cette injustice. »

June's message to all of us was clear when she said, "If any of you happens to see an injustice, you are no longer a spectator, you are a participant. And you have an obligation to do something."

I had the good fortune to see June shortly before we put out our last budget. I knew she was sick. I'd certainly heard that she was sick, but I couldn't tell by looking at her. She seemed to defy cancer as well. I took the opportunity to thank her for all she had done for so long, on behalf of so many. She was much more interested in telling me why our budget needed to help children growing up in poverty. On the one hand, she was such a gentle person; on the other, she had this remarkable steely resolve when it came to making her case.

Just before the meeting ended, I asked her if she would honour Ontario's best volunteers by allowing us to rename our Outstanding Achievement Award for Volunteerism as the June Callwood Outstanding Achievement Awards for Voluntarism. She said yes, and she seemed quite moved by this. I remember her saying to me, "To think: All this for a girl from Belle River." I said, "You've come a long way from Belle River," and she gently corrected me and said, "No, I never really left," which I took as a testament to her lifelong humility.

June never set out in life to be something; she wanted to do something for others, whether her family, her friends, her community.

A few weeks later, I visited June in the hospital. My intention was to lift her spirits. Instead, she lifted mine. That was June.

There has been lots of talk these past few days about the loss of an icon and whether those shoes can ever really be filled. It's only natural for us to lament such a tremendous loss, but I think June would want us to defy that sort of conventional thinking and focus instead on the future.

There are literally thousands and thousands of remarkable young women in our province who volunteer every day in places like Toronto and Ottawa, Cornwall and Belle River, who dedicate themselves to making a difference. What's more, this new generation of defiant souls see themselves as citizens of the world. So they are also travelling to places like South America, Africa and southeast Asia, because they feel what June felt—an obligation to do something—and they have learned from June and women like her that they can do anything. In this sense, June, you have even defied death, because your example, your inspiration and your kindness will live forever.

Our thoughts and prayers are with June's family and especially her husband, Trent, and her children, Jill, Brant and Jesse. We thank them for sustaining June and for sharing her with us.

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): If I can follow where the Premier left off, it is hard to know where to begin when it comes to June Callwood—writer, broadcaster, social activist, volunteer. She was an extraordinary person in every respect. She wielded a huge influence through what she said and what she wrote, but I think the greatest influence, the biggest difference she made, came from what she did and who she was.

I first met June Callwood as a young boy, as she was a good friend of my late grandmother. My grandmother was herself a noted community activist who devoted a lot of her time to helping the poor. Most of my encounters as an adult were not as an elected official but through our encounters in community and charitable work. As I said in my statement on her passing, you always knew where she stood and you always knew at the same time where she expected you to stand, and that is exactly as it should have been.

Former Prime Minister Paul Martin once said that he was afraid of her, but this was later interpreted by June Callwood's friend Rabbi Arthur Beilfeldas being "an expression of respect and admiration of her moral authority." I think the rabbi understood the June Callwood effect very well, that moral authority came from who she was as a person and what she did.

I went to Casey House last night to sign the book of condolences and, as you would expect, there was a steady stream of people in and out, flowers lined up against the fence.

I flipped through the book after I signed, and there were notes there from the Lieutenant Governor and from many prominent people, but page after page, the vast majority of the many pages, were filled with notes from average citizens who said things like, "I never met you, but I want to thank you," or they said, in many cases, "I intend to give some of my time in the future as a tribute to you and to carry on some of the work you did." It's consistent with what the Premier just said.

It really was remarkable to see these people, average people who didn't know her and never met her, but she had obviously moved them and motivated them in her lifetime and by her passing.

I should say by way of one additional observation about that book of condolence that while the written tributes weren't confined by any means to the HIV/AIDS community, there were many which spoke very eloquently to what June Callwood had done, not just in a practical sense but, as they described it, in terms of the rights, dignity and self-respect of members of that community and their families.

If you look at the history of Casey House, it sprang in part from a group of people who came together to care for Margaret Frazer, a teacher, a social activist and a feminist who had been diagnosed herself with terminal cancer in 1985. June Callwood wrote a book about the experiences of the group that helped, of which she was part, of course, called Twelve Weeks in Spring, the proceeds from which formed part of the initial financial underpinnings for Casey House itself. In that book, June Callwood had this to say, referring to Margaret Frazer:

"One of the lessons of Margaret's death is a redefinition of friendship.... She needed help and people came together suddenly to give it, but most of them were little more than acquaintances of hers. Very few were friends in the way the word is normally meant: that intimate relationship with someone whose loyalty and support have been tested, someone who has become as close as kin."

This may well explain the essence of June Callwood's magic. She had, in some respects, her own definition of friendship, which may in fact have been a redefinition of citizenship, which says that you don't just stand by and watch people suffer, whether they are victims of domestic violence, disadvantaged people or street kids. Indeed, it may be that that view of citizenship is also summed up by another passage I found in Twelve Weeks in Spring, which I thought worth sharing. June Callwood said this:

"Palliative care shouldn't be reserved for the Margaret Frazers who happen to have spent a solid ten years of their lives helping others. If the human community can't make itself into a tribe to help someone, anyone in trouble, it isn't worth saving from the bomb."

This is vintage June Callwood—some of the characteristics the Premier described of her personality.

Many people were in awe with regard to the serenity with which June Callwood accepted the end of her life, and that includes me. I found a passage in a column she wrote in the Globe and Mail in 1989 dealing with what she called "the challenge of parting." Here is what she said:

"A human passage is marked by roads not taken.... At the end of the day the pattern of departures is random and whimsical. The old are tantalized by the lives they didn't live."

In June Callwood's case, I think it's very fair to say that there weren't too many good roads not taken. I don't think there were any lives not lived which tantalized or traumatized her as she faced the end. She could go with serenity and with her fighting spirit intact.

I think the greatest tribute we can pay to her is to do what the people who signed the book said they would do, and the Premier made reference to this as well: to volunteer for something, to take up a cause, to carry on her work.

To Trent Frayne and to the Frayne-Callwood children and the extended family, we express our condolences but also our gratitude for the life of June Callwood and for the support and inspiration they gave to her throughout. To June Callwood, we simply say thank you.

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora—Rainy River): We celebrate the life of a truly remarkable woman: a journalist, an author, a mother, a wife, a pilot, a feminist, a political activist—all of those things characterize June Callwood but none of them completely describes her. Her legacy has many aspects; probably the most enduring, though, was her strength and her humanity. She was a fighter for equality, a liberator, using her words as her weapon. Callwood left behind, and leaves behind, a rich legacy as a journalist, a writer and a social activist.

She once said, "If you see an injustice being committed, you aren't an observer, you are a participant." That's why I believe she was known as Canada's conscience.

Throughout her life, she fought for equality and she preached courage. She spoke her mind and pulled no punches. She was a woman who didn't tell government what to do; she went out and did it herself. She founded or helped to found more than 50 social organizations. She passionately exposed the tears in Canada's social fabric and was compelled to work to change them. She was a trailblazer for women's rights, gay rights and the rights of the underprivileged, with a history of activism going back over 40 years.

She started by founding Digger House, a shelter for homeless youth, in the late 1960s. She then went on to found Nellie's, one of Canada's first shelters for women in crisis, in 1974, and then Jessie's Centre for Teenagers in 1982. In 1988, she founded Casey House Hospice, named after her dear lost son. Casey House was the first hospice in the world to provide support and palliative care for people afflicted with HIV/AIDS, at a time when little was yet known about the disease and the ignorance and fear surrounding it was intense.

I suspect probably every member of this Legislature, present and past, has received a fund-raising letter from June Callwood for Casey House or been asked to attend a fund-raising function. In fact, I expect that virtually every member of this Legislature has been reached by June Callwood in some way or fashion. I know the member for Parkdale—High Park worked with June Callwood on a number of social issues, especially with her at Nellie's as a volunteer when it first opened and then later at Margaret Frazer House.

One of the most challenging meetings I ever had as Attorney General was a meeting with June Callwood, who came through the door, was polite and dignified but obviously had spent a great deal of time thinking out exactly what she was asking for and thinking out the plan of action, about how to do it. At the end of the meeting, you felt compelled to take up the cause, because here was someone who conducted herself with such dignity, with such intelligence and with such compassion that you felt compelled to take on the cause and to follow her lead. She motivated us, she encouraged us and she inspired us to make our world a better place.

This will not be the end of June Callwood. It may be the passing of June Callwood, but it will not be the end, because she has left such a rich legacy, which will go on.

Callwood once said in an interview in 2004, "If there is any kind of message in the way I've lived, it's that we're here to take care of one another. It was Kurt Vonnegut who said that we're all in this together, whatever 'this' is. That's how I feel, that we're in it to help one another." And she firmly believed that this is how people should always conduct themselves.

Our thoughts are with June Callwood's husband, Trent Frayne, her children, her family, her extended family and her friends. We have lost a great Canadian, but her work will go on, and her work will lead many of us to do better work ourselves.

The Deputy Speaker: Please stand and join me in a few moments of silent remembrance and respect.

The House observed a moment's silence.

The Deputy Speaker: Of course we will see that the Callwood family receives the remarks from Hansard today.

ORAL QUESTIONS

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the Premier, and it concerns the lottery scandal. Last night, you used your parliamentary majority to crush our motion that would refer this entire scandal to the standing committee on the Legislative Assembly. Once upon a time, this move would have outraged you, as the former member for Ottawa South, Dalton McGuinty, as opposed to the Dalton McGuinty who sits as Premier today. The former member for Ottawa South, Dalton McGuinty, said the following in 1991, and I quote from Hansard:

"Our public and our traditions of fairness demand that this matter be reviewed by a committee of this House. The course that the government members of the committee have embarked the committee upon means that this government has no intention of dealing with this matter publicly and fairly. Government members have accused us of being on a witchhunt. We are on a hunt—a hunt for the facts, and we will pursue those facts relentlessly, rigorously and unfailingly."

My question for the Premier is this: Why did you use your parliamentary majority to crush our attempts to do exactly what you said you would have done and thought should be done in similar circumstances in 1991? What do you have to hide?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): I can't recall those words back in 1991, but something tells me we were not presented in opposition with an Ombudsman's report and an independent objective analysis of the issue at hand. Something tells me that the government of the day had not turned the matter over to the Ontario Provincial Police. Something tells me that the government of the day had not moved ahead on some very specific recommendations to restore confidence in whatever was broken in the first instance.

Something tells me that those circumstances were markedly different from the circumstances that obtain today and the approach that's been taken by our government to restore public confidence in Ontario's lottery system.

Mr. Tory: I think the Premier would have said at that time, in 1991, when he was Dalton McGuinty, the member for Ottawa South, that really what was not being addressed and what he wanted to see addressed at that time was the question of ministerial accountability, the question of what the government did, what its response was, what it knew, when it knew it and so on.

But before seeing his values changed by the power of the Premier's office, this is what Dalton McGuinty, the Leader of the Opposition, had to say: "There are many, many more questions that we feel ought to be answered, and for that reason once again I'm asking you to allow this House, through an all-party legislative committee, to subpoena witnesses and have them answer questions under oath." I believe that was in December 1996.

That's an attitude that makes a lot of sense. Perhaps the Premier can explain why a move of about two metres from this seat here to that seat over there has caused his opinion to change so dramatically about the need for accountability, for an independent investigation and for a legislative committee to be able to get to the root of these matters and find out the truth.

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: To the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal.

Hon. David Caplan (Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal, Deputy Government House Leader): The member is quite aware that this government has taken very quick and decisive action where previous governments decided to sweep these matters under the rug. Where they looked the other way and would not take the proper action, we've called in KPMG, one of Canada's leading independent auditing firms, I believe. They should be quite familiar to the member opposite. They are the auditing firm for your political party.

Indeed, they've welcomed the Ombudsman and his independent investigation into this matter, probably one of the most thorough and sweeping investigations we've seen. In addition to that, they have directed that the materials that were reviewed by the Ombudsman be turned over to the Ontario Provincial Police for their review.

But in addition to that, all members should want to know that quick and decisive action has been taken to implement some of the 60 recommendations of both the Ombudsman and KPMG. Seventeen have already been implemented. An additional 25 should be complete by the end of June. The other 18 have begun and are ongoing.

This is in marked contrast to the approach of previous governments. This has not only lived up to but exceeded the kind of standard we saw previously. We've shone a light on these matters, we are getting to the bottom of them and are quickly implementing the appropriate—

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Supplementary.

Mr. Tory: I hope the Premier will choose to answer these, because these are statements he made. Here's one from 1996 when he was on this side of the House that is very reasonable and applies very well to the lottery scandal. He said this: "If the Premier is convinced that the minister has nothing to hide, then why not agree to the all-party legislative inquiry? Do the minister a favour. He's going to be hanging under a cloud after the result of this commissioner's inquiry. There's always going to be a lingering doubt. Do the minister a favour. Give him the opportunity to come before a legislative committee." Once again, a very reasonable statement and one I find myself agreeing with.

The question for the Premier—because it's his statement—is this: Why the 180-degree turn from what he was saying just a few years ago? There can only be one of two answers: either you didn't mean it then or you're trying to hide something today. I think we will choose door number two. What are you trying to hide? Why won't you refer this to a legislative committee so that we could have a full airing?

Hon. Mr. Caplan: In fact the leader of the official opposition is quite wrong. The Ombudsman has commented on the actions of myself and the government. In his report—and I understand that members opposite don't wish to accept the Ombudsman's finding—he says, "I commend the minister and the government for its openness and responsiveness to my report and recommendations and for their immediate and resolute commitment to ensuring change."

In fact, for eight years we saw government members on the other side—if you look to your left and right—who sat in the cabinet of the day who would not call one agency before the standing committee on government agencies. It took this Premier and this government, with a commitment to transparency, with a commitment to reforming the institutions of this House, redemocratizing it, to ensure that the government and members are empowered to be able to look at agencies.

The Deputy Speaker: Response.

Hon. Mr. Caplan: In fact, the standing committee on government agencies was chaired by a member of your own caucus. They looked into government agencies and in fact three more government agencies—that will be six in four years—

The Deputy Speaker: Thank you. New question.

Mr. Tory: This minister is so amusing. Redemocratization of the House? This is the only government I've heard of that brought in time allocation on a piece of democratic renewal legislation. They take credit for all of the things they did after they got caught.

My question is for the Premier. Yesterday, you instructed your caucus members to use your majority, not to do time allocation this time, but to stop a legislative inquiry from happening—yet another attempt to obscure and cover up this scandal. We're not going to let you cover up this scandal. We're going to use whatever tools we have to get to the bottom of this lottery rip-off. We are going to use the selections available to us through the estimates process to call the Premier and the minister before the committee to answer questions they have refused to answer in the House.

Will the Premier show some leadership and commit here and now to appearing before the standing committee on estimates to answer any and all questions that the committee might have for him? Will you commit to doing that?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: To the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal.

Hon. Mr. Caplan: In fact, I have already had an opportunity to attend the estimates committee to answer all questions that were put.

I can assure you, the member from Erie—Lincoln did in fact request information and was provided information through that process. I look forward to asking members opposite, because I do know—and the leader of the official opposition has indicated—that both Mr. Hudak and Mr. Sterling were former ministers at the period of time the Ombudsman talked about, when they looked away.

I'd like to pose some questions: What did they know? When did they know it? Why didn't they take the appropriate action?

I look at the Ombudsman's comments from his March 26 press conference when he says, "I conclude that they"—the OLG——"put profits ahead of public service. I think there was a point, a crossroads, in" the year "2002"—

The Deputy Speaker: Response.

Hon. Mr. Caplan: The leader of the official opposition should look to members on his left and members on his right who were there at the time, who chose to look the other way—

The Deputy Speaker: Thank you. Supplementary.

Interjections.

The Deputy Speaker: Order.

Mr. Tory: Well, my supplementary question is for the Premier, and I would say to the minister, he'll have plenty of chances to answer questions when he comes to the committee on estimates, and he'll have a lot of chances to ask questions when he's over here about the end of October.

Now to the Premier: You obviously have some reason to stonewall. You have something to cover up. You have some piece of information that you're trying to hide. The estimates process—

Interjections.

The Deputy Speaker: Order. I need to hear the question, please. Leader of the official opposition.

Mr. Tory: Premier, we asked about whether you would appear to discuss your estimates, not whether the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal would appear to discuss his, and it would be appreciated if you could get up and answer the question as to whether you will appear to discuss the estimates of your office.

If you don't, then it's obvious you must have something to hide, something that you don't want to talk about or some piece of information that you want to keep hidden because, as you well know, the estimates are one important part of the process where the executive is to be held accountable by the Legislature for spending. Why won't you show some leadership, why won't you give some meaning to the words you spoke about empowering committees and agree to appear in front of the estimates committee to discuss your estimates?

The Deputy Speaker: Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal.

Hon. Mr. Caplan: I certainly thank the member for agreeing in advance that I will be here subsequent to October 10, but I won't do him the same courtesy, because I know my colleague from Don Valley West is going to make sure that Mr. Tory is a footnote in history.

The facts are these: That 6,557 ticket-checking devices have already been implemented as of April 2007; in fact, by the end of June, some 8,800 should be in place. All lottery terminals selling online products have customer-facing video screens—currently 8,871. Screen displays have been enhanced beginning in March 2007. Font size was increased for all validation messaging for both winners and all non-winners. In fact, in January, a 29-second audio and video display is produced on a screen for validation of wins over $10,000. Also, currently there is a sign posted at each location reminding people to sign the backs of their tickets as part of the silent seller display on the retail—

The Deputy Speaker: Final supplementary?

Mr. Tory: Here is the record of weak leadership that we're seeing on display today. The Premier will not answer questions in this House about the lottery scandal. He orders his people to shut down the attempt to refer the lottery scandal to the standing committee on the Legislative Assembly, and now he is refusing to answer to a committee of the Legislature for his own estimates.

This is the same Premier who once talked about transparency and accountability, and the best he can do is to refer these questions to someone else. It's very clear that Dalton McGuinty hasn't changed the Premier's office; the Premier's office has changed Dalton McGuinty.

The people of Ontario want some accountability. The Premier won't even offer to be accountable for the millions of dollars that his office spends through the estimates process. My question to the Premier is this: Why won't you appear in front of the estimates committee? Why won't you hold yourself accountable, as you said you would, and make a change to the process, as you said that you would, and get to the bottom of this rip-off of innocent people across this province that happened on your watch?

Hon. Mr. Caplan: In fact, I quite look forward to presenting the information to the committee when asked. I look forward to placing questions to Mr. Hudak and to Mr. Sterling about what they knew and when they knew it and why they didn't act. As the Ombudsman has indicated, the crossroads was in 2002. The answer may be, in part, that an Ian Urquhart column back in 1999 indicated that Ron Barbaro was brought in to run the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corp. as a business. This was the mindset of the previous Conservative government. These are the people they brought in.

This is the culture that they developed and nurtured. These are the changes that need to be made. No Ontarian should doubt that I, as minister, will get to the bottom of the matter, and then we'll take the quick and decisive actions to ensure that all Ontarians have trust and confidence in their corporation. That stands in stark contrast to this member and his colleagues when they sat in government, when they either sat on their hands and looked the other way or when they simply swept these matters under the rug. Speaker—

The Deputy Speaker: Thank you. New question.

NORTHERN ECONOMY

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora—Rainy River): Premier, just one year ago northern Ontario was the home of some of Canada's leading natural resource companies. Decisions about what investments to make and where to focus research and development needed to sustain future jobs were being made right here in Ontario. But under the McGuinty government one year later, first Inco, then Falconbridge and now Algoma Steel have been gobbled up by foreign-based companies who will now make the big decisions outside of Ontario; indeed, outside of Canada.

My question is this: Is the McGuinty government at all concerned about the foreign takeover of three of the leading companies in northern Ontario?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): We're always concerned about any struggling sector or part of our province, and long ago we rolled up our sleeves in an effort to partner with management and with labour in a number of different areas.

I had the opportunity last week to speak to a CAW convention, and after I delivered my remarks, I was approached by CAW members from Thunder Bay. They are very, very concerned about the position taken by the NDP not to proceed with the subway, very concerned about the impact that's going to have on their jobs, their community and their local economy, and they're very eager to hear Mr. Hampton change his mind in that regard. I undertook to put that to him. They want to hear from him. They want to know why he has adopted a position that is harmful to CAW and, in particular, harmful to the economy of Thunder Bay.

Mr. Hampton: I'm not sure where the Premier is, but I know that working people across northern Ontario are very concerned when leading natural resource companies that have been the providers of some of the best-paying jobs have now been taken over by companies that are based halfway around the world. Working Ontarians are concerned about their natural resources, they're concerned about natural resource jobs and they're concerned about where the future decisions are going to be made in terms of research and development and future job development.

Premier, how many other northern Ontario companies have to be taken over or go out of business before the McGuinty government shows some concern about sustaining jobs and sustaining communities in northern Ontario?

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Premier?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: To the Minister of Northern Development and Mines.

Hon. Rick Bartolucci (Minister of Northern Development and Mines): Do you know what northerners are concerned about? Northerners want jobs. They want to have some type of certainty. They want to know that this government cares enough about them that jobs are going to be sustained, that jobs are going to grow. Over one year, from March 2006 to March 2007: 18,400 net new jobs in northern Ontario.

Let me tell the leader of the third party that this government will compare its record any time against what they did in northern Ontario between 1990 and 1995.

Mr. Hampton: I say to the McGuinty government, I welcome the comparison. But I can tell you this: The 32,000 people who are out of work—direct and indirect jobs across northern Ontario—are not going to be happy about your answer or this government's inaction.

Here's the reality, Minister: The decisions about future investment in research and development, whether it be in the steel industry in northern Ontario or whether it be in the mining industry, are no longer going to be made in northern Ontario. If people want to talk with someone, they'll have to fly to Switzerland or they'll have to fly to Brazil or they'll have to fly to India.

Let me tell you, when the price of steel starts to decline—and it's a market that goes up and down—or when the price of nickel or copper starts to decline, those decisions will be made elsewhere. I simply say, what is it going to take for the McGuinty government—

The Deputy Speaker: The question has been asked. Minister?

Hon. Mr. Bartolucci: Here's the record that we're going to be comparing ourselves against. Between 1990 and 1995, an average of 1,000 people a week joined the ranks of the unemployed when the NDP were in power; 5,513 jobs were lost in the north under the NDP. When the leader of the third party and the member from Nickel Belt were in cabinet, the number of people in northwestern Ontario employed in the natural resources sector collapsed from 11,700 to 6,000. In northeastern Ontario, the number of people in the natural resources sector plummeted from 27,700 to 21,700. I will compare our record on job creation and prosperity in northern Ontario against their record any time.

MANUFACTURING JOBS

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora—Rainy River): To the Premier: 110 workers at the Buchanan Forest Products sawmill in Hudson, near Sioux Lookout, have learned this week that they are losing their jobs. Effective April 28, 110 workers will be laid off. The company is clear: This is a direct result of the softwood lumber deal. That was the softwood lumber deal put forward by the Harper government and supported by the McGuinty government.

Premier, my question is this: Do you still think your government's support for the Harper government's softwood lumber deal with the United States was good for working families in northern Ontario?

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

Hon. David Ramsay (Minister of Natural Resources, minister responsible for aboriginal affairs): The leader of the third party conveniently likes to ignore all the economic indicators in North America. He knows as well as every member in this House that there has been a total collapse of the US housing market, thereby severely lessening the demand for softwood lumber from this country. That's what's happening. Our mills are having to adjust to that.

Just like he talked about in his previous question, lumber is a commodity like minerals, and the demand and the prices go up and down in a cycle just like they do in minerals, as accepted in the first question. So it's accepted in this question, too, that lumber is the very same, but we have a $1-billion transition fund to help our industry try to get through this cycle.

Mr. Hampton: It was the McGuinty government that said that the US softwood lumber deal proposed by the Harper government was going to be a good deal. It was you, the Minister of Natural Resources, who said this was going to sustain softwood lumber jobs in northern Ontario. Well, Tembec sawmill in Timmins, 130 jobs gone; Domtar sawmill in White River, 250 jobs gone; Domtar sawmill in Nairn Centre, 140 jobs gone; now 110 jobs at the sawmill in Hudson.

Premier, industry leaders warned you about the softwood lumber deal, community leaders warned you, union leaders warned you. They said the softwood lumber deal is not going to be a good deal. Premier, do you still think your support for the Harper government's softwood lumber deal was a good deal for working families in the forest industry in northern Ontario?

Hon. Mr. Ramsay: What the member refuses to recognize is how competitive a jurisdiction Ontario is, compared to the other provinces, because of the changes that the McGuinty government made to the forest sector. By supporting forest inventory and the forest roads, we're in a position now where companies from across the country want to do business in Ontario.

The proof of that is in the export levels that are happening out of Ontario. Where Quebec is exporting about 50% of what they could, Ontario is exporting 95% of what Ontario could, under the quota system. That shows that we're at almost full capacity in what we could be doing. We're the most competitive jurisdiction in this country, and we're very proud of those commitments we've made to the industry, and the industry is very pleased with the commitments we've made to them.

Mr. Hampton: I was in northeastern Ontario not long ago, and what people are concerned about there is in fact the exporting of raw logs out of northeastern Ontario under the McGuinty government to mills in Quebec, where they're being processed and where the jobs are.

Premier, this is about your government. This is about 32,000 good-paying forest sector jobs that have been destroyed under the McGuinty government. In some cases, it has been your policy of driving hydro rates through the roof that has closed paper mills and has shut down sawmills. In other communities, it has been your support for the softwood lumber deal, which is turning out to be a disaster for sawmills across the north. In Ignace, 60 jobs gone, and the company was very direct: This is a direct result of the softwood lumber deal. That's a town that's completely dependent upon its sawmill.

Premier, I want to ask you this simple question: How could the McGuinty government abandon all of these working families who are involved in the forest sector across northern Ontario?

Hon. Mr. Ramsay: It's too bad the leader of the third party doesn't like to talk about some of the good success stories that we've had. In contrast to your very first question, when we had a multinational walk away from a pulp and paper company in northern Ontario, at Terrace Bay, Buchanan Forest Products came to the government and said, "We'd like to work with you and get this plant up and running again." We have that; we have a really good story. We're going to be going there again this week and helping them with biofuel boilers and making sure they have even greater efficiency than they do today.

These are good stories that you like to ignore because we're working with the companies. In Cascades and some of these, we're going to come back too. We're working to make sure we have an indigenous-based industry. We're working with the companies and making sure we get that sector back on again.

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

Mr. Jim Wilson (Simcoe—Grey): My question is for the Premier. I'm hoping the Premier will have the intestinal fortitude to actually answer a question about his own office. Premier, you've dodged our questions in this House. You've ducked our attempts to have an inquiry into the lottery scandal conducted by the standing committee on the Legislative Assembly. Now you're ducking and dodging our call to have you appear before the estimates committee to answer for your attempts to cover up the lottery scandal and to answer for your own ministry. What are you afraid of, Premier? What are you hiding?

Why can't you show the respect and leadership people expect from their Premier and appear before the estimates committee, as you were asked by members of this House?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): To the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal.

Hon. David Caplan (Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal, Deputy Government House Leader): I would say to the member that I understand the partisan political perspectives of members opposite, indeed of all members of this House. But an independent, unbiased officer of the Legislature, Mr. André Marin, the Ombudsman, said just this past weekend, on CH television, "I'm pleased with the recommendations that were accepted. I think the recommendations are very substantial." Key to them: screening of retailers, the secret shopping scheme he recommended, the policing of retailers by an outside agency, a new adjudicative agency to decide who gets the award when it's in dispute.

"These are radical changes, and I'm happy with the government's response. The government chose to forward it to the OPP; it's not a recommendation I made."

The point is, many of these things could have been done under a previous government when this member sat in the cabinet. Regrettably, this member and members of his caucus decided to sweep these matters under the rug and not take their responsibility seriously, but the folks on this side of the House today certainly do. We've gotten to the bottom of the matter and we're acting decisively to protect—

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Thank you. Supplementary?

Mr. Wilson: Premier, your minion here talks about taking responsibility seriously. It's an absolute—

The Deputy Speaker: I've asked members to use temperate language. I think we're getting near the edge of that, and I ask the members to reconsider what they're saying and how.

Mr. Wilson: It is rude and it is disgraceful that the Premier would not answer questions about his own ministry. It's not only a requirement of this House and of our democracy; it's something that he said he would do during the last election campaign: He would promote members, he would promote committees and he would be held accountable for his role as Premier of this province should he be elected Premier. I guess that was something very nice to say to the electorate—say anything to get elected.

I ask you today, what makes you so high and mighty that you won't do what every other minister is required to do in this Legislative Assembly, and that is to appear and be accountable before the estimates committee for your—

The Deputy Speaker: The question has been asked. Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal.

Hon. Mr. Caplan: I have twice appeared before the estimates committee, and I look forward to another engagement to answer questions from all parties in the Legislature. But I guess the question for the member opposite is, when he was sitting at the cabinet table, if he was so serious about these matters, why did he and his House leader and his colleagues not allow the standing committee on government agencies to call one government agency in eight years—not one?

This government, on the other hand, in four years will have six government agencies called for review by an all-party committee, in fact chaired by a member of your caucus, to sit and ask questions and to make recommendations about the way those agencies run. I think that stands in stark contrast—in fact, I know that the Ombudsman comments quite specifically, where he commends me as the minister and commends the government for our openness and responsiveness, because it is in stark contrast to the way things have been done previously.

The Ombudsman does note that there was a crossroads in 2002, but this member and members of his caucus and members of the cabinet chose to look the other way, chose to—

The Deputy Speaker: Thank you. New question.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora—Rainy River): My question is for the Premier. Last week the joint hospital laundry facility in North Bay announced it is closing. Sixteen jobs in laundry services will be cut and another 10 jobs may be transferred out of the city. All of the laundry will now be shipped over 130 kilometres away, at considerable environmental and financial cost. My question is this: Is this what happens under the McGuinty government's private, profit-driven hospital scheme—the cost of the hospital deal goes from $200 million to $500 million to $1 billion, and the hospital laundry workers lose their jobs in order to pay for the private company's profits?

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

Hon. George Smitherman (Deputy Premier, Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): If the honourable member cared to pay attention to it, he would know very clearly that North Bay General Hospital, associated with dramatic enhancements to their funding, most certainly has more people employed today than when our government came to office, providing important health care services to the people of that area.

We are very proud indeed that our member, Monique Smith, has been able to build hospitals in that community that Mike Harris couldn't deliver for that community. But the issue with respect to the laundry is most assuredly a decision that the local hospital board took. They saw it as an opportunity to piggyback on the capacity for laundry services that's there in the Sudbury community and they made this decision purely as a local part of decision-making processes.

Mr. Hampton: For the McGuinty government, shipping laundry some 300 kilometres back and forth may make sense for you, but I can tell you, for the people of North Bay, watching the laundry go 160 kilometres down the highway one way and then come 160 kilometres back doesn't make sense, and workers and community leaders have told you that. But it's clear the McGuinty government isn't listening.

My question again is this: Premier, how many other North Bay hospital services will be cut or consolidated somewhere else? How many hospital worker jobs will be cut or privatized under the McGuinty government's private, profit-driven hospital scheme, which has already driven up the cost of the hospital at least $500 million?

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: It's passing fancy that today the honourable member is concerned about some trips back and forth from North Bay to Sudbury, but he's not concerned whatsoever about the decisions he's taken to cut 35 million rides by transit users of a long-promised and long-supported subway line here in York.

Where was the honourable member when his party saw ancillary services contracted out at St. Thomas Elgin General, at Trillium Health Centre, at Halton Healthcare, at Joe Brant Memorial, all under his watch? Where was that honourable member when two years in a row they massively cut the budgets of all hospitals in the province of Ontario? Where was he then? Silence.

OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR GENERAL

Mr. Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay—Superior North): My question is to the Minister of Government Services. Minister, last week, rumours were swirling around Thunder Bay that the Registrar General's office was about to close its call centre in the city, with the 30 jobs involved being relocated to Toronto. Obviously, such a possibility was of great concern to me and my colleague Bill Mauro, as our region has already suffered significant job losses in the forestry sector and any further job losses struck us as unacceptable.

After speaking with you about this issue, I was grateful to learn that the call centre is not closing, that there are no job losses as a result of any reconfiguration of the office and that indeed we have seen, and will continue to see, employment increases at the ORG office in my community.

Having said that, there continues to be some confusion as to the status of the provincial office in Thunder Bay that I believe requires absolute clarity. Minister, can you inform me, my constituents and the members of the House as to what exactly is the situation with the ORG operation in Thunder Bay?

Hon. Gerry Phillips (Minister of Government Services): I do want to share with my colleagues from Thunder Bay that the call centre is not closing. We are actually going to be adding staff. It's an outstanding office, I might say to all of the people watching this. The member will know that actually we've added 102 permanent full-time jobs. Now, 80 of those were part-time temporary jobs, but another 22 are incremental jobs.

What we are doing at this outstanding office is we are moving production from our Toronto office to Thunder Bay. We are moving our premium service from Toronto to Thunder Bay. Now, there will be several people in Toronto who are employed at our Registrar General office that will be doing calls that are currently handled in Thunder Bay. At net-net, we are adding jobs to Thunder Bay. This is, I might say, an outstanding office doing great work for the people of Ontario.

Mr. Gravelle: Minister, thank you very much. Clearly, this is a good-news story for employment opportunities in Thunder Bay, and obviously I am relieved that the rumours of the job losses have proven to be completely unfounded.

In your initial response, though, Minister, you made reference to new services that will be provided by the ORG in Thunder Bay, and new jobs. Are you in a position to provide any specific details as to what this will involve and, perhaps more significantly, will this mean further job opportunities for our constituents?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: The two things that we are adding to Thunder Bay: the production of birth certificates, the part that is done currently in Toronto, will be moving there; and what we call the premium service.

I would just say to the Legislature, if you remember, 18 months ago all birth certificate applications were by paper and that office said, "We can do this online. Furthermore, Minister, if you do it online, we can guarantee that if we don't have it delivered in 15 business days, it's free."

I want to tell the people of Ontario and the Legislature, we had zero online applications 18 months ago. Since then, we've had 400,000 applications and 128 refunds. I always say, Pizza Pizza can't do that. We've had terrific service. Our employees at Thunder Bay are an example and we're going to continue to build on that centre of excellence, delivering great quality to the people of Ontario.

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

Mr. Robert W. Runciman (Leeds—Grenville): I have a question for the Premier, and hopefully he will respond to it. What we're seeing here today is unique—I think shamefully unique. We're asking the Premier questions about his estimates, how he's going to deal with his estimates, his office's estimates, and he's referring it to the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal. Anyone viewing the proceedings today should be wondering why the Premier will not deal with questions about his office and the conduct of officials in his office. I ask him once again, will he appear before the estimates committee to justify the expenditures in his office?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): To the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal.

Hon. David Caplan (Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal, Deputy Government House Leader): As I have indicated, I have twice attended the estimates committee, and I look forward to attending once again. This member, with all of the phony outrage and fake bluff and bluster, knows quite well that when he was a member of the crown, I believe Premier Harris was called three times before the estimates committee and did not appear once. I think anybody who is watching at home understands the source that this is coming from. It is phony outrage. It is completely fake.

The member opposite well knows that the Premier has not attended the estimates committee, which was the case under your government. If you would come clean and just be clear with Ontarians that I have been to the estimates committee, that I will be at the estimates committee and that I have answered every question that has been posed in this House and will continue to do so, because it is this government that decided to get to the bottom of these matters, to roll up our sleeves and to deal with it, unlike yourself, sir, who swept—

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): The answer's been given. Supplementary.

Mr. Runciman: I suspect that any former Premier in this place had the intestinal fortitude, the courage and the leadership to stand up and answer questions about estimates dealing with the Premier's office, not a referral to a minister who has nothing whatsoever to do with the estimates of the Premier's office—nothing whatsoever.

Interjections.

The Deputy Speaker: Okay, turn it down a notch, please. Thank you.

Mr. Runciman: This is a significant abuse of the rules of the House in my view—a significant abuse. I ask the Premier once again a very clear-cut question: Estimates for your office are coming before the estimates committee in the next week or two. Will you appear to justify the expenditures in your office?

Interjection.

Hon. Mr. Caplan: My colleague says that's simply a cheap stunt. I wouldn't go that far. I recall previously in the House when we couldn't get ministers or a Premier to even attend question period in this House. Of course this government has introduced legislation requiring the attendance of the Premier, of the cabinet, here in the House, to answer questions daily that are posed by the members of the official opposition.

This member in fact was the chair of the executive council, the chair of cabinet. In that eight-year period when they were the government, they did not call one government agency in front of the standing committee on government agencies. That is a glaring omission. The record under this government: In four years, six agencies will have been called for members of all parties to review, to make recommendations and to get a response. I'll stack the record of this administration compared to this member and his colleagues any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

SCHOOL CLOSURES

Mr. Rosario Marchese (Trinity—Spadina): To the Minister of Education: From 2003 to 2006, 159 schools in Ontario were closed. Some of these schools are being closed and sold to cover board deficits. The Ottawa-Carleton District School Board recently decided to completely disrupt the programming of over 500 students in two schools—Bayview and R. B. Curry—to leave the more valuable Bayview property available for sale. The parents of R. B. Curry, constituents of the Premier, are losing their school despite having a vibrant program for over 232 students. Minister, what happened to keeping good schools open?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne (Minister of Education): I'm happy to respond to the member opposite. I really believe in the institution of school boards. I believe in their ability to have a plan for their communities. The reason school boards are important is that they know about their communities.

We're also dealing right now with declining enrolment across the province. We have got to give school boards the ability to plan in that environment of declining enrolment. We froze school closures for two years; we put a moratorium on. We brought out a series of guidelines. We've asked boards to consider the value of programs to the community, to the students, to look at the services that are delivered in a school community, because we know that schools are worth more than just the bricks and mortar; they are hubs for communities. We've asked school boards to look at those factors.

But at the end of the day, school boards have to be able to plan. They have to be able to meet the needs of the students who are in the system as opposed to students who are not.

Mr. Marchese: Thank God we had a moratorium on school closures. By the way, I'm a bit displeased, because the Premier is losing a school despite having a vibrant program for over 232 students. I'm glad the board has a plan, because the plan I described isn't working.

You can't put school boards in a position of having to close schools to make up for a lack of funding and then wash your hands of the responsibility by appointing a review, which is what you did. You promised to keep good schools open, not to review them. Minister, when did "keep good schools open" become "displace, divide and disperse"?

Hon. Ms. Wynne: Just off the top, let's remember that under the government of that member, 155 schools closed across the province. Under the NDP, 155 schools closed.

Since we've been in office, we have put into the funding formula a supported schools grant that helps boards keep isolated schools open. We have put funding into the funding formula for small schools, to guarantee that those small schools have a principal and a secretary. So we have given boards extra resources to keep schools open.

But boards have to be able to do their planning. We need to have school trustees in communities who know what the needs of their communities are, and those school trustees have to have the authority to make their plans, consolidate programs and provide the programs that their students need. That is why I look forward to continuing to work with the Ottawa board and with boards across the province as they put their plans in place.

SERVICES FOR THE DISABLED

Mrs. Maria Van Bommel (Lambton—Kent—Middlesex): My question is directed to the Attorney General. The McGuinty government has been a champion in advocating for the rights of 1.5 million Ontarians who live with disabilities. I understand that the federal government recently announced that it will add its signature to a landmark United Nations treaty on protecting the rights of people with disabilities and that Canada will join 53 other nations to endorse the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

Minister, on this, the 25th anniversary of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, could you explain the importance of this convention and indicate to the Legislature if the government of Ontario will support this initiative?

Hon. Michael Bryant (Attorney General): Absolutely, the answer is yes. On March 14, I was very pleased to write the Minister of Foreign Affairs and express Ontario's support for Canada's intention to sign the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

The convention seeks to promote the fundamental rights and freedoms of persons with disabilities through progressive implementation of measures to ensure their dignity and full participation in society. The broad objectives of the convention are consistent with the goals of the McGuinty government and the policies and measures that we've taken to protect and enhance the rights and lives of persons with disabilities.

As Ontario will be required to implement some of the convention's terms, we've asked for assurances from the federal government that we be consulted, as all provinces ought to be consulted. I also expressed Ontario's support in a conversation with the Minister of Foreign Affairs last month and look forward to updates from Parliament in this regard.

Mrs. Van Bommel: Minister, I'm very pleased to hear that we will be supporting the convention.

I want to thank Chief Justice McMurtry for his tremendous dedication and commitment on this and many, many other issues and look forward to—

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Thank you. New question.

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

Mr. John Yakabuski (Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke): My question is for the Premier. Repeatedly today you have been asked—and you have not even addressed the question; you have referred it to your minister. It's a very simple and not unusual question: Will you, as you claimed to be placing so much importance upon the work of committees in this legislative body during your campaign stumping speech in 2003, appear before the estimates committee so that you can be asked questions about the expenses arising out of your office? It's a simple question, Premier. Please don't refer it. Please answer this question: Will you appear before the estimates committee so that your expenses can be reviewed?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): No, I won't. Just so they hear it again: No, I will not. I'll follow the precedent set by Premier Harris. He was asked on three separate occasions if he might appear.

I can say proudly, though, that we have reduced the budget of the Premier's office by $150,000 from the days of the Conservative government. I can also say that our cabinet office budget has been reduced by $2.3 million since the Conservative days. So we're being very careful with the people's money.

Mr. Yakabuski: At least we have an answer, but it's very disappointing, Premier.

Mr. Tim Hudak (Erie—Lincoln): No surprise.

Mr. Yakabuski: Not surprising, but disappointing.

First of all, you refuse and you crush the ability of this Legislature to bring this whole issue before a legislative committee. Now you are asked to please appear yourself so that you can answer questions on your own estimates and expenses arising out of your office with regard to this issue for this House, and you steadfastly say no.

Premier, what is left for us to determine your role and that of the people in your office with regard to this scandal?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: The members opposite have lost all faith in the Ombudsman and his ability to deal with these kinds of issues. They, furthermore, entirely discounted the ability of the Ontario Provincial Police to deal with these kinds of issues. It's in their interests to continue to play games with this, and I understand that. But I think what Ontarians want us to do, and we hear them loudly and clearly, is all those things that are necessary to restore their confidence in the integrity of their lottery system.

The Ombudsman has looked at this. He has given us a number of specific recommendations. KPMG has laid out a number of additional recommendations. We have turned this matter, beyond that, over to the Ontario Provincial Police. There are a number of changes that have already been made that are manifest at the lottery terminals themselves today in Ontario. We will continue to do everything we need to do to ensure that we keep our sleeves rolled up. We don't try to brush things under the carpet, as was done by the previous government. We will move forward to improve the quality of the services provided by the Ontario lottery and gaming system.

MANUFACTURING JOBS

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): Premier, it's official: Genfast Manufacturing Co. in Brantford threw 210 people out of work today. The sudden Genfast closure is yet another example of the way tens upon tens of thousands of workers are being thrown on the scrap heap in Dalton McGuinty's Ontario. One is of them is a gentleman named Alex MacPhearson, of Hamilton Mountain. At 64, after 25 years of service and just 10 days to go until early retirement, he was cut off his benefits despite the fact that he has three types of terminal cancer. He has stomach, lung and throat cancer and no compensation whatsoever.

Premier, where do you suggest that Mr. MacPhearson turn for some help with this inhumane situation that he now finds himself in?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): Let me first say that we are tremendously concerned any time that anybody in the province of Ontario loses their job, whether it's Mr. MacPhearson in his very trying circumstances or other workers as well.

I know that the NDP are exceptionally negative when it comes to their outlook on our economy, but the truth bears repetition that since the past three and a half years, we are now ahead by 340,000 net new jobs. The unemployment rate is at its lowest level in five years.

The Canadian Federation of Independent Business recently announced that there are 70,000 job vacancies right now in the province of Ontario, mostly in the skilled trades. That's why we're expanding the number of people enrolled in our apprenticeship programs by up to 7,000 more on an annual basis. That's why we've created room for 86,000 more young people in our colleges and universities to invest in them, so that they continue to take advantage of all these new opportunities that are appearing in this economy.

Ms. Horwath: Premier, no severance, no termination pay, no job benefits or no job and no benefits: Is that your idea of success in this province? When manufacturing plants are falling like dominoes in McGuinty's Ontario, you have no plan to help hard-working and loyal, long-service employees like Alex MacPhearson. Alex's next cancer appointment is May 17, and without benefits, he won't be able to afford his cancer medications without having to beg for charity. Will you embark on a personal undertaking to ensure that Alex MacPhearson is covered for his cancer drugs and can live out his life in dignity?

And will you finally acknowledge that your failure to protect good manufacturing jobs in this province is creating massive hardship for hard-working Ontario families?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: To the Minister of Labour.

Hon. Steve Peters (Minister of Labour): I'm proud of the record that, when communities have experienced job losses, our Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities is very quickly there to reach out to work with those communities and with those affected employers.

As well, it's important to understand that the Employment Standards Act does protect employees in this province. After three months of employment, an employee is entitled to notice-of-termination pay or notice in lieu if the employer ends that employment. An employee may also qualify for severance pay after five years of service. Severance pay is intended to compensate the employee for loss of seniority and job-related benefits and recognizes long service.

There is something the honourable member could do, and that would be to pick up the phone and call her colleague Mr. Layton in Ottawa. One of the things we need to see proclaimed is Bill C-55, which would better protect workers in the province of Ontario from those companies that have gone bankrupt. I would encourage the honourable member to pick up the phone, call Jack Layton and help us out in that regard.

TFO

M me Monique Smith (Nipissing): Ma question s'adresse à la ministre déléguée aux Affaires francophones. Elle est au sujet de TFO.

Regardez maintenant l'essor que connaît cette petite chaîne. TFO est devenue pour la francophonie ontarienne une institution fondamentale et un outil de développement indispensable. C'est avec un immense plaisir que la communauté francophone a accueilli un TFO indépendant le 1 er avril 2007, autonomie accordée par le gouvernement McGuinty. Qu'est-ce que cela représente pour la communauté francophone de l'Ontario?

L'hon. Madeleine Meilleur (ministre des Services sociaux et communautaires, ministre déléguée aux Affaires francophones): Je voudrais remercier la députée de Nipissing pour l'intérêt qu'elle porte à la communauté francophone, parce qu'elle représente une grande communauté francophone.

La chaîne TFO sera dotée de son conseil d'administration et sera gérée de façon autonome à la fois sur les plans administratif et budgétaire. Elle a son propre conseil d'administration, ses propres gestionnaires et son propre budget.

Nous avons d'ailleurs alloué une subvention ponctuelle de 15,4 $ millions pour soutenir les coûts de transition, de réinstallation et de démarrage, de même que les coûts de conversion au numérique. Nous continuons à allouer une subvention annuelle d'environ 15 $ millions pour veiller à ce que TFO réponde aux besoins culturels et éducatifs spécifiques de la communauté francophone et remplisse son mandat en matière de télédiffusion et de communication.

La communauté franco-ontarienne nous demandait depuis longtemps que TFO devienne autonome, avec son propre conseil d'administration, et nous avons livré la marchandise.

M me Smith: C'était demandé depuis longtemps; c'est vrai.

Nous entendons tous que TFO, par son action innovatrice, parle à l'intelligence, suscite la réflexion, éveille l'intérêt, interpelle l'imagination et nourrit le sentiment d'appartenance à la francophonie d'ici et du monde. Cette autonomie revêt un caractère extrêmement significatif, car elle va permettre à TFO d'élargir ses horizons et d'aspirer à un brillant avenir. Quelles sont vos aspirations quant à la nouvelle autonomie de TFO?

L'hon. M me Meilleur: J'espère que TFO va continuer à grandir, à se développer et même à se dépasser. J'espère que TFO va continuer à nous informer sur l'actualité entourant nos villes et nos villages, nos institutions, nos artistes, nos hommes et nos femmes qui à chaque jour écrivent une nouvelle page de notre histoire.

J'espère que TFO va continuer à nous raconter l'histoire des Franco-Ontariens, ses luttes et ses victoires, qu'elle va continuer à développer des partenariats avec les francophones d'ici et d'ailleurs.

LONG-TERM CARE

Mrs. Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener—Waterloo): My question is for the Premier. You made a 2003 election promise to build a strategy for seniors that would guarantee that our seniors would be treated with dignity and respect. However, you have failed to do so. Today, about 50% of the long-term-care residents—that's about 35,000 people—still live in older homes that are not wheelchair accessible. They have three- and four-bed wards and they don't have ensuite baths. In fact, they're only meeting the design standards from 1972, as opposed to 1998.

I am asking you today, Premier, to commit to a capital renewal plan in order that these vulnerable older people can live with dignity and respect and be accommodated in homes that have rooms where they are private or semi-private, where they have ensuite baths and are totally wheelchair accessible. Will you commit today to a capital renewal plan?

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

Hon. George Smitherman (Deputy Premier, Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): We all look forward with great intrigue and fascination to whether the Conservative Party will actually develop policy for the coming election around health care, and most especially how they will rationalize their daily requests for greater resource with their commitment to cut health care funding by $2.6 billion. For our part, with respect to long-term care, we're very proud that, even before this fiscal year, we had invested 740 million new dollars in long-term care.

We have a bill that will soon be called for, I hope, third reading in this House that will enhance the protections that are available for our residents in long-term care.

We most certainly do agree that across the province of Ontario there are a number of homes which require upgrade. We're working very, very carefully within our ministry to develop an appropriate program that would see especially those smaller homes among C and Ds appropriately redeveloped. We are very concerned that if we follow the pattern established by my honourable friend when she was a minister, the homes in rural Ontario—some 50 or 60 beds—would all disappear. That has been their strategy in the past.

PETITIONS

LONG-TERM CARE

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound—Muskoka): I have a petition to do with funding at Muskoka Algonquin Healthcare and it reads:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas demand for health services are expected to continue to rise with a growing retirement population in Muskoka-East Parry Sound; and

"Whereas studies indicate that overcrowded emergency rooms result in higher mortality rates; and

"Whereas growing demand and lack of availability of long-term-care beds places increased pressure on acute ca