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

March 22, 2010

39th Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2010-Mar-22 (PDF)

L005 - Mon 22 Mar 2010 / Lun 22 mar 2010

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Monday 22 March 2010 Lundi 22 mars 2010

INTRODUCTION OF MEMBERS FOR

OTTAWA–WEST NEPEAN AND

LEEDS–GRENVILLE

INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS

ORAL QUESTIONS

ENERGY RATES

ENERGY RATES

MANUFACTURING JOBS

ENERGY RATES

ENERGY RATES

CHILD CARE

HOSPITAL FUNDING

ENERGY RATES

SOCIAL ASSISTANCE

RENEWABLE ENERGY

CHILDREN’S AID SOCIETIES

PENSION PLANS

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

HOSPITAL FUNDING

CLIMATE CHANGE

MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT

INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS

MEMBERS’ STATEMENTS

GOVERNMENT’S RECORD

JUNIOR HOCKEY

WORLD DOWN SYNDROME DAY

MIHIR GHOSH

EDUCATION

BROCKVILLE MENTAL HEALTH CENTRE

INTERNATIONAL DAY FOR THE ELIMINATION OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION

MAX KEEPING

NOWRUZ

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

SEPARATION DISTANCES

FOR NATURAL GAS

POWER PLANTS ACT, 2010 /

LOI DE 2010 SUR L’ÉTABLISSEMENT

DE DISTANCES DE SÉPARATION

POUR LES CENTRALES ÉLECTRIQUES

AU GAZ NATUREL

MOTIONS

COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP

PETITIONS

TAXATION

CHILD CARE

HOSPITAL FUNDING

POWER PLANT

CHILD CARE

CHILD CUSTODY

TAXATION

TAXATION

TAXATION

TAXATION

ORDERS OF THE DAY

THRONE SPEECH DEBATE

The House met at 1030.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Good morning. Please remain standing for the Lord’s Prayer, followed by a moment of silence of inner thought and personal reflection.

Prayers.

INTRODUCTION OF MEMBERS FOR

OTTAWA–WEST NEPEAN AND

LEEDS–GRENVILLE

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): I beg to inform the House that the Clerk has received from the Chief Electoral Officer and laid upon the table certificates of the by-elections in the electoral districts of Ottawa West–Nepean and Leeds–Grenville.

The Clerk of the Assembly (Ms. Deborah Deller): I have a letter addressed to Mrs. Deborah Deller, Clerk of the Legislative Assembly, and it reads as follows:

“A writ of election dated the 3rd day of February, 2010, was issued by the Honourable Lieutenant Governor of the province of Ontario, and was addressed to Douglas B. Shouldice, returning officer for the electoral district of Ottawa West–Nepean, for the election of a member to represent the said electoral district of Ottawa West–Nepean in the Legislative Assembly of this province in the room of Jim Watson who, since his election as representative of the said electoral district of Ottawa West–Nepean, has resigned his seat.

This is to certify that, a poll having been granted and held in Ottawa West–Nepean on the 4th day of March, 2010, Bob Chiarelli has been returned as duly elected as appears by the return of the said writ of election, dated the 12th day of March, 2010, which is now lodged of record in my office.

“Yours sincerely,

“Greg Essensa

“Chief Electoral Officer.”

An additional letter reads as follows:

“A writ of election, dated the 3rd day of February, 2010, was issued by the Honourable Lieutenant Governor of the province of Ontario and was addressed to Barbara Mills, returning officer for the electoral district of Leeds–Grenville, for the election of a member to represent the said electoral district of Leeds–Grenville in the Legislative Assembly of this province in the room of Robert Runciman who, since his election as representative of the said electoral district of Leeds–Grenville, has resigned his seat.

This is to certify that, a poll having been granted and held in Leeds–Grenville on the 4th day of March, 2010, Steve Clark has been returned as duly elected as appears by the return of the said writ of election dated the 12th day of March, 2010, which is now lodged of record in my office.”

It is signed, “Greg Essensa, Chief Electoral Officer,” and dated March 16, 2010.

Mr. Chiarelli was escorted into the House by Mr. McGuinty and Ms. Smith.

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: Speaker, I have the honour to present to you and to the House Bob Chiarelli, member-elect for the electoral district of Ottawa West–Nepean, who has taken the oath and signed the roll and now claims the right to take his seat.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Let the honourable member take his seat.

Applause.

Mr. Clark was escorted into the House by Mr. Hudak and Mr. Yakabuski.

Mr. Tim Hudak: I have the honour to present to you and to the House Steve Clark, member-elect for the electoral district of Leeds–Grenville, who has taken the oath and signed the roll and now claims the right to take his seat.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Let the honourable member take his seat.

Applause.

INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS

Hon. Monique M. Smith: It’s my privilege today to welcome a few residents from my constituency. Linda and Stephen Morrin from Commanda are here today, and we’re delighted to have them with us. As well, I believe Mary Beth Caliciuri is in the House. She is the mother of one of our new pages, Anthony Caliciuri. We welcome all of them to the House today.

Hon. Harinder S. Takhar: I would like to introduce the grade 5 class from Hawthorn Public School, in my constituency, to the Legislature. They should be here in the House around 11 o’clock.

Mr. Steve Clark: I have a small entourage, including my wife, Deanna, a number of folks from Leeds and Grenville and my former employer, the mayor of Leeds and the Thousand Islands, Frank Kinsella. So I’d like to welcome the group.

Mr. Bob Chiarelli: I’m very pleased to introduce my spouse, Randi Hansen, a number of my daughters and some friends from Ottawa, particularly Howard and Anne Perron. They’ve been long-time supporters, and I’m very, very pleased that they could share this day with me.

Hon. Michael Gravelle: I’m very pleased to introduce the mother of one of our new pages, Ben Neilipovitz. His mother, Constance Neilipovitz, is in the public gallery. Welcome. I’m looking forward to having lunch with them today.

Mr. Dave Levac: My personal congratulations to the two newest members of this place.

I’d also like to introduce Mr. Robert Hornung, president of the Canadian Wind Energy Association. He’s here along with Chairperson Gary Pundsack and other CanWEA members, including Justin Rangooni, today in the gallery. I encourage everyone to visit their reception at 5 p.m. in committee room 2 and learn about the great work that CanWEA is doing to expand our renewable energy opportunities in Ontario. Welcome to those in the gallery today.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): I take this opportunity on behalf of the member from Vaughan and page Catia Marceau to welcome her mother, Giulia Marceau, to the members’ gallery today. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

As well, on behalf of the member for Oakville and page Alexander Bowie, I welcome his mother, Janette Bowie, in the members’ gallery today. Welcome, all, to Queen’s Park.

ORAL QUESTIONS

ENERGY RATES

Mr. Tim Hudak: I want to first take the opportunity to say how delighted I am to welcome Steve Clark to the Ontario PC caucus and his wife, Deanna, and supporters to the assembly. We are proud of the hard work he is already doing on behalf of the people he serves. Welcome also, Mr. Chiarelli, back to the assembly; we served together a number of years ago.

My question is to the Minister of Energy. On March 17, regulation 66/10 was posted on e-Laws, the electronic website. Regulation 66/10 slips a new tax onto hydro bills through the back door. Interestingly, within 24 hours and one media call later, the regulation mysteriously disappeared from the e-Laws website.

Minister, what is it about your new backdoor energy tax that you’re trying to hide from the general public?

Hon. Brad Duguid: The Leader of the Opposition, as usual, has it completely wrong.

What we’re talking about here is an investment that is being made in a couple of relatively new conservation programs, programs that I know the Leader of the Opposition did not support when he was in government, nor did his government support; programs which obviously the Leader of the Opposition continues not to support; conservation programs that are giving to consumers the opportunity to find savings in their energy bills; conservation programs that are allowing us to move from dirty coal to cleaner sources of energy; conservation programs that are very much part of our plan to ensure that we have reliable, sustainable sources of energy now and into the future.

The Leader of the Opposition obviously—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The members from Nepean–Carleton, Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke, and Lanark: Welcome back. It’s nice to hear your voices. I would like to hear your voices a little lower, please.

Supplementary?

Mr. Tim Hudak: I will tell the energy minister what’s wrong. What’s wrong is, your backdoor energy tax is taking more money out of the wallets of seniors and hard-working Ontario families. The minister didn’t even try to answer my question about why you posted the regulation one day, and then, 24 hours later, it has slipped off altogether.

The minister surely must know that Ontario families are already struggling to make ends meet. Now they’re going to be paying your HST sales tax grab on hydro; they’re paying your new so-called provincial benefit tax; they’re going to be paying for that sweetheart Samsung deal for 20 years yet to come, and now you want to slip in this new backdoor energy tax.

Minister, I’ll ask you again: Please tell us, why did you put it up one day, and then, 24 hours later, it disappeared?

Hon. Brad Duguid: Once again, the Leader of the Opposition categorizes this completely wrong. The fact of the matter is, conservation programs have been funded through the energy base for many, many years. Many of our programs do that. What we’re talking about here are two new, effective conservation programs that are working. We’re talking about $4 a year for the average consumer. But with that $4 investment, all Ontarians benefit, because if we were to do it his way, we’d have to invest in creating more sources of energy supply, which would be a lot less cost-effective than what we’re doing now.

He didn’t get it when he had the opportunity to be in office and to make these decisions. He doesn’t get it now. The most effective way to deal with our energy supply is through conservation.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Final supplementary.

Mr. Tim Hudak: Back to the minister. Two straight questions and two dodges by the minister reading the same old talking points, refusing to answer the question about why they pulled down this backdoor energy tax within 24 hours. We’ll release the regulation. We got a hold of it within those 24 hours. We’ll send it out to the general public, because the minister is obviously afraid to do so.

Also, it says in that regulation that this will be a $53-million tax grab from the pockets of hard-working Ontario families and seniors. In fact, the original plan on your legislation was to apply it to gas companies as well.

I’ll ask the minister, is your greedy energy tax grab for one year only, or do you plan on making this an annual grab from Ontario families?

Hon. Brad Duguid: Once again, the Leader of the Opposition is categorizing this completely wrong. It is really important that we invest in conservation. It’s really important for consumers who, under this plan, can save up to $600 off their energy bill when they take

part in the energy audits, when they take

part in some of the retrofits—that we provide up to $5,000 in rebates.

These are important programs that help move us out of dirty coal—which the Leader of the Opposition and his party fully support and want to keep us in—ensure that the lungs of our young people, our children and grandchildren, can be protected and preserved and ensure that we can move forward with our strategy to create new jobs, green energy jobs, which this program does. We’re proud of this program. It’s important that we move forward—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. New question.

ENERGY RATES

Mr. Tim Hudak: Three times I asked the minister why he pulled down that regulation within 24 hours. I asked if it was going to be an annual tax grab. He has avoided each and every one of these questions. This has all the appearance of yet another slippery and greedy tax grab from the McGuinty government. Let me ask the minister this, and hopefully we will get an answer: Why are you making utility companies do your dirty work of raising more tax revenue for something that the utility companies are not themselves delivering?

Hon. Brad Duguid: There’s nothing new with utility companies where, in fact, the rate base provides support for conservation programs. That’s just good public policy, to ensure that those who are benefiting from the programs are paying for them. I get it.

I understand that the Leader of the Opposition wouldn’t be supportive of this, because he was never supportive of conservation when he had the opportunity. Their energy policy was a day-to-day event. It was a case of “cross our fingers and hope we can make it through our term with enough energy supply.”

We’re doing it differently. We’re investing in green energies, we’re investing in modernization of our nuclear units, and we’re investing in conservation to ensure that we have a reliable and sustainable source of supply, not just to get us through our term like you tried to do but for future generations to benefit from, to ensure that we have—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. Supplementary?

Mr. Tim Hudak: I’ll tell you what we’re against. We’re against your plan to turn utility companies into yet another bunch of tax collectors for another Liberal slush fund program.

The minister has no idea. Working families are struggling to make ends meet. They’re going to pay your HST sales tax grab, they’re going to pay for your sweetheart Samsung deal for 20 years to come, and now you’re nailing them with this $53-million backdoor tax grab.

I think the minister knows he also has the ability for gas companies, under the Energy Act, to similarly increase taxes to support the Liberal slush fund. Minister, you’re obviously trying to do this with energy utilities; is it true that the gas companies are next on your list?

Hon. Brad Duguid: Clearly the Leader of the Opposition has not learned anything since his days in government. Clearly he wants to take us back to the days of dirty coal. Clearly he wants to take us back to the days when the Minister of Energy couldn’t sleep at night because he had to worry about whether there was going to be a reliable supply.

We’re moving away from those days. He may not have the guts, he may not have the courage to make the strong decisions we need to make today to ensure that future generations can breathe healthy air in this province, to ensure that future generations have access to good, green economic development jobs and opportunities. We have the intestinal fortitude to move forward with these policies. We will lead, and the people of Ontario recognize that this is indeed the way to go.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Final supplementary.

Mr. Tim Hudak: I’ll tell you what we haven’t learned: We’ve had one single answer to five straight and direct questions to the energy minister. We got the same old talking points five times in a row. You didn’t tell us why you took it off the website. You didn’t tell us this would be an annual tax grab, and you didn’t tell us if you’re going to the gas companies next.

Let me try one last time. I have a new idea for the energy minister: Instead of raising people’s utility bills by another $53 million, why don’t you instead use that money that you’re giving out to the HST tax collectors in the $45,000 in severance, not for missing a single day’s work? That’s a better idea.

Hon. Brad Duguid: I appreciate the advice of the member opposite, but let me tell you this and let’s be clear: We are not going back to the days of dirty coal. No matter how much you want us to go there, we’re not going to do that. We’re not going to pollute the lungs and the health of young people, the next generation and generations to follow. We’re making the tough decisions today, decisions that are leading the world in green energy and building—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Please continue.

Hon. Brad Duguid: We’re making the decisions today that are leading to the next generation of jobs economy, building a green energy hub here in this province that future generations are going to be able to benefit from, ensuring that we are moving to alternatives from coal. What are those alternatives? Modernization of our nuclear units, enhancing of our conservation programs. For $4 a year, that’s what this is doing: the most economical way that we can move forward to ensure that our supply needs are met for many years—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. New question.

MANUFACTURING JOBS

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My question is to the Premier. Last weekend in Hamilton, Siemens International announced that they are going to be closing their doors in my community, and that’s going to cost us 550 jobs. The Minister of Economic Development claims she was working with Siemens. My question is this: Will the government release the details of its final offer to Siemens?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: To the Minister of Economic Development and Trade.

Hon. Sandra Pupatello: Let me say first off that we were not happy with the outcome of a competitive process that saw Siemens select a different jurisdiction for an expansion of an advanced manufacturing that Ontario does very well.

In direct answer to this question, all of the jurisdictions that were involved signed a non-disclosure agreement that would not allow us to speak with a whole variety of people that we would otherwise speak with. It was conditional on signing that non-disclosure agreement that we were allowed to go forward in the bid. That is why that kind of information wouldn’t be public, or, frankly, it would be in the papers by now.

We’d be happy to talk about the work that we are doing today to secure the future for Hamilton and Siemens.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Whatever the government was trying to do, it failed miserably, and that’s obvious. As a result, 550 families are wondering how they’re going to be putting food on the table and paying the bills.

In tough times like these, we cannot play politics with people’s jobs. Why didn’t anybody in the mayor’s office, anybody in the economic development office or the workers themselves get a call when the government learned that Siemens could possibly be leaving my community?

Hon. Sandra Pupatello: In fact, officials from my ministry did contact people from the city of Hamilton, and we were able to exact key information that was required, things like development charges, information about adjacent lands and buildings that we knew could help to bolster the case that we were making to Siemens. We spent an inordinate amount of time trying to land that bidding process.

I’m not happy with the outcome. I can tell you that we worked very hard to do that. We are working very hard now to see that Siemens will maintain the 6,000 employees that they employ here in Ontario, not just in Hamilton but across their many divisions. They are an important partner for us. We want them to stay. We think there are future opportunities in Hamilton—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The member from Don Valley East will please retract his comment and apologize.

Mr. David Caplan: I apologize and withdraw.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Final supplementary.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Nobody is more unhappy than the 550 workers and their families who are going to be affected in Hamilton. When this McGuinty government found out that these good jobs were at risk, it could have pulled together Hamilton’s economic development team, the workers and their union, and other parties to try to help to come up with a consolidated effort. Instead, they kept it to themselves, and now the jobs are gone.

On this side of the House, we’ve actually proposed measures to ensure that government works with local leaders, works with affected workers and their unions, and works with the companies at risk in advance, before we lose jobs. Will the government act openly with a plan to save jobs, or will they keep playing politics and failing us?

Hon. Sandra Pupatello: Let’s be clear: There are a number of factors that were involved in the decision that landed in the southern states instead of Ontario, one of those being Buy America. Where was the NDP in our Buy America discussion—

Interjections.

Hon. Sandra Pupatello: —when we had to get that clause out of American legislation? That did not help us. It did not help us in Windsor, didn’t help us in Hamilton, didn’t help us in Welland. So when we come to the NDP and say we need help on our industrial—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The member from Hamilton East will withdraw the comment that he just made.

Mr. Paul Miller: Which one? The “baloney” part? I withdraw it. I apologize.

Mr. Jeff Leal: Stand up and—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): No, I don’t need help from the armchair member from Peterborough. Apologize.

Mr. Paul Miller: I withdraw.

ENERGY RATES

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My second question is to the Premier as well. In tough times, people want help to make life more affordable, but the McGuinty government seems determined to make life more expensive. The Premier is adding a new charge to hydro bills months before he adds a new 8% tax. What steps is he actually making to make energy conservation more affordable to the people in this province?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: The Minister of Energy had an opportunity a moment ago to speak to this, but maybe I can just reiterate some of the good points that he made.

The charge which my colleague is referencing, which the leader of the official opposition referenced a moment ago, is 33 cents a month on the average bill. That cost goes to support two energy programs. One offers up to $150 for a home energy audit—by the way, 348,000 Ontarians have already taken advantage of that particular program—and we also offer up to $5,000 in retrofit rebates. So far, 160,000 Ontarians have taken advantage of the home retrofit rebates. This 33 cents a month on a typical bill is going to help fund those programs that Ontarians are seizing.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: The government is only interested in green initiatives when they can lift some green from people’s pockets. The government quietly ended the sales tax exemption for Energy Star appliances, another way the HST is going to whack people.

If this government is genuinely interested in helping Ontario families make the right environmental choices, why are they making it more expensive to do so?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: I’m not sure my honourable colleague heard what I had to say in my first answer, and I’ll say it again: What we are doing, through this 33 cents a month on the typical bill, is paying for $150 for a home energy audit and up to $5,000 in retrofit rebates. Those two programs, providing electricity users with $150 and then, again, up to $5,000, are where the savings are coming from.

We’re allowing homeowners to make investments that reduce their electricity bill and we’re helping to pay for the changes they need to make. That’s how we’re helping homeowners save money when it comes to the electricity bill. I think it’s pretty obvious.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Final supplementary.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: What’s obvious is that only one in 100 people actually take advantage of the retrofit program because they don’t have the money in their pockets to be able to pay for those up-front costs. That’s the reality.

Here’s what everyday people in this province face: When they open their hydro bill, they’re going to be paying more. If they want to make the right choices, they’re going to be paying even more. It’s a slap in the face to Ontarians who are trying their best to conserve.

When will this government stop nickeling and diming Ontarians who want to go green?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: That’s exactly what we are doing: We are helping Ontarians go green by paying for some of the costs connected with that. We’ll pay up to $150 for their home energy audit and up to $5,000 in retrofit rebates; 348,000 Ontarians have taken advantage of the home audit program and 160,000 so far have taken advantage of the home retrofit program.

I think we’ve got a couple of winners here when it comes to these programs. We’ll keep on finding ways to support those.

ENERGY RATES

Mr. John Yakabuski: My question is for the Minister of Energy. Minister, the only thing that happened between the posting of the regulation creating the new backdoor energy tax and its disappearance from public access was that you gave a media interview on the subject. Thirty minutes after the interview, the regulation was gone, but the tax lives on.

Who ordered the regulation to be pulled and hidden from public access?

Hon. Brad Duguid: I guess my question to the member and his leader is, when was the last time you checked the website? It’s there; it’s there as we speak. You might just want to make sure that you’ve got up-to-date information before you stand up in this House and make those kinds of accusations.

The fact—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Minister. The member from Halton.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Stop the clock. The Minister of Economic Development.

Minister?

Hon. Brad Duguid: I know the member, in his heart of hearts, would support this program—and I know he believes that consumers deserve to have the opportunity to save, on average, 23% on their energy bill by engaging in the home energy audit program, by engaging in the retrofit program, which can provide families up to $5,000 in rebates.

These programs are working. They’re benefiting 160,000 families through the retrofit program; 348,000 people have—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. Supplementary?

Mr. John Yakabuski: It’s typical of the way the Liberals do business. They put it up, they pull it, and they put it back up while members are being walked into the House here. That’s the way they do business and that’s the way they treat the public in this province as well. At 10:30 this morning, that regulation was not there.

Minister, the regulation that we retrieved from e-Laws before you pulled it contradicts what you’ve been telling the media. You say it’s for one year, but the regulation calls for the tax to be reassessed at the end of the year. Did you order the regulation to be pulled so that the public wouldn’t know about the new hidden tax, the backdoor tax, or was it just so you could take the time to get your story straight?

Hon. Brad Duguid: I’ll say it again: The regulation is on the site. Check. It’s there.

It’s funny how you talk about changing positions on things. I remember—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The member from Lanark will withdraw the comment he just made.

Mr. Randy Hillier: I withdraw.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Minister?

Hon. Brad Duguid: What happened to your belief when you said in this Legislature not along ago—in fact, it was February 23 of this year—that there’s no question that conservation is important? You talked about reducing your own usage in your home. You said that it’s an important thing and that—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Minister.

The member from Renfrew knows the rules. If he’s not satisfied with the answer, following question period, he can put a late show in.

Minister?

Hon. Brad Duguid: You said, “I think that is an important thing, and I think there are some gains to be made out there today in that part of this act,” and you were referring to the Green Energy Act. You supported it just a few months ago. Why are you all of a sudden opposed to conservation? Why do you want to deny your constituents the opportunity to save up to 23% on their energy bills? Why do you want to deny Ontario consumers the ability, through this conservation, to be able to—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. New question.

CHILD CARE

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My question is for the Premier. Children and their parents gathered on the lawn of the Legislature on Friday to ensure that they won’t lose their child care in the coming year. Will the Premier commit to keeping those child care spaces open or does he plan to tell parents that there are going to be 7,600 less spaces for their children here in Ontario next year?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: I know that my honourable colleague understands that she’s talking about children for whom we have extended the benefits for child care, which had originally been funded by the federal government.

What I would ask my honourable colleague to do would be to join us in the overtures and the efforts that we continue to make vis-à-vis the federal government to encourage them to continue to assume that original responsibility so that we can, in fact, have the funding in place to provide the child care that I know that we all support for those children involved.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: I have 11,000 signatures on petitions from parents who disagree with this Premier. Parents don’t want the blame game. They know that constitutionally, it is this government’s—the provincial government’s—responsibility to provide for child care funding. They want quality—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Please continue.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: They want quality public child care for their children—children of all ages—that’s not going to actually bankrupt them. That won’t happen unless this Premier acts. Will he commit to keeping those child care spaces open or is he telling mothers and fathers across the province to quit their jobs and stay home with their kids?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: My honourable colleague does not have to convince me about the value of good-quality, affordable child care for our families. She knows where we stand on these kinds of things broadly speaking because we’re moving ahead with a new $1.5-billion program to provide full-day learning opportunities for our four- and five-year-olds—the first program of its kind in North America.

Again, my colleague is referencing spaces that were originally funded by the federal government. We stepped in to extend that funding because it was about to run out. Again, I call upon my colleague to join us in the efforts that we are making to convince the federal government that they should restore that funding on a permanent basis.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Mr. Bob Chiarelli: My question is to the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. Minister, my constituency of Ottawa West–Nepean is home to one of the largest senior populations in Canada. These seniors have faith, as I do, in our system of public health care. But over the last four or five weeks they have seen and heard mixed reports about hospital budgets and service cutbacks, particularly at our community hospital of Queensway Carleton. Many of these seniors are concerned, even though the hospital has an impeccable record of patient care and financial management.

Minister, can you give assurances that the level of patient care will continue at the Queensway Carleton Hospital?

Hon. Deborah Matthews: Thank you to the honourable member very much for his question. I welcome him back and I congratulate him on his victory.

The first thing I want to say is that our government is absolutely committed to providing quality health care for all Ontarians within this province. In stark contrast, the first thing the previous government did when they were elected was cut funding to Ottawa hospitals by $57 million. They shut the Grace Hospital, they shut the Riverside Hospital, they tried to close Montfort and they tried to close the pediatric cardiac program at CHEO.

In contrast, our investments at Queensway—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Please continue.

Hon. Deborah Matthews: Thank you, Speaker.

In contrast, our record is clear. We’ve increased funding to Queensway Carleton by almost 60%. Our wait times have come down dramatically. Knee surgery is down by 440 days; hip surgery is down by 188 days—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. Supplementary?

Mr. Bob Chiarelli: That is good news about the Queensway Carleton Hospital in Ottawa.

Last year, about 65,000 new cases of cancer were diagnosed in Ontario. Specialized care and short wait times are absolutely essential. The $35-million Care Grows West campaign in Ottawa supports expanded cancer care at the Queensway Carleton. The campaign chair, philanthropist Dan Greenberg, and his family donated an incredible $11 million to this campaign, knowing the urgency of increased cancer care in our community.

Could the minister please tell this House how the government is providing advanced-level cancer care for patients at the Queensway Carleton Hospital?

Hon. Deborah Matthews: I can tell you that our government has worked very hard to ensure that Ontarians who are fighting cancer get the care they need as quickly as possible, as close to home as possible. To help achieve that goal we’ve invested $82.5 million for the construction of the Irving Greenberg Family Cancer Centre at Queensway Carleton Hospital.

This centre will help reduce wait times and provide personalized care for an additional 1,300 cancer patients each year. It will focus on breast, prostate and colorectal cancer—three of the most frequently diagnosed forms of cancer in Ontario. This new centre will create 60 new clinical jobs that will start serving patients in early April. It will house three radiation treatment machines, two clinics and 33 chemotherapy spaces.

This centre is a very important

part in ensuring that Ontarians fighting cancer—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. New question.

ENERGY RATES

Ms. Lisa MacLeod: My question is for the Minister of Energy. The McGuinty Liberals have to be hearing the same thing that we are in the opposition about the HST and how it’s just a $3-billion tax grab. It can’t be easy for them to travel the province trying to sell a tax hike of 8% more on home heating, on gas, on haircuts, on autism therapy, especially since it makes things a lot harder for Ontario families.

At the end of last week the Premier just made things a lot harder for Ontario families by signing a regulation that slips a massive $53-million tax on energy bills. So we have a question for you: Is that why morale over there is lower than a gutter snake on a backcountry road, or is that why George Smitherman was gang-tackled, or is it both?

Hon. Brad Duguid: It’s obvious to me that the Conservatives never got it when they were in power, they still don’t get it. The fact is—and don’t take our word for it. Talk to energy experts around the world and they will tell you that the most efficient way to manage energy supply is through conservation. Your critic used to get it. He did in February; he obviously doesn’t get it today. He’s on a different learning curve than the rest of us.

The fact is that if we can reduce our overall load and if we can reduce our overall maintenance of the system, we’re saving all Ontarians dollars. This is smart investment. It’s something that will ensure that all families will have an opportunity to find savings on their energy bill through conservation. It just makes sense.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Ms. Lisa MacLeod: While that minister plays hide-and-go-seek with taxes, our critic has been hard at work on the energy file and energy conservation. At no time did he ever suggest that we shouldn’t be conserving, and that’s something that he needs to clarify in his supplementary response.

There was no news release last week to announce the $53-million tax grab through the back door. In fact, last week, after the throne speech when we asked them what they were going to tax, what was the new surprise, they didn’t respond. In his lecture on the HST to the Stratford and Area Builders’ Association on the day that the regulation was posted and in his speech today to Toronto business people, there was no mention by the revenue minister that there was going to be another surprise backdoor tax that wasn’t mentioned in the throne speech. That is this $53 million.

We want to know: Was the regulation pulled because they didn’t tell their caucus about this secret deal?

Hon. Brad Duguid: The member should know that conservation programs have been paid for by the rate base for a very long period of time. The majority of conservation programs that have gone forward are paid for by the rate base because in the end, they’re paid for by the very people who are going to accrue the savings by taking advantage of those programs.

This is just good public policy. It ensures that families have the opportunity to engage in these very important programs. It ensures that we’re making the most cost-effective investment we possibly can to deal with our energy-supply challenges. These are decisions that the party opposite failed to make when they were in power. These are challenging times; these are challenging decisions. But at the end of the day, we’re building a system that’s reliable, we’re building a system that’s sustainable and we’re building a system that’s affordable to consumers. That’s what Ontarians expect—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. New question.

SOCIAL ASSISTANCE

Mr. Michael Prue: My question is for the Minister of Community and Social Services. I have repeatedly asked for assurances that this government would not cut the special diet supplement from Ontario Works and ODSP recipients who need it. I have received no such assurance from this minister. The public is worried. The editorial pages across Ontario are warning us that cutting the special diet supplement is wrong-headed, cruel and will deepen the poverty of people with diabetes, heart disease and other illnesses.

Again, will this minister tell the House today that the McGuinty government will not cut the special diet allowance?

Hon. Madeleine Meilleur: I guess that you will have to wait until Thursday to see what will be in the budget. But one thing I can say is that this government has been addressing poverty since we have been elected. Since 2003, we have increased social assistance by 11%. We have created a cabinet on poverty and we are working to help reduce poverty in Ontario. We have invested in the Ontario child benefit—$1,100 right now, and by 2013 it’s going to be $1,310. We also have a low-income dental plan in place and we have more affordable housing. In the supplementary, I will continue to let you know what we have done to reduce poverty.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Mr. Michael Prue: Again the minister refuses to answer a very simple question and a very important one. I asked this question on behalf of the tens of thousands of Ontarians who depend on this supplement to try to purchase healthy food to address their medical needs. I also speak for the countless people and organizations who care deeply about the elimination of poverty, people like Doris Grinspun of the Registered Nurses’ Association of Ontario, who says, “Cutting the special diet allowance program would be catastrophic for individuals and families in the short term and increase costs to the health care system in the long term.”

Has the Social Assistance Review Committee recommended this drastic action, or is the government taking this action unilaterally?

Hon. Madeleine Meilleur: Again, I will say to the member that you have to wait until Thursday to see what will be in the budget.

Special diet has been a concern of ours. When we came into power, this special diet budget was around $6 million. Today, it’s over $200 million. So we have to look into it. We have the Auditor General who wrote a very critical report about special diet, and we are looking into it. We’ll have to wait until Thursday to see what will be in the budget or not.

RENEWABLE ENERGY

Mr. Michael A. Brown: I have a question for the Minister of Energy and Infrastructure. Earlier this month, the minister, along with the Ontario Power Authority, announced a series of contracts, mostly solar, under the feed-in tariff program of our Green Energy Act. I understand that a major participant in this first round of programs is Loblaws, which truly demonstrates the wide-ranging support and interest that we are receiving across the province.

With such great demand to participate in this program, I know there surely must be some difficulty in ensuring as many communities have the opportunity to participate. Would the minister share with this House the distribution of contracts across the province and specifically what projects are in my riding of Algoma–Manitoulin?

Hon. Brad Duguid: I’m very pleased to respond to the member’s question. Indeed, he is right. A couple of weeks ago we made a very important announcement, and it was terrific to see the widespread take-up and support for this important program. We announced that over 500 projects in 120 communities will be receiving contracts under the feed-in tariff program. We’re talking about farmers; we’re talking about schools; we’re talking about hospitals; we’re talking about large-scale retail and commercial operations.

All kinds of individuals and businesses across the province are engaging in this green energy revolution. I think I can call it that. These projects, in total, will produce enough energy to power 13,000 homes.

In the member’s riding specifically, there are four projects—three hydro, one solar—that are receiving contracts. These together will generate about 765 kilowatts of energy.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Mr. Michael A. Brown: With the Green Energy Act and initiatives such as the closing of coal-fired plants, the government has demonstrated a commitment to becoming a North American leader in green energy. We all benefit from better, cleaner air, and we are at the forefront of a growing industry.

Wind energy has been a topic of considerable discussion. As a matter of fact, I have the largest wind farm in Canada at Prince township in my constituency. I know that the Canadian Wind Energy Association is here today.

Residents of Algoma–Manitoulin can appreciate the drive towards generating a clean, renewable energy supply, but they also want to know that we are taking their concerns surrounding wind power seriously, and they want to know that we are making progress on getting this clean energy supply online.

Would the minister tell the House what he and his ministry are doing in taking their concerns into account—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. Minister?

Hon. Brad Duguid: Let me say first and foremost that absolutely, we take the concerns that are expressed to us very seriously. We know there’s some anxiety, as there often is with new things that come forward, particularly with wind turbines. Our Green Energy Act ensures that environmental safety concerns are being addressed. I know our Minister of the Environment is very much engaged in these issues.

The fact of the matter is, there is no recognized research indicating health effects on people from wind turbines. That being said, we will be constantly monitoring the situation. As I said, I know the minister is very engaged in ensuring that that monitoring takes place. We already have stringent noise regulations in place. We’ve put in place very important setback requirements. But let me tell you what kind of progress we have made.

In 2003, there were just 15 megawatts generated by 10 turbines. Today there are about 700 turbines generating 12,000 megawatts. That’s an 80-fold increase over—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. New question.

CHILDREN’S AID SOCIETIES

Mrs. Joyce Savoline: My question is for the Minister of Community and Social Services. Minister, your recent last-minute announcement for one-time funding to the struggling children’s aid societies across Ontario left most saying the cash injection just wasn’t enough. However, closer to home for me, the Halton Children’s Aid Society is still saying, “Where is ours?”

Mr. John O’Toole: That was hush money.

Mrs. Joyce Savoline: The Halton Children’s Aid Society receives—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The member from Durham will withdraw the comment he just made.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): No, please stand.

Interjection.

Mrs. Joyce Savoline: However, the Halton Children’s Aid Society is still saying, “Where is mine?” The Halton Children’s Aid Society receives less than half the provincial average, some of the lowest per capita funding in the province.

Why hasn’t the Halton Children’s Aid Society received one red cent from this funding announcement?

Hon. Madeleine Meilleur: To the Minister of Children and Youth Services.

Hon. Laurel C. Broten: I’m pleased to have an opportunity to speak to the work that we’ve been doing over the past many months to bring stabilization and stability to children’s aid societies across the province.

As you know, we were able to announce an additional $26.9 million in one-time funding for some CASs to get them on more stable footing, and we did that because we continue to work very closely with all children’s aid societies across the province. In fact, I know that I’ll be speaking to the Halton Children’s Aid Society later this week.

We are continuing to work in partnership with the commission to promote the sustainability of children’s aid societies, to get better outcomes for kids and ultimately, to have a system that will be there in the long term to protect kids and to do the work that is being done every day in communities across the province.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Mrs. Joyce Savoline: Again, there was no answer, Madam Minister. This is short-term money. There is no solution; it’s a band-aid. All that happened here was that children’s aid societies that had even less than Halton were equalized so that all children’s aid societies don’t have enough to do their business.

Your government provided assistance to Halton children’s aid, and then you said to them, “Get the rest on your line of credit.” This does nothing more than to provide that band-aid solution. They originally predicted that they would run out of money in March 2010.

As you know, cost reductions mean cutbacks in services, and in this case, to the most vulnerable children and families in Ontario. The families and children of Halton deserve better. Will you put your money where your mouth is and provide the Halton Children’s Aid Society with the money they deserve to do their work?

Hon. Laurel C. Broten: As the member opposite would know, children’s aid societies over the past number of years have received increases in funding. We continue to work with them to find a mechanism to ensure that children’s aid societies are on stable footing.

Halton’s CAS funding is up 32% since 2003. Halton’s CAS, like all other CASs and the Ontario Association of Children’s Aid Societies, knows that the work we are doing at the present time is to stabilize the system and to get us through to the end of the year so that we continue to have the conversation about the long-term, sustainable approach to children’s aid societies across the province.

The commission is working and travelling across the province. Our ministry works closely with all CASs, including Halton’s CAS, and we continue to ensure that no child will be at risk and that the work will be done in communities across the province. That’s the work that we do every day and continue to do.

PENSION PLANS

Mr. Paul Miller: My question is to the Minister of Finance. A few weeks ago, the minister said he would bring in further pension reform this session. Like the Arthurs report, pensioners have been asking for an increase in the pension benefits guarantee fund to $2,500 a month, and in these difficult economic times all pensioners want security from stranded pension plans being wound up. They want an Ontario pension agency, but there was no mention of further pension reform in this government’s throne speech.

Will there be further pension reform in the spring session and will an increase in the PBGF fund and an Ontario pension agency be included in this package?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: Yes, there will be another piece of legislation. The member opposite is correct. Professor Arthurs, as one of 144 recommendations, recommended increasing the coverage of the PBGF, but he also recommended paying for it. He also said that we have to determine what the costs are and how much that would cost workers and employers. He was very concerned that, in anything we do, number one, we not disincent employers from offering pensions, or number two, disincent employees from contributing to those plans, so it is important that we get this right.

We will continue; as I say, we have a bill before the House now. We will be bringing forward further legislation. We will be talking with all Canadian governments about the need for overall pension reform in Canada to assure our seniors and future seniors that we’ll have a brighter and better future for everyone.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Mr. Paul Miller: I’ve asked the minister repeatedly to fully step up to the plate on the pensions file and bring in reforms that provide pension security for all Ontarians.

The NDP has produced an Ontario retirement plan that would provide workplace pension coverage for the 65% of Ontarians without such pension plans. When will this government introduce an increase in the pension benefits guarantee fund to $2,500 per month for all pension plans and introduce an Ontario pension agency like that which is now operating in Quebec to manage and grow all stranded pensions?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: The member references the NDP proposal, which is one of a number of proposals we’ve seen. I think the member would acknowledge that it would be important to decide how it’s going to be paid for. I think the member and his colleagues would probably agree that we don’t want to inadvertently disincent people from saving for their retirement. That is one option that’s available. It’s the view of this government that we need to canvass, in a very careful fashion, all of the options available.

The second point I would make is, we do believe that it is in all of our interests to have a national or a pan-Canadian response to the circumstance. We want to ensure that we incent both employers and employees to do more to prepare for people’s retirements as we move forward.

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

Mrs. Maria Van Bommel: My question is for the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. In February, I attended the annual meeting of the Lambton county Farm Safety Association in my riding of Lambton–Kent–Middlesex. This local organization reminded the farmers in attendance that each year, an average of 115 people are killed and at least 1,500 are hospitalized for farm-related incidents across Canada.

This past week was Canadian Agricultural Safety Week. Agricultural Safety Week reminds us how important it is to have continued improvement of our farm safety record, year after year.

I understand that the Canadian Agricultural Safety Association launched a new national three-year campaign with the theme “Plan. Farm. Safety.” Minister, what kinds of initiatives are being undertaken by your ministry to raise awareness and promote farm safety here in Ontario?

Hon. Carol Mitchell: Thank you for the question. My ministry has been working with the Farm Safety Association for over 10 years. Our goal is to reduce the occurrence of workplace injuries and illnesses at Ontario farms, horticulture and landscape operations.

Canadian Agricultural Safety Week gives us the opportunity to reflect on work we have done over the years to improve our farm safety record. My ministry is providing the FSA with $120,000 annually. In partnership with OMAFRA, the FSA is working on a number of safety initiatives this year, such as publishing articles on workplace health and safety issues in Ontario Farmer, the farm accident rescue program, and safety days, a summer camp program for over 1,800 Ontario children which focuses on farm safety.

I’m very pleased to report that farm-related incidents have been on the decline over the past—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. Supplementary?

Mrs. Maria Van Bommel: Minister, the warn weather we experienced last week reminds us all that across Ontario, farmers will soon be hard at work in the fields preparing for another season of food production. Agricultural workers play an important role in that production.

A large number of my constituents in Lambton–Kent–Middlesex are farmers and farm workers. They face dangerous hazards on the job each and every day. Unfortunately, many of these risks are associated with this type of work, especially when farmers and farm workers are faced with the pressures of unfavourable weather conditions and time constraints. I’d like to know, Minister, if you can tell us what our government is doing to improve the health and safety of agricultural workers.

Hon. Carol Mitchell: I would ask to refer this to the Minister of Labour.

Hon. Peter Fonseca: First, I would like to thank the member for the question, and I’d like to thank the minister for her continued support of agricultural workers.

In June 2006, my ministry extended the Occupational Health and Safety Act to cover farming operations, and since then, farm workers have shared the same rights as the rest of the province’s workers. Furthermore, farming operations are now fully integrated in the ministry when it comes to the health and safety programs that we offer. My ministry has approximately 100 inspectors who are specially trained in issues specific to agricultural operations, and we’ve doubled the number of farm inspections over the last number of years. All of this has led to stronger protections for our agricultural workers.

My ministry will continue to work closely with the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, as well—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. New question.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Mr. Steve Clark: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for giving me the opportunity to ask my first question as member of provincial Parliament for Leeds–Grenville.

My question is to the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. Minister, a lack of proper funding at the Brockville General Hospital in my riding has meant the elimination of 15 acute care beds and 17 staff positions, including front-line health care workers. My question is: Why would the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care say these cuts were justified?

Hon. Deborah Matthews: Let me start by congratulating the member on his victory and welcoming him to this very special place.

Since we were elected, we’ve made significant investments in health care. We’ve increased hospital funding from almost $11 billion to $15.5 billion; that’s a 42% increase in hospital funding alone since we took office. This year alone, it’s a 4.7% increase to hospitals.

However, hospitals are aware that that rate of funding increase simply will not be able to continue this year. They are working very hard with the LHINs to come up with plans so that they can continue to improve health care as they make sure that every dollar they spend goes to better patient care.

When it comes to Brockville, I’ll be happy to talk about that in the supplementary.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Mr. Steve Clark: At the same time that the cuts were being announced at the Brockville General Hospital, the McGuinty government found $3 million for the Cornwall Community Hospital. The CUPE president at Brockville said, “Our problem is we’re not a Liberal riding.”

During the by-election, the Liberal candidate said that he would have the health minister visit the riding within 100 days of his election. Despite the outcome, will the health minister come to Leeds and Grenville so she can see that funding the Brockville General Hospital is as important as funding Cornwall or Toronto Grace?

Hon. Deborah Matthews: Thank you, and I appreciate the invitation.

I look forward to having the opportunity to talk to the member opposite about some of the improvements that we have made in his area since we were elected. In stark contrast, when his party was elected back in 1995, they cut funding to the hospital by $5 million.

Interjections.

Hon. Deborah Matthews: They can hoot and holler all they want, but I tell you—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Stop the clock. Order.

Minister?

Hon. Deborah Matthews: Those cuts hurt families. They cut almost 10% from the Brockville General Hospital budget.

In addition to increasing funding at the hospital, we’ve invested in community-based care: five family health teams in the riding of Leeds–Grenville are providing care to 40,000 patients, including 6,600 who previously did not have access to primary health care. These are important investments that we’re making—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. New question.

CLIMATE CHANGE

Mr. Peter Tabuns: My question is for the Premier. Premier, when will your government present a climate change plan that meets your promised targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: To the Minister of the Environment.

Hon. John Gerretsen: As this member well knows, we’ve done an awful lot with respect to climate change over the last six years. We’ve got the most ambitious transit plan in the province of Ontario; that’s going to invest $15 billion. We have just passed cap-and-trade legislation that will put limits on the major emitters of greenhouse gases in Ontario.

We have done an awful lot. Much more needs to be done. We want to make sure that greenhouse gas emissions are going to be reduced in the years to come, and our climate change action plan that was introduced a number of years ago is making that happen.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: In fact, the report from the minister himself showed that they’re not meeting their targets, and they don’t have a plan to meet their targets. In fact, after 2014, emissions rise, and they’re going to miss what has to happen by a significant margin.

The question for the Premier is: When will you actually bring in a plan that gives us what you promised you’d give us? Will you keep that promise?

Hon. John Gerretsen: As the member well knows, we are doing something here in Ontario that no other jurisdiction in North America or indeed around the world is doing, and that is, we’re closing our coal-fired energy plants. That is going to get rid of some major greenhouse gas emissions, which is absolutely necessary for us to meet those goals.

Greenhouse gas emissions and climate change in general are the issue of this decade, and the entire world needs to get together in order to get this done. We are doing our

part in a number of different ways in Ontario to actually make it happen. We invite the member and his party to play along with us, work with us and make sure that we actually meet those targets as we go along.

MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT

Mr. David Zimmer: My question is for the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. The province is working with Ontario municipalities in the Golden Horseshoe area to make sure their official plans conform with the growth plan for the greater Golden Horseshoe area. It’s a hugely important exercise. The growth plan conformity exercise will rationalize the use of land, infrastructure and services. It will protect ecosystems and community health and ensure community sustainability. It’s a very detailed and time-consuming process. Minister, what’s the process behind the conformity exercise?

Hon. James J. Bradley: That’s an excellent question from the member for Willowdale. The Places to Grow Act, as he may know, requires municipalities that are located within the greater Golden Horseshoe growth plan area to bring their official plans into conformity. In short, an official plan describes, as I think most of us know, a municipal council’s policies on how land in that community should be used.

A municipality’s official plan is created by the community with input from groups and individuals within that community. This approach ensures that future planning and development will meet the specific needs of each local area. The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing works closely with the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure and other partner ministries to ensure effective implementation of the growth plan policies and municipal plan conformity exercises.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Mr. David Zimmer: A number of municipalities have already gone through the process of conforming to the 2005 provincial policy statement. Recently, you attended the Ontario Good Roads Association and ROMA conference here and said that the province will be reviewing the provincial policy statement.

Minister, how will the municipalities or the other many stakeholders who have a keen interest in this conformity process participate in the review of the provincial statement as well? I think it’s an important issue for people here in Toronto, especially in Willowdale.

Hon. James J. Bradley: The member is correct: I was given the opportunity to announce a five-year review at this year’s Ontario Good Roads Association/ROMA conference. I would like to take this opportunity to thank everyone involved with the organization of the conference and all the municipalities and stakeholders who participated. They have all contributed to the success of the Ontario Good Roads Association/ROMA organization, and I look forward to meeting with them once again next year.

The purpose of the review is to determine whether the provincial policy statement is providing effective policy direction on matters of provincial interest related to land use planning and to determine if changes are needed to those policies.

You may wish to visit my ministry’s website at www.ontario.ca/mah in the near future, as there will be information—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. The time for question period has ended.

There being no deferred votes, this House stands recessed until 1 p.m. this afternoon.

The House recessed from 1145 to 1300.

INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): I’d like to welcome Julia Morton-Marr, Georgina Bencsik and Melinda Rooke, along with members and students from the United Nations Association in Canada–Toronto, and the International Holistic Tourism Education Centre, who are here today, seated in the Speaker’s gallery, to launch their peace and sustainability education initiatives. Welcome, all.

MEMBERS’ STATEMENTS

GOVERNMENT’S RECORD

Mr. Ted Chudleigh: The changing of the seasons:

In the warmth of spring

The world comes to life

Emerging from winter’s

Cold, brutal strife

Adults on patios,

Children on lawns,

Windows, be open!

Winter jackets, be gone!

But this year, it seems,

Something is missing.

Enjoyment replaced

By buzzing and hissing

Cluster flies here,

Ladybugs there.

Fragile gardens

And flowers beware!

Hornets at picnics

Ants in the kitchen

Little ones scratching

And stinging and itching

Wasps at the playground

Grubs in the field

Free to harass us

We carry no shield

And weeds that strangle

Weeds that spread

Once veggies and flowers

Now crabgrass instead.

And who do we thank

For this season gone wild?

Who welcomed the foes

Of gardener and child?

’Twas McGuinty and company

With their pesticide ban

Another decree

Without long-term plan

They ignored the good science

Rode the emotional wave

Told us how to choose

How to live and behave

Time and again,

They forbid and exclude,

Choosing for us our pets,

Our tools and our food.

And with every ban

They lose more and more votes

As more legislation

Is crammed down our throats

They don’t see it now

But this controlling ambition

Will send them across

As the next opposition.

JUNIOR HOCKEY

Mr. Jeff Leal: The residents of Peterborough were very proud during the Olympic gold medal game between Canada and the United States, not just because Canada was playing, but because our community had a direct impact on the game. No less than five players and coaches were products of the Peterborough minor hockey system and the Peterborough Petes organization.

Corey Perry was born in Peterborough and played minor hockey up to Bantam AAA. This talented young man caught the eye of the Londonites and, in 2001, was drafted fifth overall to London, where he played until 2003, when he was drafted by the Mighty Ducks of Anaheim.

Chris Pronger played two seasons in Peterborough with the Petes before being drafted to the Hartford Whalers, and was named to the all-rookie team after playing his first year in the National Hockey League.

Eric Staal, born in Thunder Bay, caught the interest of the Petes organization, and was drafted by them at the age of 16. Under the excellent coaching of Dick Todd, Eric honed his skills, averaging at least a point a game during the 2001-02 season. Eric was drafted by the Carolina Hurricanes, and his NHL career took off.

Jamie Langenbrunner, who played for the United States in the gold medal game, played two seasons with the Peterborough Petes, after being drafted by the Dallas Stars straight out of high school. During those two years, he accumulated 190 points in over 124 games.

On the bench, those watching that game saw another product of the Peterborough hockey system. Steve Yzerman played two seasons for the Petes before being drafted to Detroit, where he played 22 seasons for the Wings.

There wasn’t anyone who watched that gold medal game who wasn’t proud of each and every player who contributed his skills and talents. For those of us watching from Peterborough, it was a very proud moment.

WORLD DOWN SYNDROME DAY

Ms. Sylvia Jones: I rise today to recognize that Sunday, March 21 was World Down Syndrome Day. The third month and the 21st day were chosen to signify the uniqueness of Down syndrome as the tripling of the 21st chromosome.

The annual observance of this day aims to promote awareness and understanding. The goal is also to rally support and recognition of the dignity, rights and well-being of persons with Down syndrome. Worldwide, one in every 733 babies born has Down syndrome.

Canada celebrated World Down Syndrome Day by premiering a documentary called Tying Your Own Shoes, which provides a glimpse into the exceptional mindsets and emotional lives of four adult artists with Down syndrome. The personal stories of Matthew, Katherine, Petra and Daninah are shared in the documentary. They include discussions on families, relationships, workplaces, experiencing loneliness, and their ambitions and desires.

The film is a humorous, heartbreaking and matter-of-fact story about the challenges and rewards of living with Down syndrome. These four individuals also recall some important childhood memories and discuss what it’s like to grow up as a person with Down syndrome.

I want to thank organizations like Community Living Ontario and the Down Syndrome Association of Ontario that have made a difference in our province, dispelling stereotypes, providing accurate information and raising awareness of the potential of individuals with Down syndrome.

MIHIR GHOSH

Mr. Michael Prue: It is with great sadness that I rise today to talk of the death of my friend Mihir Ghosh. He was more than my friend; he was, importantly for our community, an activist who embraced multiculturalism and taught us all to appreciate it.

He planned and organized every East York Day for the last 20 years, and he planned and was present at every swearing-in ceremony for new citizens that we held in our community.

He brought together people of different cultures, religions and languages. He often told the story, when they were present, of his leaving India at a young age to find fame and fortune, travelling first to Germany and later to Toronto. But it was here, he said, of all the places he ever lived, that he found a place that he could call his home.

He was the president of the East York Lions. He recently retired and went back to India to visit relatives and friends. He sent me a postcard, which I received only about 10 days ago. The next day, I received a message—the sad news that he had suddenly passed away.

To his wife, Jharna, and his children David and Anita, we send condolences, but more importantly, the knowledge that he made a profound contribution to the harmony and understanding in our community and to the Canada he so loved.

EDUCATION

Mr. Monte Kwinter: Our government understands that Ontario’s prosperity depends on creating the world’s most highly skilled and well-educated workforce.

We’ve already made a lot of progress improving our public education system. For example, class sizes are down, test scores are up and our graduation rates have increased. Now, our Open Ontario plan will help us take the next steps.

For example, we’re introducing a full-day kindergarten program for four- and five-year-olds, the first of its kind in North America. This program will start our youngest students off on the right path to success.

We’re opening up new opportunities in our colleges and universities. We will increase post-secondary education spaces for an additional 20,000 students this year alone.

We’re also creating a new Ontario online learning institute to give Ontarians an opportunity to learn online from our best professors and teachers. And we’re going to open up Ontario to 50% more foreign students, who will bring new ideas and generate more revenue that can be reinvested in our colleges and universities.

These initiatives will allow more Ontarians to receive the higher education and training they need to succeed in today’s knowledge-based economy.

I am proud to support our government’s Open Ontario plan.

BROCKVILLE MENTAL HEALTH CENTRE

Mr. Steve Clark: Just days after the by-election in Leeds–Grenville, Royal Ottawa Health Care Group CEO and president George Weber was quoted that there is a “clear impasse” hindering possible developments at the Brockville Mental Health Centre. He later said, “We need some political support to break the impasse. I am not giving up.”

The proposed secure treatment centre for women can be created at the Brockville Mental Health Centre site, where 160 staff are now losing jobs due to the closing of the transitional unit. This would save the province money, improve treatment for people who need it and give a job boost to the local economy.

Earlier today, I asked the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care whether she would visit Leeds–Grenville within the next 100 days. I urge her to agree to visit Leeds–Grenville and commit to meeting with the Brockville Mental Health Centre and to support this project.

I also call on the minister to put a moratorium on the bed closures at the Brockville Mental Health Centre so that we can keep those jobs and build on the success and expertise we have on-site.

My riding of Leeds–Grenville has waited months for an answer from the Minister of Health. We’ve also been waiting over seven years for the Premier to make good on his promise for new jobs at that site.

INTERNATIONAL DAY FOR THE ELIMINATION OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION

Ms. Helena Jaczek: For the past eight years the York Regional Police, in partnership with the community, have gathered to commemorate the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination.

March 21 was the day the Sharpeville massacre occurred. In 1960, approximately 7,500 anti-apartheid demonstrators marched peacefully to the police station in Sharpeville, South Africa, to protest a law that required all black Africans and people of colour to carry a passbook to travel within the country. During this rally, police opened fire and killed 69 demonstrators, including 10 children. In 1966, the United Nations declared March 21 a commemorative day, in memory of the Sharpeville massacre.

Collectively, we stand together against racism and all forms of discrimination while we celebrate the vibrant diversity of our communities. On April 11, 2010, the York Regional Police, under the direction of Chief La Barge, will be hosting this year’s celebration at Milliken Mills High School, themed “We Are the World,” with Ashaw Noorhasan from Rogers TV as the master of ceremonies.

I would like to thank some of the participating organizations who will be taking

part in this year’s commemorative day: the Markham African Caribbean Association, Sandgate women’s shelter, the Buddhist Association of Canada, the Federation of Chinese Canadians in Markham, the Council of Agencies Serving South Asians, Fuerza Latina Community Services and COSTI Immigrant Services.

MAX KEEPING

Mr. Yasir Naqvi: What an incredible person I have the honour of paying tribute to today. I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that almost everybody in Ottawa knows Max Keeping well enough to consider him a friend, even if they have never met him.

There’s no doubt that he deserves every bit of this celebrity status in our community, not only for his trusted presence on Ottawa airwaves for the last 45 years or as the mainstay of CJOH News for 38 years, but as the face, voice and champion of charity and good causes in our community, from food banks to the United Way, youth sports programs and scholarships to juvenile diabetes, and of course, the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario, which has named a wing in his honour.

If that doesn’t move you, consider the numbers: Max makes more than 200 personal appearances annually on behalf of charities, service groups, fundraisers and the like—that’s on top of a full-time job.

If that doesn’t do it for you, consider this: By 2004, Max Keeping had helped raise $100 million for good causes in eastern Ontario and western Quebec—$100 million and counting.

Max is a member of the Order of Canada and the Order of Ontario, has an Ontario Medal for Good Citizenship, a Gemini Humanitarian Award, a Canadian Association of Broadcasters Gold Ribbon for outstanding community involvement, the keys to the city of Ottawa, and dozens of other awards and tributes.

As Max Keeping steps away from the news desk this Friday, he will become CJOH’s community ambassador, a fitting role for our community icon.

Max Keeping, best of luck, but most of all, thank you.

NOWRUZ

Mr. Reza Moridi: Spring arrived this year on March 20 at exactly 1:32 p.m. eastern standard time, which also marks Nowruz. Nowruz, which directly translates to “new day,” marks the first day of spring and the beginning of the calendar year in Iran and Afghanistan.

Nowruz is celebrated and observed by over 300 million people around the world. Most notably, it’s celebrated in Iran, Afghanistan, the Republic of Azerbaijan, and other parts of the world, including the Middle East, parts of central Asia, south Asia, northwestern China, the Crimea and some ethnic groups in Albania, Bosnia, Serbia and the Republic of Macedonia.

I am proud to inform my colleagues that Nowruz has now been recognized by the international community. The UN General Assembly, in 2010, recognized March 21 as the International Day of Nowruz, describing it as a spring festival that has been celebrated for over 3,000 years. Nowruz was officially registered on the UNESCO list of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity.

In 2008, this House passed a motion and proclaimed the first day of spring as Nowruz in Ontario, and in 2009, the House of Commons proclaimed the first day of spring as Nowruz in Canada.

May this Nowruz bring prosperity and peace to people around the world, and freedom and democracy to the people of Iran.

Nowruz-etan perooz.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

SEPARATION DISTANCES

FOR NATURAL GAS

POWER PLANTS ACT, 2010 /

LOI DE 2010 SUR L’ÉTABLISSEMENT

DE DISTANCES DE SÉPARATION

POUR LES CENTRALES ÉLECTRIQUES

AU GAZ NATUREL

Mr. Flynn moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 8,

An Act to establish separation distances for natural gas power plants / Projet de loi 8, Loi établissant des distances de séparation pour les centrales électriques au gaz naturel.

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

First reading agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The member for a short statement?

Mr. Kevin Daniel Flynn: I’m pleased to introduce this bill, which would ban the construction of natural gas power plants unless the facility is at least 1,500 metres from any land that is zoned for residential use, or any land on which an educational facility, day nursery or health care facility is located. It creates a defined separation distance between natural gas plants and communities. Ontario, then, will be able to reduce health impacts of power plant emissions such as PM 2.5 , and will minimize the safety concerns associated with locating these facilities near homes and schools.

The bill is designed to make Ontario a leader in safe energy, and I ask all members of the House to support it.

MOTIONS

COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP

Hon. Leona Dombrowsky: I seek unanimous consent to move a motion without notice regarding committee membership changes.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Agreed? Agreed.

Hon. Leona Dombrowsky: I move that the following changes be made to the membership of the following committee: on the Standing Committee on General Government, Mr. Moridi be replaced by Mr. Chiarelli, and Mr. Yakabuski be replaced by Mr. Clark.

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

Motion agreed to.

PETITIONS

TAXATION

Mr. John O’Toole: I’m a bit surprised with petitions here today, but I have one from my riding of Durham, which reads as follows:

“Whereas Premier Dalton McGuinty is increasing taxes yet again with his new 13% combined sales tax, at a time when families and businesses can least afford it;

“Whereas by 2010, Dalton McGuinty’s new tax will increase the cost of goods and services that families and businesses buy” and use “every day. A few examples include: coffee, newspapers and magazines; gas for the car, home heating oil and electricity; haircuts, dry cleaning and personal grooming; home renovations and home services;” health services; “veterinary care and pet care; legal services, the sale of resale homes, and” last and certainly not least, “funeral arrangements;

“Whereas Dalton McGuinty promised he wouldn’t raise taxes in the 2003 election. However, in 2004, he brought in the health tax, which costs upwards of ... $900 per individual. And now he is raising our taxes again;

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

“That the Dalton McGuinty government wake up to Ontario’s current economic reality and stop raising taxes on Ontario’s hard-working families and businesses.”

I’m pleased to sign and support this on behalf of my constituents in the riding of Durham and present it to Alexander, one of the new pages.

CHILD CARE

Mr. Paul Miller: This is a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

“Save Our Child Care! Ontario Faces Dramatic Cuts to Subsidies.

“Whereas, in the 2006 budget, the McGuinty government allocated $63.5 million for child care for each of the next four years. Each year since, $63.5 million went to support our vital child care services;

“Whereas, if the province does not continue this funding in the 2010 provincial budget, municipalities will have no option but to make dramatic cuts to child care subsidies, destabilizing the entire system;

“Therefore,

be it resolved that in the 2010 budget we call on Premier McGuinty and Finance Minister Dwight Duncan to:

“

(1) Ensure the province provides sufficient funding to maintain existing levels of child care service and recognize cost-of-living and other legitimate increases in operating costs; and

“

(2) Provide all necessary tools to support the transition to an early learning program, including base funding for child care programs to support operations and wages comparable to the full-day learning program, in order to ensure the child care system remains stable and sustainable.”

I agree with this petition and will affix my name, and Ben will bring it down.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Mr. Bob Delaney: I have a petition addressed to the Ontario Legislative Assembly, sent to me courtesy of Dr. Nguyen from Eglinton Avenue in Mississauga. I especially want to thank those people from Oakville, Mississauga, Toronto and as far away as Tweed who have signed it, noting particularly Robert France and Constance Ferrell, both of Mississauga.

It reads as follows:

“Whereas wait times for access to surgical procedures in the western GTA served by the Mississauga Halton LHIN are growing despite the ongoing capital project activity at the hospitals within the Mississauga Halton LHIN boundaries; and

“Whereas ‘day surgery’ procedures could better be performed in an off-site facility. An ambulatory surgery centre would greatly increase the ability of surgeons to perform more procedures, reduce wait times for patients and free up operating theatre space in hospitals for more complex procedures that may require post-operative intensive care unit support and a longer length of stay in hospital;

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

“That the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care allocate funds in its 2009-10 capital budget to begin planning and construction of an ambulatory surgery centre located in western Mississauga to serve the Mississauga-Halton area and enable greater access to ‘day surgery’ procedures that comprise about four fifths of all surgical procedures performed.”

I’m very pleased to sign and support this petition and to ask page Snigdha to carry it for me on her first week in the Legislature.

POWER PLANT

Mr. Ted Chudleigh: I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

“Whereas the province of Ontario, through the Ontario Energy Board, has selected a location for a gas-fired electrical generating power station within three kilometres of 16 schools and more than 11,000 homes; and

“Whereas the Oakville-Clarkson airshed is already one of the most polluted in Canada; and

“Whereas no independent environmental assessment has been completed for this proposed building location; and

“Whereas Ontario has experienced a significant reduction in demand for electrical power; and

“Whereas a recent accident at a power plant in Connecticut demonstrated the dangers that nearby residents face;

“We, the undersigned, petition the government of Ontario to immediately rescind the existing plan to build a power plant at or near the current planned location on ... Royal Windsor Drive in Oakville and initiate a complete review of area power needs and potential building sites, including environmental assessments and a realistic assessment of required danger zone buffer areas.”

I’m pleased to sign this petition and pass it to my page, Leah. I want to just mention that there are thousands and thousands of signatures on this petition.

CHILD CARE

Mr. Robert Bailey: This petition is addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

“Save Our Child Care! Ontario Faces Dramatic Cuts to Subsidies.

“Whereas, in the 2006 budget, the McGuinty government allocated $63.5 million for child care for each of the next four years. Each year since, $63.5 million went to support our vital child care services;

“Whereas, if the province does not continue this funding in the 2010 provincial budget, municipalities will have no option but to make dramatic cuts to child care subsidies, destabilizing the entire system;

“Therefore,

be it resolved that in the 2010 budget we call on Premier McGuinty and Finance Minister Dwight Duncan to:

“

(1) Ensure the province provides sufficient funding to maintain existing levels of child care service and recognize cost-of-living and other legitimate increases in operating costs; and

“

(2) Provide all necessary tools to support the transition to an early learning program, including base funding for child care programs to support operations and wages comparable to the full-day learning program, in order to ensure that the child care system remains stable and sustainable.”

I’ll send that down with Diana.

CHILD CUSTODY

Mr. Bob Delaney: I’m pleased, on behalf of my seatmate, the member for Niagara Falls, to present this petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, thanking Olga Alexander of Ottawa for having sent it:

“We, the people of Ontario, deserve and have the right to request an amendment to the Children’s Law Reform Act to emphasize the importance of children’s relationships with their parents and grandparents, as requested in Bill 33, put forward by MPP Kim Craitor.

“Whereas subsection 20(2.1) requires parents and others with custody of children to refrain from unreasonably placing obstacles to personal relations between the children and their grandparents....”

It contains a number of other specific subsections of the bill and concludes, “We, the undersigned, hereby petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to amend the Children’s Law Reform Act to emphasize the importance of children’s relationships with their parents and grandparents.”

On behalf of my seatmate from Niagara Falls, I’m pleased to sign this petition and to ask page Eric to carry it for me.

TAXATION

Mr. Ernie Hardeman: I have a petition here signed by a number of people in my great riding of Oxford, and it is to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas residents of Oxford do not want Dalton McGuinty’s new sales tax, which will raise the cost of goods and services they use every day; and

“Whereas the McGuinty Liberals’ new sales tax of 13% will cause everyone to pay more for gasoline for their cars, heat, telephone, cable and Internet services for their homes, and will be applied to home sales over $500,000; and

“Whereas the McGuinty Liberals’ new sales tax of 13% will cause everyone to pay more for meals under $4, haircuts, funeral services, gym memberships, newspapers, and lawyer and accountant fees; and

“Whereas the McGuinty Liberals’ new sales tax grab will affect everyone in the province: seniors, students, families, farmers and low-income Ontarians;

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

“That the McGuinty Liberal government not increase taxes for Ontario families.”

I affix my signature, as I agree with this petition wholeheartedly.

TAXATION

Mr. John O’Toole: I’m pleased to rise and read a petition on behalf of my constituents in the riding of Durham. It reads as follows:

“Whereas residents in the riding of Durham do not want Dalton McGuinty’s new sales tax, which will raise the cost of goods and services they use every day; and

“Whereas the McGuinty Liberals’ new sales tax of 13% will cause everyone to pay more for gasoline for their cars, heat, telephone, cable and Internet services for their homes, and will be applied to home sales over $500,000”—in fact, it actually applies to ones under $500,000;

“Whereas the McGuinty Liberals’ new sales tax of 13% will cause everyone to pay more for meals under $4, haircuts, funeral services, gym memberships, newspapers, and lawyer and accountant fees; and

“Whereas the McGuinty Liberals’ new sales tax grab will affect everyone in the province: seniors, students, families, farmers and low-income Ontarians;

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

“That the McGuinty Liberal government not increase taxes for Ontario families.”

I’m pleased to sign and support this and present it to Ben, one of the new pages.

TAXATION

Mr. Robert Bailey: This is a petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas residents of Oxford do not want Dalton McGuinty’s new sales tax, which will raise the cost of goods and services they use every day; and

“Whereas the McGuinty Liberals’ new sales tax of 13% will cause everyone to pay more for gasoline for their cars, heat, telephone, cable and Internet services for their homes, and will be applied to home sales over $500,000; and

“Whereas the McGuinty Liberals’ new sales tax of 13% will cause everyone to pay more for meals under $4, haircuts, funeral services, gym memberships, newspapers, and lawyer and accountant fees; and

“Whereas the McGuinty Liberals’ new sales tax grab will affect everyone in the province: seniors, students, families, farmers and low-income Ontarians;

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

“That the McGuinty Liberal government not increase taxes for Ontario families.”

I agree with that petition and will affix my signature.

TAXATION

Mr. Jerry J. Ouellette: A petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas Dalton McGuinty said he wouldn’t raise taxes in the 2003 election, but in 2004 he brought in the health tax, the biggest tax hike in Ontario’s history; and

“Whereas Dalton McGuinty will increase taxes yet again with his new 13% combined sales tax, at a time when families and businesses can least afford it; and

“Whereas Dalton McGuinty’s new 13% sales tax will increase the cost of goods and services that families and businesses buy every day, such as: arena ice, soccer and baseball field rentals ... gas at the pumps ... home heating oil and electricity; gym fees; golf green fees; ski lift tickets; movie, theatre and ... admission fees; Internet services; cellphone bills; boat rentals, fishing licences, charters and wood for the campfire; home renovations; and real estate transactions;

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

“That the Dalton McGuinty government wake up to Ontario’s current economic reality and stop raising taxes, once and for all, on Ontario’s hard-working families and businesses.”

I affix my name in full support.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

THRONE SPEECH DEBATE

Resuming the debate adjourned on March 11, 2010, on the motion for an address in reply to the speech of His Honour the Lieutenant Governor at the opening of the session.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Further debate?

Mr. Paul Miller: In reference to the throne speech, this government’s throne speech vision is so rooted in giving up control of Ontario’s economy to large outside interests that it should be called “sale-a-vision.”

For example, why sign on to the Harper government’s buy-American deal when it will tie the hands of the provincial government and municipalities from using local tax dollars to create local jobs? Why forbid OPG to be the leader in renewable energy and then invite foreign giants like Samsung and the American giant NextEra Energy into this province? Why privatize Ontario’s crown jewel corporations when it is existing provincial policy that is preventing the crown corporations from using their expertise and resources to create jobs in Ontario?

If taken to the extreme, crown asset privatization would worsen future deficits by removing the more than $4 billion of annual revenues that crown corporations currently contribute to the provincial treasury. In exchange, as privatized enterprises, they would pay $400 million in provincial corporate income tax and $600 million in federal corporate income tax, leaving $3 billion of after-tax profits for the private owners.

Ontario taxpayer money should be used to create jobs for Ontarians, processing our resources right here in Ontario. Ontario needs a comprehensive program that would ensure that, whenever it is economically feasible, provincial and municipal procurement projects give preference to Ontario- and Canadian-made products and projects. We also need a policy that insists that, whenever feasible, Ontario resources are processed here in Ontario.

An effective “local tax dollars for local jobs” program would allow smaller and mid-sized Ontario companies to achieve the scale they need to export and successfully compete in global markets, creating good-paying jobs for Ontarians. It is crucial that any “local tax dollars for local jobs” program be cost-effective and not be a burden to the taxpayer. Therefore, the price premium for Ontario-made goods would be limited to 10% above non-Canadian products and 5% for Canadian-made goods manufactured outside of Ontario.

The harmonized sales tax, corporate tax cuts and tax giveaways to profitable banks will not—I repeat, will not—create jobs. High-wage, good-quality jobs can be created by carefully targeting financial incentives towards quality investments in plant and machinery, computer technology, new employment and skills training. New Democrats believe in creating a pro-investment tax regime, a tax regime that directly rewards job-creating investments in plant, machinery, information technology and workplace skills.

The government’s harmonized sales tax inputs will cost the treasury $4.5 billion annually, and its corporate income tax reduction will cost the treasury $2.4 billion annually. The NDP simply doesn’t believe that these tax cuts are the best possible use of nearly $7 billion per year. A more targeted use of nearly $7 billion—in fact, far less money—would create many more jobs. In particular, the creative and timely use of tax dollars for new investment and new hiring in Ontario, as is done in Quebec, Manitoba and other provinces, is a far more effective way of creating jobs.

Additionally, Ontario must create more value-added jobs in the forestry and mining sectors. A value-added strategy in forestry would mean more jobs making hardwood flooring and doors, engineered wood products, cabinets and furniture, and less unprocessed lumber being shipped out of our province. Whenever possible, the processing of Ontario resources, particularly wood and steel, should be done in Ontario, not in outside jurisdictions.

Another issue very close to my heart: There was no mention of any government plan to expand pensions to the roughly 65% of Ontarians who presently have no workplace-based pension coverage in this province. The Harper federal budget made it clear that the federal government is not going to move to expand pension coverage. Therefore, we believe there is an important role to be played at the provincial level in greatly expanding workplace pension coverage.

The NDP believes that Ontario should move ahead with other provinces and develop a workplace-based pension plan for all working Ontarians who presently lack occupational coverage. The NDP has proposed such a plan, the Ontario retirement plan. Under our plan, every employee not enrolled in a workplace pension plan would be automatically enrolled in the ORP. But the plan is not mandatory; if you have a better way to plan for your retirement, you don’t have to take

part in the Ontario retirement plan.

The throne speech also made many health care promises, such as continued drug reforms, legislation to make health care providers and executives accountable for improving patient care, funding that will follow the patient and greater choice in where to access their treatment, the creation of an independent expert advisory body to provide recommendations on clinical practice guidelines, and a review of the Public Hospitals Act to include expertise of community partners and health care professionals. But the changes the government speaks of could be profound and have a devastating impact on patients.

Ontarians are concerned that their community care is threatened. There is no justification for the government’s secretive approach to health care reform. If they have a good idea, why won’t they share it with Ontarians, with the experts in the field and with the opposition? What are they afraid of?

New Democrats have substantial concerns about the shift in hospital funding. We are gravely—I repeat, gravely—concerned that this government is choosing to further pursue a failed model of competitive bidding and private care, just like they did in home care and just like they have done with our P3 hospitals, which have delivered less for more public money. Ontarians need the highest quality of patient care that is available to families close to home. What will these changes mean to our families?

Drug reform is likely related to generic drug reform. Previously, Ontario capped the rebate that pharmacies could receive from drug manufacturers, as well as capping the price for generics. Currently, the price point for generic drugs is capped at 50%. The government is likely looking at lowering this cap to 25%. The government is likely looking at lowering this cap another 10% in future months. This is a contentious issue that has infuriated the pharmacy industry, broadly speaking. In general, these reforms are positive. They lower costs and do not directly impact patient care.

However, the decrease in pharmacists’ fees will likely have a negative impact, especially on smaller and independent pharmacies.

We really have no clue what improving provider and executive accountability may be about. The government must explain what they mean by this statement. If it is Ombudsman oversight, we applaud this move. New Democrats have repeatedly called for this fundamental shift toward transparency and accountability. A more likely scenario would signal a move toward linking health care provider and executive pay to patient care and outcomes. There have been rumours of executive bonuses tied to patient outcomes—a scary thought, Speaker.

The NDP believes in care based on quality and not profit. As we all know, the devil is in the details. The government must come out with its plan for health care provider and executive accountability sooner than later. We are gravely concerned about these issues and the possibility that we are shifting toward a competitive model of health care. Heaven help us if we go that way.

The government has not yet released the details of its new hospital funding model, and is not expected to until the March 25 budget. What we know, so far, is that it will be related to the health-based allocation model, HBAM, launched in 2007 with the creation of the LHINs.

HBAM was supposed to take into account the health needs of a region. However, the HBAM has always been a sorely inadequate tool that measures current use and not the true need of the population, i.e. it is terrible at taking health equity issues into account and tends to reproduce the existing issues with the health care system. It appears there will be greater pay for procedure-based funding, like the wait times strategy, and financial incentives to better-performing hospitals—I’m not quite sure how that’s going to work. We would hope that they would be uniform throughout the province and they’d all provide the same care, not care based on funding.

New Democrats do not know the full plan for this new hospital funding system, because the government has been rolling it out in pieces rather than sharing its plan with stakeholders and the opposition. Ontarians do not know what is in store for them or their hospitals. This is an inexcusable way to launch a new model of hospital funding. What about transparency and consultation with the public? Where is it? I don’t see a lot of it. We have grave concerns about this plan.

HBAM has proved to be a useless tool for Ontario’s health care system. It does not take health equity into account, and it reproduces the problems we currently have with our health care system in terms of both under- and over-utilization of hospital services.

Procedure-based funding compartmentalizes the needs and health care issues of Ontarians. It has created a bottleneck of services in our hospitals. We want excellent patient-based care, but we need to understand the system as a whole and not just pick out the procedures and health care facilities that will garner the most support.

This system will have a devastating impact on smaller and rural hospitals, the very ones that have been hurt by the already occurring cuts, i.e. Fort Erie, Port Colborne, Burk’s Falls. We do not want a health care system that picks winners and losers. We need consistent policy and planning.

New Democrats have long supported research and clinical guidelines, and perhaps the independent expert advisory panel is expected to do that. Again, this aspect is very short on details.

We all must ask: Is this just a smokescreen for introducing a series of competitive mechanisms into our system, or is this actually a move toward higher-quality care? Good question.

We need to know how any new system of clinical guidelines will fit within the existing framework. What about the existing avenues for expert advice such as the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences? This has been in existence since 1992 and is the body responsible for clinical guidelines. Why the change? What will this mean for Ontario?

New Democrats have proposed changes to the Public Hospitals Act dozens of times in the last number of years. Every time, this was rejected. So a review of the Public Hospitals Act is an interesting concept that’s being brought forward. This is a vital move if we’re going to take on some of the issues occurring in our hospitals. However, again, we need to see the details of this and ensure the government is actually serious about tackling these issues head-on.

Will the government finally go far enough and recognize the contributions of all health professionals and community health partners? Stakeholders such as the RNAO, ONA, Ontario midwives etc. have long asked for changes to hospital advisory committees. They have told this government time and time again that if Ontario wants to get serious about full collaboration in our hospitals, the full spectrum of health care providers must be represented on these advisory committees. There can’t be hand-picked people on these boards. They have to involve all the people who work in hospitals: staff, doctors, scientists, researchers—everyone.

Will the government clarify what they will be reviewing in the PHA? We’ll be looking forward to that and looking to see what they do about it. Or will this be just a quick move to ram through whatever hospital funding changes they are pursuing instead of dealing with the underlying issues? I hope not.

Poverty reduction was central to the 2007 Liberal platform. They talked about reducing poverty in our province. The 2007 throne speech stressed opportunity for all, saying that opportunity “does not mean more prosperity for some and more poverty for others.” There’s a little bit of a turnaround, I’d say, on that little promise. Three years later, more and more Ontarians are losing their jobs and falling into poverty or are a paycheque away from living in poverty. Ontarians, more and more, are turning to food banks in record numbers. The waiting list for affordable housing has hit record numbers. The waiting list for regulated child care is now longer than it ever was.

We are facing higher student tuitions and higher student debt than ever before. Schools are forced to fundraise for basic supplies for elementary classes more than ever before. And what about the schools that can’t afford it? What about the areas where the economy is dead and they haven’t got enough to help the schools? What do those people do? They don’t live in rich areas.

The volunteers for their support for poverty reduction: We’d like to thank the volunteers for their support.

To pretend that full-day learning, on its own, will magically lift children out of poverty is ridiculous. To pass the buck to the federal government on child care—where is the provincial government’s action?

There’s nothing on child care, nothing on affordable housing, nothing on minimum wage, nothing on income security, nothing on increases to child benefits or to social assistance. Nothing, nothing, nothing.

Clearly, the McGuinty Liberals’ legacy is not going to be a bright one. According to a Toronto Star editorial, a particularly disappointing note is the absence of a progressive agenda to help Ontario’s most vulnerable.

Far more must be done, including increasing access to affordable housing and daycare. The government’s virtual silence on these issues suggests that increased investment is unlikely in the upcoming budget. If so, it’s short-sighted. Poverty reduction was simply left off the table in the 2010 throne speech. That is unacceptable.

The government still has a year and a half left in its mandate, and its mandate clearly included a commitment to reduce poverty. Without a comprehensive set of measures, poverty won’t be reduced. It’s increasing day by day. It is irresponsible for the government to abandon its election promise to reduce poverty.

Our solution? Ensure fair wages for all Ontarians; increase the minimum wage to $11 an hour and index it to inflation; invest in stronger employment standards; ensure that all Ontarians have the education and basic resources to participate in the new economy; freeze tuitions; ensure access to affordable housing; invest in good-quality affordable child care, starting with an investment of $63 million to save the 7,600 child care spaces threatened with closure; and create more equitable, safe and inclusive communities by ensuring strong and supportive social assistance programs rather than the current punitive approach that locks up families in cycles of poverty.

Our world faces unprecedented economic, environmental and social changes ahead. We must transition to a new clean, local production economy. This will help our province, the country and the world move more efficiently. Ontario must be a leader and builder of solar panels and wind turbines, but the McGuinty Liberals’ real commitment to the environment and to building a strong and green economy was sadly lacking in this throne speech.

Reiterating its promise to close coal plants means nothing on the same day as it revealed that the government paid OPG over $400 million in 2009 to keep these plants open. I think you’re kind of talking out of both sides of your mouth.

On climate change, the McGuinty government is missing its targets for greenhouse gas reduction, but there’s no plan in the throne speech to address this shortfall. Neither is there an expansion of energy conservation or targets for green energy. The government’s vague promise to promote the export of clean water technology rings false when it has done such a poor job in providing clean water to the First Nation communities in our own province or significantly protecting vulnerable bodies of water like Lake Ontario and the dumpsite 41 aquifer, another example. More handouts to profitable multinationals like General Electric and DuPont, with no strings attached, will not create green jobs now.

The government’s willingness to allow unbridled staking of boreal forest land as a part of the Ring of Fire mining initiative also undermines confidence in the McGuinty government’s commitment to protect one of the last intact original forests on our planet.

The government has allowed mining companies to stake 8,000 mining claims covering an area six times the size of the Athabasca oil sands. They should be ashamed of themselves. The McGuinty Liberals have allowed construction of a 2,000-metre airstrip and is planning for a 350-kilometre railway without consultation with the First Nation communities. The government has repeatedly promised to build a new relationship with the First Nation communities based on consultation and inclusion. I guess what they’re doing doesn’t quite cut it, does it?

But the process of the Ring of Fire shows that the government is not truly committed to protecting our northern environment. It’s not committed to building a new relationship with our First Nations, and it’s not committed to building a green economy in the north. Some 8,000 mining claims in the Ring of Fire area, but still no land planning process or First Nations consultation: unacceptable. They show no money or commitment to an inclusive land planning process. The government is creating unnecessary conflict between First Nations and mining companies and is polluting the environment for decades to come.

The McGuinty government must ensure that the First Nations are fully consulted on anything in the Ring of Fire and consent to all mining activities in their homelands before mining activities can continue, and adequately fund a land planning process with First Nations as lead decision-makers before proceeding any further.

Instead of giving corporate handouts for unproven technology, the government should make environmentalism affordable for struggling Ontarians, invest in proven job-intensive and green sectors, and create jobs now by making green choices affordable today.

I could go on for quite a while, but I’m going to end it. My time is almost expired.

The throne speech should have set up a strong plan to grow our economy, create jobs and employ those who lost theirs during this recession, and ensure the environmental sustainability of our province. They didn’t do that. All this did was to leave many Ontarians fearing the worst: more foreign ownership of our valuable Canadian- and Ontario-owned industries and resources, and a failure to provide a decent living for our vulnerable disabled community. This will continue until this government and the government in Ottawa get a handle on our base industries and start putting more industries back into Canadian hands.

If all your base industries and your forestry and mining are foreign-owned, you don’t have control over your own economy.

That’s where we’ve missed the boat. These two governments continue to sell us down the river, and that’s why all those Ontarians are out of work. Until they stop that and start putting Canadian content into our lives and into our future—then we’ll be all right.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Cheri DiNovo): Questions and comments.

Mr. Bob Delaney: Open Ontario is the theme of the speech from the throne. The member from Hamilton East–Stoney Creek must be one of a slender few in this province to lack faith in the ability of Ontario entrepreneurs and Ontario workers to meet the demands of our province’s customers here at home and abroad. Our province and its hard-working people just don’t share this member’s pessimistic outlook.

The raw material of the present and the future rests on the shoulders of the eight million or so working people in Ontario. That’s why graduation rates are up across the province. Ontario is now reaping the rewards of seven years of investment in primary, secondary and post-secondary education.

Open Ontario means that young people studying ways of building value from this province’s natural resources can set up and run those businesses right here in Ontario: not in Europe, not in the United States and not in South Asia.

Ontario’s tax reforms and aggressive tax reductions for individuals, families and businesses will, as of mid-year, give this province a sustainable competitive advantage all across North America. There is no better place in North America to start a business, to relocate a business or to run a business than the province of Ontario. There is now no better place in North America to create a job or to have a job.

That’s why independent studies have concluded that with this broad-based strategy of which this throne speech is a part, Ontario will see a net new 591,000 jobs, an estimated $47 billion of new investment, and a rise in real incomes of about 8.8%.

Those are the cornerstones of sustainable progress. That’s why Ontario’s speech from the throne is a building block toward a bright and prosperous future.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Cheri DiNovo): Questions and comments?

Mr. John O’Toole: I always listen closely and attentively to the member from Hamilton East. He brings the real working person’s point of view to it because he knows of what he speaks, coming from Hamilton.

I can only tell you this: There was nothing of any substance about jobs—a lot of promises. Up to a million jobs were promised, but what’s the record? They’ve lost almost 150,000 jobs.

I look at my riding as another example. There was no mention of anything that was progressive.

I think they’re trying to hide behind the HST. The member who replied on behalf of the Liberals with the prepared speech they gave him—I’m surprised they don’t realize that the economy of Ontario is in serious trouble.

There was nothing in this throne speech on deficit reduction. There was a token-ness to come out of reform in the pension issues that are before us. There was nothing for Durham with respect to the new-build nuclear or the 407 east expansion to be completed, nothing on the GO extension east—nothing for one of the regions of this province, with 600,000 people and growing, to improve the infrastructure.

I’m surprised that the member from the Liberal side didn’t listen more closely to the Hamilton East argument that my good friend put forward. I can only say to you that he was speaking about jobs and the economy. There was nothing in the throne speech. There was this new—what they called “Sell Ontario,” or “Do business with Samsung.” “Buy Korea” was their new policy that they announced.

You’ve got to listen closely when the government members on that side are talking. Question it seriously. They promised they wouldn’t raise taxes; then they raised them. This HST is another tax increase, and now we find out there’s a new energy charge.

They could collect all the money in the world, but ask yourself: How are things working in the province of Ontario? Not very well.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Cheri DiNovo): Questions and comments?

Hon. Monique M. Smith: I’m pleased to have the opportunity to respond to the member for Hamilton and the member for Durham.

For the member for Durham, I’d just like to remind him that the budget is going to be read by the finance minister in this very House—not Magna, not anywhere else that you may have preferred, but actually in the House on Thursday at 4 o’clock, and you will see set out before you the financial plan that we have for the province.

I think that our Open Ontario plan is incredibly progressive and provides some great opportunities. We’re talking about a new Water Opportunities Act to take advantage of our province’s expertise in clean water technology. I know I’ve had calls in my constituency office already asking me about the Water Opportunities Act and what we’re going to be doing and how we in northern Ontario can take advantage of it.

The 20,000 more student spaces in colleges and universities are very exciting for colleges and universities in my riding, Nipissing and Canadore. I was there on Thursday, celebrating a wonderful investment by Seymour Schulich in our faculty of education. Everyone was talking about the fact that we’re going to be expanding our colleges and universities. They’re very excited about seeing more foreign students brought in and more opportunities for Ontario students.

The member also spoke about the Ring of Fire. As a northern member, I have to say that it’s an incredibly exciting opportunity. We look forward to working with our First Nations communities and our northern communities and developing what could be the richest find of chromite in the world, a great opportunity for so many in the north, for industry, for technology and for our learning institutions as we train those who will go forward and work in this great initiative.

It is an exciting opportunity that we see on the horizon, unlike the previous government that sold off the north, that put the ONTC up for sale and really didn’t pay any attention to anything north of Barrie for however many years that you were in power—a long, bad time for the north.

We are very excited about the opportunities that we face in the north, and we are excited to take advantage of those opportunities.

As I said, the folks at Nipissing and Canadore are very excited about what they heard in the Open Ontario plan last week.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Cheri DiNovo): Questions and comments?

Mr. Jim Brownell: I’m pleased to have a couple of minutes this afternoon to respond to comments made by the member from Hamilton East and to add to this debate.

I certainly know that the Open Ontario plan that we have developed is optimistic, and I take an optimistic view with regard to how this will set Ontario for the future and certainly during the next five years, unlike the pessimism that I saw and heard across the way.

I’d like to just make comments about the opportunities for expansion of businesses in Ontario. I look at the opportunities that there will be from implementing a new Water Opportunities Act. In eastern Ontario we have a business that during the past five, six years has expanded tremendously: the Thompson Rosemount Group, for example, in water resources. I just look at the opportunities that they’ve had in the past five, six years and the opportunities that this will give to that business in the future, that business and others who have expertise in that field.

I also want to say that I’m very pleased with regard to the opportunities that there will be here for higher education. As a retired educator, I’m always seeking opportunities to express that. I think it’s wonderful that this will create 20,000 new opportunities, but it will also give St. Lawrence College in Cornwall, with its adjacent St. Lawrence River Institute of Environmental Sciences, that opportunity to look at the water situation in Ontario and the expertise that we have in those fields to cause that to be all part of the new Water Opportunities Act.

I just think that we are set and we’re at the stage that we will see tremendous development in this in the future. That’s the optimistic view that I take with regard to the throne speech.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Cheri DiNovo): The member from Hamilton East–Stoney Creek has up to two minutes to respond.

Mr. Paul Miller: I’d like to thank the member from Durham for his kind words, and he, too, is well aware of what’s going on in his community. The member from Mississauga–Streetsville, the member from Stormont–Dundas and the House leader: I would invite them to come to the city of Hamilton and talk to the 15,000 to 20,000 people in my city who have lost their jobs in the last 15 years. Our most recent victim is another big outfit—Siemens—leaving Hamilton and heading south to North Carolina because of incentives.

You can talk about clean water up north. You can talk about your Ring of Fire. You can talk about those things, but come to Hamilton if you want to see what’s really going on.

Interjection.

Mr. Paul Miller: You’ve been there. Well, you obviously didn’t keep your eyes open, because most of my city is unemployed. All the jobs have left. For an hour, I could go through a list of major companies that have left Hamilton. Because they’re foreign-owned, when there’s a recession or a depression in our province, the