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

April 10, 2007

38th Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2007-Apr-10 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Tuesday 10 April 2007 Mardi 10 avril 2007

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

KARYNE MAISONNEUVE

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

UKRAINIAN CANADIAN SOCIAL SERVICES

RICK SHAVER

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

ARTHUR CURRIE

DIABETES

HYDRO ONE

VISITORS

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

GREAT LAKES SHORELINE RIGHT OF PASSAGE ACT, 2007 /

LOI DE 2007 SUR LE DROIT DE PASSAGE SUR LE LITTORAL DES GRANDS LACS

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

ABORIGINAL EDUCATION /

ÉDUCATION AUTOCHTONE

DEFERRED VOTES

2007 ONTARIO BUDGET

ORAL QUESTIONS

CONVENIENCE STORES

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

NUCLEAR ENERGY

UNPARLIAMENTARY LANGUAGE

AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

EDUCATION FUNDING

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

MANUFACTURING JOBS

GOVERNMENT CONSULTANTS

PETITIONS

LONG-TERM CARE

REGULATION OF ZOOS

GRAVESITES OF FORMER PREMIERS

LABORATORY SERVICES

SHORELINE RIGHT OF PASSAGE

MACULAR DEGENERATION

PHYSICAL EDUCATION

SCHOOL FACILITIES

MACULAR DEGENERATION

LABORATORY SERVICES

PHYSICAL EDUCATION

HERITAGE CONSERVATION

PHYSICAL EDUCATION

ORDERS OF THE DAY

BUDGET MEASURES AND INTERIM

APPROPRIATION ACT, 2007 /

LOI DE 2007 SUR LES MESURES

BUDGÉTAIRES ET L'AFFECTATION

ANTICIPÉE DE CRÉDITS

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound–Muskoka): When will the Lottogate blame game end? The Premier and the minister responsible for the integrity of Ontario's lottery games steadfastly refuse to accept any responsibility.

The first move of the OLG in addressing the evidence of insider fraud was to try to blame the CBC. Within days of The Fifth Estate story on Bob Edmonds being broadcast, four individuals with direct ties to the Premier were busily crafting a communications plan to discredit the report by hiring a statistical analyst to refute the numbers. Jim Warren, fresh from the Premier's office, long-time McGuinty advisers Bob Lopinski and Warren Kinsella, and of course Liberal campaign chair Don Guy were involved in the damage control.

The people of Ontario didn't buy their communication strategy, so the next move in the Liberal blame game was to get rid of Ontario Lottery and Gaming's CEO Duncan Brown and hope that offering him up as a scapegoat before the release of the Ombudsman's report would relieve the McGuinty government of its responsibility. No dice, as a gambling person might say. The headlines and breakfast table talk of average Ontarians still demonstrate that this province is not in the mood to be fooled again by the McGuinty team.

So in a desperately low attempt to change the channel, the Premier personally lashes out at the 140,000 employees of convenience stores across Ontario, saying they just can't be trusted. Will the Premier finally admit that it is his government that holds ultimate responsibility for its own failures? Will he, today, finally deliver the apology to all retailers and convenience store workers, who deserve it?

KARYNE MAISONNEUVE

M. Phil McNeely (Ottawa—Orléans): Récemment, j'ai entendu parler d'un projet formidable commencé par une famille qui habite dans ma circonscription d'Ottawa—Orléans. Le but est d'introduire une source d'énergie renouvelable pour une école secondaire à Orléans. Le projet est inspiré par une petite fille très courageuse qui s'appelle Karyne Maisonneuve.

Two and a half years ago, Karyne was diagnosed with cancer. Her family says she never lost her smile or her love of life as she courageously endured various treatments and numerous operations. But the efforts to save Karyne's life did not succeed. She died in her mother's arms in June 2006.

Karyne's family came to believe that her cancer was partly caused by pollution and other environmental concerns. Having reached that conclusion, the Maisonneuves decided to turn the tragic loss of their beloved daughter and sister into a project that will benefit the environment.

Marc, Paul et Élyse, les frères et la sœur de Karyne, sont étudiants à l'école secondaire Gisèle-Lalonde à Orléans. Avec l'aide des professeurs et des étudiants à l'école Gisèle-Lalonde, la famille Maisonneuve s'est fixé comme objectif de faire installer cette année un système de panneaux solaires et une éolienne sur le toit de l'école.

The initiative is known as Project Karyne and is currently searching for sponsors and partners to raise the necessary $40,000 to $50,000 to complete this environmentally friendly project.

Je voudrais féliciter la famille Maisonneuve, ainsi que les élèves et les professeurs à l'école Gisèle-Lalonde, pour leur courage et leur détermination en développant un tel projet au nom de Karyne.

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): The convenience store owners deserve respect for the hard work and long hours they contribute to the economy of Ontario. Instead, the Premier heaps scorn on these people by blaming them for his government's Lottogate scandal.

Jean-Luc Meunier, vice-president, central Canada, for Mac's Convenience Stores Inc., notes the obvious irony of the Premier's damning retailers for the failures of his government's own program and rightly points out that the issue is not their competence or their morality. He's too polite to say what I've been hearing from retailers in my riding, but they go much further and ask what right the Premier has to accuse them of failing in their responsibilities when the Premier's only concern has been protecting his incompetent minister responsible for the mess by focusing on a communications strategy rather than taking real action to fix the problem.

All of these store owners are disappointed by Dalton McGuinty's remarks that they can't be trusted, according to Dave Bryans, the president of the Ontario Convenience Stores Association. He expressed the hope that the Premier will reconsider his comments and give convenience store operators an apology. Elaine Abbas, who with her husband has owned and operated their store for almost 27 years, paid all their taxes, purchased various licences and complied to the letter of the law in all areas, all the while raising three children and working 14 hours a day, seven days a week, is insulted. She writes, "While Mr.

McGuinty may question our integrity, our customers know us." She is absolutely correct. And now, with his stubborn refusal to offer his overdue apology to Ontario's 10,000 convenience store operators and 140,000 employees, all the people of Ontario know how the Premier lacks integrity and downright decency and respect for the hard-working people of Ontario.

UKRAINIAN CANADIAN SOCIAL SERVICES

Ms. Cheri DiNovo (Parkdale—High Park): Today I want to highlight the work of a wonderful organization in Parkdale—High Park, that of the Ukrainian Canadian Social Services, an organization having its roots from after the Second World War.

They provide a drop-in centre all day Monday to Friday, including Internet access. They provide arts and crafts groups, bingo and a marvellous seniors' club on Wednesday, and on Friday a discussion and debate group. A traditional New Year's Eve celebration, Malanka, takes place under their auspices in January, and in the summer, day trips are arranged. Skilled counsellors and countless volunteers assist all year round with referrals, counselling, emergency food and financial aid, clothing, furniture and visits.

I was delighted to be able to contribute my raise in March to this example of community responsibility and involvement. Congratulations to the Ukrainian Canadian Social Services Association for over 50 years of service in Parkdale—High Park.

RICK SHAVER

Mr. Jim Brownell (Stormont—Dundas—Charlottenburgh): Today I rise to congratulate Rick Shaver, the general manager and co-founder of the Seaway News, on his recent election as president of the Ontario Community Newspapers Association.

Rick was a student in my very first class at Viscount Alexander Public School back in 1969. He was active in school life then and remains a positive force in the community now. As just one example of his dedication to the community, he recently co-organized a very successful first annual Cystic Fibrosis East Front Literacy Campaign pizza party, which raised more than $17,000 for these two causes.

While there are many accomplishments of Rick's that I could talk about, I want to focus today on his weekly newspaper, the Seaway News. Rick founded this paper back in 1985 with his colleague Dick Aubry. Since then, the Seaway News has brought important local stories to its readers on a weekly basis. To quote Rick's acceptance speech, "We tell the stories of our community, the stories of our readers. In our papers, the school bake sale doesn't have to fight for a space against the war in Afghanistan."

Community papers bring the news that is closest to readers' hearts, and there will always be a place for them in Ontario. I want to commend the Ontario Community Newspapers Association for the work it does and congratulate their new president, Rick Shaver.

As well, if I might, I would like to wish Rick an early happy birthday and also congratulate him on his 25th wedding anniversary with his wife, Brenda.

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

Mrs. Julia Munro (York North): From day one of the OLG scandal, the McGuinty government has refused to provide answers to our questions in this House. They have worried more about managing public relations than solving the problem. Within days of The Fifth Estate exposing this scandal, the action the McGuinty government took was not to investigate the high level of insider wins but to bring in spin doctors to do damage control.

The minister denied ever knowing there was fraud even though insider wins were a hot topic among senior OLG staff starting in August 2005, almost two years ago; even though the minister's chief of staff talked to the OLG about the CBC's freedom-of-information request in April 2006, one year ago. The minister claims he doesn't know anything about freedom-of-information requests in his ministry even though we know he has personally denied our own FOI requests.

If the people of Ontario are to have any faith in the integrity of the lottery system, they need an independent investigation to ensure accountability and transparency. If you have nothing to hide, why don't you call an inquiry?

ARTHUR CURRIE

Mrs. Maria Van Bommel (Lambton—Kent—Middlesex): Born on a farm at Napperton, just outside Strathroy, Ontario, Sir Arthur Currie has been described as being an unlikely soldier, having had no professional military training when he enlisted in 1914, at the age of 38. But within three years he became lieutenant general and the first Canadian commander of all four divisions of the Canadian corps.

Currie was a brilliant and daring battlefield strategist. He distinguished himself as one of the key architects of the Vimy Ridge assault in 1917, when the Canadian corps won the first unequivocal allied victory, with Currie as lieutenant colonel of Canada's first division. After being promoted to Canadian commander, he led his soldiers through the remaining days of World War I. For his efforts, he was knighted in 1918 by King George V. After the war he served as Inspector General of the Canadian militia and became the first general of the Canadian army. In 1920 he became principal and vice-chancellor of McGill University, where he remained until his death in 1933.

This Thursday, students at Strathroy District Collegiate Institute, where Currie was a graduate, will be joined by members of Strathroy's Sir Arthur Currie branch of the Royal Canadian Legion to commemorate Vimy Ridge and the rise of a local farm boy who became what many historians say was the best military commander that Canada has ever produced.

DIABETES

Mr. Bill Mauro (Thunder Bay—Atikokan): I think most of us in this Legislature realize that health care, along with the environment, are two of the top priorities of most Ontarians, and as legislators we spend much of our time dealing with these issues.

Diabetes and its complications is a serious ongoing public health issue. Currently 1.3 million Canadians, or 5% of the population, have diabetes, 800,000 of those being in Ontario. It is expected that there will be 60,000 new cases diagnosed annually in our province. This has serious implications for our publicly funded health care system.

Recently I had the opportunity to compete in a marathon in Rome, Italy, on behalf of the Canadian Diabetes Association. Many who participated fund-raised for the association, but more importantly helped to raise awareness of this impending health problem that is already a challenge to our health care system.

I would especially like to congratulate Thunder Bay team members John Trevisanutto, Trevor Clinker, Karen Dahl, Cheryl Ritchie, Tiffany Miller, Dennis Delyea, Cara Petrone, Jack Wagenaar and trainer Sandy Guthrie, who, in addition to raising awareness, raised $55,000.

Our government understands the seriousness of this issue, as demonstrated by the establishment of an Aboriginal Diabetes Initiative, the Northern Diabetes Health Network, adding two new drugs to the ODB to treat type 2 diabetes and, of course, becoming the first province to fully fund insulin pumps for children as well as several other initiatives.

Our government gets it when it comes to health care and diabetes in the province of Ontario.

HYDRO ONE

Mrs. Carol Mitchell (Huron—Bruce): I rise in the Legislature to recognize the hard work and devotion of the Hydro One crews that helped to restore power to many communities in the riding of Huron—Bruce that were devastated by winter storms early last month.

Because of the storms, over 24,000 Hydro One customers were without power, in large part due to downed hydro lines which were caused by severe winter weather conditions. However, thanks to the tremendous team effort put forth by Hydro One management, over 150 extra line workers and engineers, along with additional help from the Ministry of Transportation and the county of Bruce, the situation was rectified.

However, this work did not go unnoticed, as the Hydro One maintenance crews responsible were honoured with the prestigious international Emergency Recovery Award. This award is presented in recognition of outstanding efforts in restoring electrical service that has been disrupted by severe weather conditions or other natural events.

While the damage in the area was vast, the hard work and swift action by Hydro One helped to limit the inconvenience to the residents throughout the area. Hydro One proved that when a government agency has an immense task at hand, the results are often an example of some of the finest dedication and hard work possible.

I once again express my gratitude to Hydro One for the role they played in repairing and restoring power to a large part of the riding of Huron—Bruce.

VISITORS

Mr. Kim Craitor (Niagara Falls): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I would like to take a moment to introduce some very special people in our gallery today in the west end.

I'm extremely pleased to introduce a former colleague of this House, MPP Ray Haggerty from Fort Erie. Welcome.

I'm also pleased to introduce two teachers, Giorgio Fragnito and Andrew Crober, who are here with their students from Fort Erie Secondary School, who have come to watch how we conduct ourselves in a very professional and orderly manner. Welcome.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, another special guest from Fort Erie is the president of Shorewalk, who is here with a large number of people to hear about the bill that's being introduced shortly by myself. Welcome, Garry Skerrett.

Hon. Marie Bountrogianni (Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, minister responsible for democratic renewal): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I'd like to welcome Mr. Mark Nimigan to the House. He's on the Hamilton Police Services Board, and he serves us very well in Hamilton.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

GREAT LAKES SHORELINE RIGHT OF PASSAGE ACT, 2007 /

LOI DE 2007 SUR LE DROIT DE PASSAGE SUR LE LITTORAL DES GRANDS LACS

Mr. Craitor moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 202,

An Act to create a right of passage along the shoreline of the Great Lakes / Projet de loi 202, Loi créant un droit de passage le long du littoral des Grands Lacs.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

The member may wish to make a brief statement.

Mr. Kim Craitor (Niagara Falls): This afternoon I take great pleasure in introducing a private member's bill that will benefit all the people of Ontario who enjoy the natural beauty of Ontario Great Lakes and bays.

Entitled the Great Lakes Shoreline Right of Passage Act, 2007, this bill when passed will reserve a right of passage along the shorelines of the Great Lakes between the shoreline and the high-water mark. These rights will be limited to passage on foot and are designed to return to Ontario the right Ontarians have always had under British common law: the right to walk on the beautiful beaches of our province.

I also want to add that this bill will not harm any existing rights, property values or personal security, and it will protect adjacent landowners from frivolous liability prosecutions. In fact, it will reaffirm existing littoral and riparian rights, enhance property value by eliminating ambiguity, and, as in other jurisdictions, the presence of people will deter crime and vandalism.

It is time to return the shorelines and the beaches to the citizens of Ontario. I would ask the House to support this bill.

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

Hon. James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism, minister responsible for seniors, Government House Leader): I move that, notwithstanding any other order of the House, pursuant to standing order 9(c)(i), the House shall meet from 6:45 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. on Tuesday, April 10, 2007, and Wednesday, April 11, 2007, for the purpose of considering government business.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Mr. Bradley has moved government notice of motion number 306. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry?

All in favour will say "aye."

All opposed will say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1352 to 1357.

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

Ayes

The Speaker: All those opposed will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Nays

The Clerk of the Assembly (Ms. Deborah Deller): The ayes are 60; the nays are 25.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

ABORIGINAL EDUCATION /

ÉDUCATION AUTOCHTONE

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne (Minister of Education): Since we were elected in 2003, we have taken enormous strides in publicly funded education in Ontario. We're restoring public confidence in the system, and we recognize that there's still more to do.

Last month, the Ontario government announced our education investment for 2007-08, which will be a record $18.3 billion, an increase of $781 million over last year. Since 2002-03, funding has increased by $3.5 billion, the equivalent of more than $2,000 per student, and we're seeing results. Class sizes are smaller, student achievement is on the rise, and more students are graduating from high school.

À mesure que nous travaillons à améliorer ces résultats, il importe que nous fassions tout en notre pouvoir pour tous nos élèves.

If we're going to reach every student, we need to continue to improve opportunities for our First Nation, Metis and Inuit students. That's why I'm pleased to announce that this year we are introducing a new grant as part of our overall education funding. This new grant, the First Nations, Métis and Inuit education supplement, is expected to provide northern school boards with more than $5 million in 2007-08 to support aboriginal students in our publicly funded schools.

Applause.

Hon. Ms. Wynne: It's a very good thing. The grant will provide more than $10.5 million to school boards province-wide. The new supplement is in addition to $12.7 million invested in 2007 to support the implementation of the First Nation, Metis and Inuit education policy framework.

La subvention offre aux conseils scolaires des fonds pour soutenir les programmes qui aident les élèves autochtones.

It will help increase funding for native language programs offered in any of the seven native languages recognized in the Ontario curriculum, and the investment will provide more funding to help boards offer any of the native studies courses available in the Ontario curriculum. Courses like these enable aboriginal students to reconnect with their cultures and histories and also provide opportunities for all students to learn more about aboriginal people.

If we want to support achievement among aboriginal students, it is essential that they feel welcome and engaged in school and that they see themselves reflected and appreciated in the curriculum and school community.

It's actually been an exciting few months for aboriginal education in this province. In January, we announced our aboriginal education strategy with the launch of the First Nation, Metis and Inuit education policy framework. It will be a foundation for delivering quality education to aboriginal students who attend provincially funded schools in Ontario. It sets out strategies for the ministry, school boards and schools, strategies like putting more aboriginal staff in schools and encouraging teaching strategies that are appropriate to aboriginal learners.

In November, we are holding a conference that will give educators a chance to come together and discuss how we can implement the framework and better support aboriginal students.

Our Six Ways website, which provides information about new programs in Ontario's high schools, is now available in five aboriginal languages: Algonquin, Ojibwa, Oji-Cree, Mohawk and Swampy Cree.

To further enhance support for our aboriginal students, the newly created Aboriginal Education Office at the Ministry of Education is now fully staffed, and half of the staff are aboriginal educators in the field.

Our aboriginal education strategy gives us the impetus to build upon this energy and carry it across the province to ensure that we are recognizing and meeting the needs of our First Nation, Metis and Inuit students, whether they are living in remote areas or in urban centres.

En collaborant avec les familles, les parents et les communautés autochtones, nous appuierons chaque élève, and we will enable our First Nation, Metis and Inuit students to develop the knowledge, skills and confidence they need to complete their education and move on to future successes.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Responses?

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound—Muskoka): It's my pleasure to respond to the statement by the Minister of Education.

This investment in aboriginal education is good news for the First Nations communities throughout the province that are struggling to maintain an education system that is troubled with a lack of funding, aging infrastructure, and much-needed space.

Our current Lieutenant Governor is living proof of what a difference education and educational opportunity and literacy can make for those people living on reserves and for those aboriginals. Just recently, I had the opportunity to read one of his books, Out of Muskoka, and from reading that book learned a lot of his early years. I'm immensely proud of our Lieutenant Governor. He points out in his book how a wealthy American whose cottage he was helping to maintain in the summertime as a teenager sponsored him into his post-secondary education.

You only need see where he is today, the wonderful achievements he has had in his life and the immense amount of good he is doing in his post as Lieutenant Governor for aboriginal and First Nations people around Ontario to demonstrate how education can be such a fantastic thing for aboriginal peoples.

I note that the Lieutenant Governor has just recently—he has written a few more books, but the most recent one is called Raisin Wine. It is about a boyhood in a different Muskoka. I'm sure, if it's half as interesting as his first book, it would be a very good read, and it supports a good cause as well.

Of course, our Lieutenant Governor has also had a number of projects he has been involved with, some very successful projects of getting books for remote First Nations. As I said, I'm proud of him for all the work that he has done. He knows from his own personal experience what a difference literacy and education can make in the opportunities for our aboriginal peoples.

While the announcement is good news, it is only a small step in the right direction. Much more needs to be done by the government to assist First Nations communities that are struggling with Third World conditions with respect to education, health and safety. The McGuinty government wants Ontarians to believe that they are supporting our First Nations communities. This announcement and their new aboriginal policy framework are meant to improve the conditions of our aboriginal communities, but this is far from the reality.

Under this government and under the new and improved aboriginal framework, First Nation communities across Ontario are struggling with deplorable living conditions. We have disasters and serious concerns such as the ongoing events at Caledonia and the devastating events that have occurred at Kashechewan. This government continues to enforce policies, such as the new mining tax initiative, that work to negatively impact upon First Nations communities. You just need to look at Pikangikum and the conditions there.

This remote northwestern Ojibway reserve is a good example of the conditions that First Nations people live under. They live in tiny wood-framed homes with no bathtubs and no toilets. The community does not have enough houses for a population that has doubled in the past 20 years. Some of these tiny, dilapidated houses are home to as many as 18 people. The one-storey clapboard school, built in 1986 for 250 students, has 780 students from JK to grade 12. Makeshift classrooms have been set up in portable trailers, as well as in the library and the storage room.

Pikangikum is one of three reserves in Ontario with a drinking water crisis. This year alone, there have been 23 suicides on the 49 Nishnawbe reserves, including six in Pikangikum. This is the reality for most First Nations communities throughout the province.

You just need to look at today's Globe and Mail to see the way this government is treating aboriginal communities. The headline is "Native Community Decries 'Tax Grab' at Diamond Mine—Ontario's New 13% Levy 'Lose-Lose' for First Nations, Chief Tells Government." This is a tax that was just implemented in the recent budget, with no consultation with or warning to the affected aboriginal communities, and, I might add, no warning to De Beers, the mining company that is opening this $1-billion project.

The representative of De Beers last week here at Queen's Park said this may be the only diamond mine that ever opens in Ontario because of this Third World taxation policy that was brought in with no warning to the First Nations or to De Beers, which are investing all this money to provide jobs and opportunity for our remote First Nations communities.

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora—Rainy River): I am pleased to be able to respond to yet another attempt by the McGuinty government to pat itself on the back over education funding: a McGuinty government that says that class sizes are getting smaller, while in fact in the intermediate grades class sizes are exploding; a McGuinty government that says that student achievement is up, but when we talk to teachers, they say the EQAO test has been made easier.

But I in particular want to pay attention to this latest attempt by the McGuinty government to pat itself on the back, because while the McGuinty government tries to boast about funding for aboriginal students, when you look at those boards which actually have a lot of aboriginal students attending, most of those have had their budgets cut.

Let me give you an example: the Keewatin-Patricia District School Board. The McGuinty government pats itself on the back and says, "We're providing the school board with money for aboriginal education," but in fact, when you look at all the numbers, this board's budget has been cut by over $120,000 over the last two years. So even as the McGuinty government shuffles money from one envelope to another, this board has less money for its schools, its students and its teachers than it had two years ago. What does this mean?

Well, it means that in fact one of the schools in this board that has predominantly Metis and First Nations students is being closed. The Wabigoon Public School is listed for closure by this board because the board says, "We simply don't have enough money to operate our schools." Some 75% of the students at the Wabigoon Public School are Metis or First Nations students. They will have to now travel 25 kilometres and in some cases 30 kilometres to school in Dryden. The McGuinty government says this is progress. I think the people who send their children to the Wabigoon Public School would beg to differ.

Then there is the Lakehead District School Board. Everyone knows Thunder Bay has an increasing aboriginal population. The McGuinty government boasts that it is going to provide $177,000 in funding for aboriginal education for the Lakehead District School Board this year. However, when you look at the big numbers, the Lakehead District School Board is now receiving $2.3 million less in funding from the McGuinty government as compared to two years ago. How is cutting $2.3 million out of a school board with increasing aboriginal student enrolment a good thing for aboriginal students?

Then there's the board I used to teach at, the Rainy River District School Board, which will receive—and the McGuinty government boasts about this—about $340,000 from the aboriginal education supplement. But when you look at the big numbers, the board is down $125,000 from what it was at two years ago, which means in the overall picture less money for more need.

Then there's the Superior-Greenstone District School Board, which has received $55,000 from the aboriginal education supplement, but it also is down by $2 million from what it received two years ago.

So while the McGuinty government boasts, school board after school board that has significant aboriginal students attending is receiving less and less money. In many cases they are being forced to close schools which have a significant, if not a majority, aboriginal student population. But the McGuinty government thinks that as long as they confine the message to Toronto, they can boast about this.

Let me tell you that parents in Wabigoon aren't happy. They're angry. They're angry about losing a school that was focused on aboriginal students and Metis students. Parents from First Nation and Metis communities who are being forced to bus their kids 30 and 40 kilometres because the McGuinty government is closing their school are not happy. Parents who know that, overall, the school board budget has been cut—in some cases by $2 million—see through this as well.

This means that these boards, which will have to operate schools, to pay for teachers, to pay for caretaking and for heating in the schools, actually will have less money from the McGuinty government than they had two years ago. I say that at a time when aboriginal students need more help, it is actually shameful that they are being cut in funding.

DEFERRED VOTES

2007 ONTARIO BUDGET

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): We have a deferred vote on Mr. Tory's amendment to the budget motion.

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

The division bells rang from 1416 to 1421.

The Speaker: All those in favour of Mr. Tory's amendment to the motion will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

The Speaker: All those opposed will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Nays

The Clerk of the Assembly (Ms. Deborah Deller): The ayes are 26; the nays are 62.

The Speaker: I declare the motion lost.

We now come to the motion of Mr. Sorbara that this House approves in general the budgetary policy of the government.

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

All those in favour will say "aye."

All those opposed will say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1425 to 1430.

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

Ayes

The Speaker: All those opposed will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Nays

The Clerk of the Assembly: The ayes are 62; the nays are 27.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

It is therefore resolved that this House approves in general the budgetary policy of the government.

ORAL QUESTIONS

CONVENIENCE STORES

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the Premier and it concerns the lottery scandal. Last week, the Premier attempted yet again to dodge responsibility for the lottery scandal by putting blame on convenience store owners. It's always somebody, and on this occasion it was the convenience store owners. In his comments he tarred thousands of hard-working small business people with sweeping, careless statements which suggested that all convenience store people were involved somehow in the lottery scandal and would do the same with alcohol.

Will the Premier take this opportunity to apologize to the 140,000 convenience store employees he collectively insulted with his irresponsible comments?

Interjections.

Hon. George Smitherman (Deputy Premier, Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): Read your own quotes, John.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Minister of Health. We're not off to a good start.

Premier?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): Let me first take this opportunity on behalf of the government to thank those men and women who devote themselves to providing convenient products at convenient times for the people of Ontario on an ongoing basis. In many ways, people who work in convenience stores, and particularly the people who own and operate those convenience stores, are part of the backbone of this economy. They employ over 100,000 people and they provide a very important service to the people of Ontario. Let me say on behalf of our government that we greatly appreciate those services offered by those people, day in and day out.

Mr. Tory: Well, of course, no surprise there: no apology, just as there's been a complete failure on the part of this Premier and this government to take any responsibility whatsoever for anything to do with the lottery scandal.

The Premier should stand in his place and have the decency to apologize and just admit that his latest attempt last week to deflect responsibility for the lottery scandal onto hard-working small business people was a complete failure and was a mistake to begin with—people like Elaine Abbas of Ottawa. She, with her husband, has owned and operated a convenience store for nearly 27 years, working 14 hours a day, seven days a week. She says, "Shame on Mr. McGuinty for blaming all small businesses for the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corp. scandal involving a few unscrupulous retailers.

To lump us all together is disgusting. He owes us an apology and, believe me, the next election results will reflect whether or not we get one."

Will the Premier just get up and admit your comments were wrong and apologize to these 140,000 people whom you tarred with a dirty brush? Will you do it?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I've just taken the opportunity to express on behalf of our government and indeed the people of Ontario our appreciation for the wonderful services provided by people who work in our convenience stores.

But let me remind all Ontarians of something the leader of the Conservative Party said on November 23 of last year: "Ontario should consider banning lottery retailers from buying tickets in light of mounting accusations that clerks are winning a disproportionate number of prizes." Not even the Ombudsman suggested that the right to buy those tickets should be removed from those people who work in our convenience stores, but the leader of the official opposition decided he was going to take it one step further and, with one wide stroke of a reckless brush, accused all people who work in our convenience stores of being unworthy of the responsibility they assume and the right to buy those tickets.

Mr. Tory: The vice-president of Mac's Convenience Stores, Jean-Luc Meunier, calls it an irony that this Premier should try to damn retailers for his own government's failures. He says, "The hard work and long hours that convenience store workers contribute to the Ontario economy deserve more respect."

Dave Bryans, president of the Ontario Convenience Stores Association, says, "It's not often that a Premier unfairly questions the credibility of an entire industry and its 140,000 workers." He goes on to say that it's unfair to tar all convenience store owners for the lottery problems. "We hope," he says, "that the Premier will reconsider his comments and give convenience store operators an apology."

Will you stand in your place today and apologize for your comments that unfairly tarred this group of 140,000 hard-working small business people?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: But there's more. The leader of the official opposition also said, "Is it more important to let those 140,000 people buy their tickets and have some of the revenue from that than it is to maintain the integrity of the system? I think that integrity always comes first."

The logical inference from that is that the leader of the official opposition is saying that you cannot have people who are working in convenience stores operating these lottery systems and have integrity in the system at the same time. We disagree. With have every faith and every confidence in our convenience store workers to continue doing the good job they've been doing on behalf of the people of Ontario.

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the Premier. We have asked your government in connection with the lottery scandal to turn over all the documents from the minister's office and your office concerning the lottery scandal and you've said no. We've asked that an independent investigation be ordered into the activities of the Premier's office and the minister's office concerning the lottery scandal and you have said no.

There are 103 of us elected here. The committee process should represent another means by which the public can get some information as to what went on and we can reinforce the role of the member of provincial Parliament. In fact, in your 2003 election platform you said, "We will give more independence and powers to legislative committees." Will the Premier consider referring the lottery scandal issues not presently being investigated by the police—namely, the actions of your office, the minister's office and the government of Ontario itself—to a committee of the Legislature for proper investigation?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): I'll remind the leader of the official opposition that the OLG was before a committee in September. I will also remind him of something which he is uncomfortable in understanding and accepting, and that is this: First of all, KPMG was brought in to provide some independent recommendations. It did that. The leader of the official opposition is not prepared to accept their independence. Then the Ombudsman came in and he provided a very thorough report complete with a substantive set of recommendations. Beyond that, we've now referred this matter to the Ontario Provincial Police.

It seems to me that this issue is heavily populated now with independent authorities offering independent investigations and independent recommendations. That may not satisfy the leader of the official opposition, but I think it does satisfy the people of Ontario, who are most intent on ensuring that we move forward and act on each and every one of these recommendations. That is exactly what we are doing.

Mr. Tory: The people of Ontario are much smarter than the Premier gives them credit for, in that what the people of Ontario know is that not one authority—independent or otherwise—of any kind has as yet examined the activities of your government, your minister, your office and your advisers in all of this because you steadfastly refuse to let anybody look at them and stonewall day after day. It's unfortunate that your promise to give a meaningful role to MPPs and committees was obviously as meaningless as all the other promises in that platform.

In 1986, then-Premier David Peterson accepted the resignation of Elinor Caplan. In accepting that resignation, he said two interesting things. First, "A minister of the crown has to have the confidence of the House in order to carry on." Second, he said that it was best that the matter in question be probed by a legislative committee and not dragged on in the House. Those were two statements made by your predecessor. Will you take the advice and the words of your predecessor as some guidance and refer this matter of your government's actions, your office's and the minister's office on the lottery scandal to a committee of this Legislature?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I want to remind the leader of the official opposition that it was the Conservative government that stopped calling agencies before our parliamentary committees. We opened the door again to that.

I'm not exactly sure what the leader of the official opposition's objective is, but it is surely not to ensure that we restore confidence for the people of Ontario in their lottery system. I think what Ontarians want to know and are entitled to know is whether or not their government is doing everything that it should do to restore confidence in the integrity of their lottery system.

We have received solid recommendations from KPMG and the Ombudsman. We've taken an additional step, referring this to the Ontario Provincial Police, and we look forward to any findings, any recommendations, anything at all that might flow from their involvement in this issue.

Again, we will do whatever is necessary to ensure that the people of Ontario can have confidence in their lottery system, and specifically we will adopt each and every one of—

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you. Final supplementary.

Mr. Tory: We should just amend that. Everything short of actually having anybody at all look at what your government did or did not do, when you knew things, what you did when you knew them and so forth—anything short of that, and if you wanted to do everything you should be doing, then you should look at precedent. I cited the precedent involving—

Interjection: It was Elinor Caplan.

Mr. Tory: —Ms. Caplan.

We have a second precedent in a majority government setting in 1992, when a legislative committee looked into matters concerning the member for Nickel Belt. A third precedent: that of René Fontaine, a former minister in the Peterson government. His matters were referred to a committee. The committee hearings took place relatively quickly in 1986. They were cited at the time for being cost-effective, and it allowed the public to see what was going on and enhanced the role of the MPP.

With all of those advantages, and your having said you want to do everything you should do to restore confidence, why won't you refer this to a legislative committee and let the public see what your government did, what it knew concerning this lottery scandal?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: This matter was brought before a parliamentary committee. Secondly, in each and every one of those instances, unless my memory fails me, I don't recall there having been a separate KPMG recommendation put forward, I don't recall the Ombudsman having looked into it, and I don't recall the government of the day having referred the matter to the Ontario Provincial Police.

If ever there was a government that's committed to doing the right thing, to ensuring that we follow up on every specific recommendation that we get from every independent authority, it is ours. Our word that we give to the people of Ontario, the hundreds of thousands who go out there and buy their lottery tickets, is that we will adopt each and every one of these recommendations so that they can have every confidence in the integrity of their lottery system.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora—Rainy River): My question is for the Premier. On March 24 of this year, your Minister of Health and Long-Term Care promised people that the price tag of the new North Bay Regional Health Centre was $551 million. He said that that price is guaranteed, and he said, "One of the new things that we offered in health care infrastructure in Ontario is certainty with respect to pricing."

However, in a letter dated February 21, 2007, signed by Minister Smitherman himself, he says, "The actual total cost of the private, profit-driven hospital deal will be over $1 billion."

Premier, why was your Minister of Health not forthcoming with North Bay residents and the taxpayers of Ontario? Why did he refuse to acknowledge that under the profit-driven model, the hospital will cost two times $500 million, or $1 billion?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): I am pleased to report that after 20 years of waiting, the people of North Bay, because of the fabulous work performed by their MPP, are getting a new hospital. More than that, not only are they just getting a physical building, they're getting a 30-year warranty with respect to maintenance and renovations. That will ensure that they have a good, quality hospital in their community for 30 years.

Beyond that, the risk associated with any problems connected with the management of the contract, any costs that might go up with respect to labour or materials, all of that is assumed by the private sector. At the end of the day, the people of North Bay end up with their hospital. It's publicly owned, publicly controlled and publicly accountable, and they get a hospital that they've been waiting for for 20 years. We think they've earned it.

Mr. Hampton: Last week we saw where McGuinty's private hydro deal with Bruce nuclear is going to add an extra $1 billion to people's hydro bills, because we're paying 44% too much. Now the Premier says that a hospital that should cost $500 million is a good deal when it costs $1 billion. It's a good deal when the profit-driven corporation gets to line their pockets. It's a good deal when the taxpayers of Ontario have to pay double for a hospital.

Premier, how is it a good deal when the taxpayers have to pay a billion dollars for a hospital that your Minister of Health himself admits should only cost $500 million to build?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: Again, the people of North Bay are not just getting a building. They get a 30-year warranty with respect to that building, with respect to renovations, with respect to repairs.

There's more good news. We're not just not shutting down hospitals in the way that the previous government did; we're actually building new hospitals in the province of Ontario. We're getting new hospitals in Thunder Bay, Brampton, North Bay, Mattawa, Newmarket, Sault Ste. Marie, Sioux Lookout, Niagara Health System, Halton, Toronto with Bridgepoint, Mississauga and Toronto with the Humber River Regional, West Lincoln Memorial Hospital, Runnymede Health Centre in Toronto, Woodstock General Hospital, and Montfort back in my hometown of Ottawa. That's 15.

There are 85 other hospitals that are undergoing major renovations or expansions. We have in place for the first time in Ontario a government that is dedicated to building hospitals, expanding hospitals, and renovating hospitals to meet the health care needs of the people of Ontario.

Mr. Hampton: Premier, here is the issue. Here is your government's press release from March 24 which says the all-in cost of the hospital is $500 million. Here is the letter from the Minister of Health that was leaked over the weekend, which points out that that hospital that you say is only going to cost $500 million, when you add in the private profit, when you add in all the other goodies that the profit-driven corporation is going to get, is going to come to $1 billion.

I simply say this to you, Premier: Do you really believe it's good health care when the McGuinty government pays a private, profit-driven corporation $1 billion for a hospital deal when the Minister of Health himself says the hospital should only cost $500 million? Do you think that's a good deal, Premier?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I just made reference to the fact that there are about 100 hospital construction projects underway at present in Ontario. We are, in fact, building more hospitals than the five previous governments combined. I don't believe there was a single new hospital built on the NDP government's watch—not a single one.

But distilled to its essence, what this is really all about is ensuring that we can meet the health care needs of our communities. We've made a determination that it is unacceptable for us to allow this state of disrepair and this lack of hospital capacity in Ontario to continue. We're making some dramatic investments in our health care system, but particularly in our hospital system, so that our population, particularly our elderly population, which has a greater call upon our hospital services, has the lead—

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you. New question.

Mr. Hampton: To the Premier: We saw last week how the hydro ratepayers of the province are going to get fleeced out of $1 billion thanks to your Bruce nuclear profit-driven private hydro deal, and now we see that people are going to pay an extra $500 million for your private, profit-driven hospital deal.

In a press release issued April 9 by Infrastructure Ontario, your Minister Caplan, you quote a PricewaterhouseCoopers report. You rely on this report to justify your private, profit-driven hospital deals. Premier, did the PricewaterhouseCoopers report examine the cost for constructing a 100% public hospital instead of going down the private, profit-driven corporate road?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: The Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal.

Hon. David Caplan (Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal, Deputy Government House Leader): The member asks about PricewaterhouseCoopers. In fact, earlier on, the Montfort Hospital independent auditor showed over $19 million worth of savings as compared to a traditional bill. In fact, PricewaterhouseCoopers did look at the alternative financing method compared to a traditional delivery model and concluded a savings of $56.7 million.

That report will soon be on the Infrastructure Ontario website, and I invite all members of this House, and indeed all Ontarians, to take a look at it and to render their own opinion. But make no mistake: The people of North Bay, Sarnia, Sault Ste. Marie, St. Catharines and many, many other communities are finally getting a hospital with modern, state-of-the-art facilities so that we can treat people closer to home. I understand that the leader of the third party would wish us to stop, but I want the member to know that I will be relentless in ensuring that Ontarians have access—

The Speaker: Thank you. Supplementary.

Mr. Hampton: This is the minister who said it was a good deal when people who bought lottery tickets got fleeced out of hundreds of millions of dollars. Now he says it's a good deal when taxpayers pay double for a hospital because the McGuinty government wants to put lots of money in the pockets of their profit-driven, private, corporate friends.

Minister, you keep relying on this Pricewaterhouse report. You keep relying on that, saying this is a good deal. You've commissioned this report, but you refuse to make it public. So my question to the Premier is this: Premier, will you today table the PricewaterhouseCooper's report since you refer to it all the time in saying that it says these profit-driven, private hospitals are a good deal? If the report says that, table the report today so that the taxpayers of Ontario can see how paying a—

The Speaker: The question has been asked.

Hon. Mr. Caplan: I wish that the leader of the third party would listen to the answer to the first question before he goes on with his previously prepared question because, as I very clearly indicated, the PricewaterhouseCooper's report, the value for money report, will soon be posted for everyone to see on the Infrastructure Ontario website, just as the report on the Montfort Hospital is currently online.

One of the hallmarks of this government is transparency, the commitment to letting people know. In fact, I have support here from a former Attorney General in the province who says, "Toronto presents, in the longer term, some interesting possibilities for partnership with private developers. For example, it might be possible to construct courts and to construct commercial space, and to construct housing in co-operation with a private developer."

That was Howard Hampton, October 9, 1991. What happened to Mr. Hampton between then and now? Obviously, he didn't have the same regard for transparency and accountability as this government does—

The Speaker: Final supplementary.

Mr. Hampton: This is the real evidence concerning the McGuinty government. They don't know the difference between leasing space in a vacant building and spending $1 billion for a hospital that only costs $500 million to construct. But I say to the Premier again, Premier, you're very fond of quoting from the PricewaterhouseCooper's report. If this report says what you want people to believe, then table the report here today. Otherwise, tell people what you have to hide.

What do you have to hide in refusing to table the report, which you say justifies paying $1 billion for a profit-driven, private hospital deal in North Bay that your Minister of Health says should only cost $500 million to build? Will you table the report today, Premier?

Hon. Mr. Caplan: In response to the first two questions, I'll give the same reply. The report will be on the website in very short order. In fact, the contract with Plenary Health is already posted on a website, as are the requests for proposals, as is the contract.

This is a hallmark for transparency and accountability unmatched by any previous government, because those are part of our five core principles: that public interest is paramount; that we have and be able to demonstrate value for money; that appropriate accountability is maintained; that we have a fair, open and transparent procurement process; and most especially, that all infrastructure will remain under public control, and core assets like hospitals, schools and our water system will always be publicly owned.

No previous government can make a claim like that because none of them—whether it was the P3 deals that the New Democrats began or that were started under a previous government—has had this kind of framework and this policy foundation. This government believes that the public has a right to know and should be—

The Speaker: Thank you. New question.

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound—Muskoka): I have a question for the Premier. Once again the Premier's Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal has distinguished himself for his failure to watch out for the best interests of Ontario taxpayers. First it was the lottery scandal, a scandal with huge implications to which he paid no attention. Now it's the North Bay hospital, a project that was supposed to cost $221 million, but thanks to the delays of your government, is actually going to cost about $1 billion.

My question for the Premier is this: Given this minister's colossal failure to protect the interests of lottery ticket buyers and given his colossal failure to protect the interests of the taxpayer with respect to the costs of the North Bay hospital, doesn't he think it's time for the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal to step down?

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

Hon. Mr. Caplan: It's somewhat ironic that the member would have participated with colleagues in phony groundbreaking in North Bay in the year 2000 and the year 2002. There was not a single penny in the bank. There was not even a plan to deliver and build that hospital until Monique Smith, the member for Nipissing, came tirelessly and ensured that we had the delivery of this hospital. That is the truth and that is the legacy.

This member should be ashamed of himself for foisting that fraud upon the people of North Bay and the people of the region, for suggesting the phony, bogus numbers that the member is coming forward with. The reality is this: The hospital, for $551 million—we have shovels in the ground. The people of North Bay can expect modern medical facilities that finally someone has delivered for them, not only there, of course, but in Sault Ste. Marie, in Sarnia, in St. Catharines, in Hamilton, in Ottawa. Right across this province Ontarians are benefiting from the most ambitious capital program—

The Speaker: Thank you. Supplementary.

Mr. Miller: Well, Mr. Minister, this project was to cost $221 million in 2002. Now—and I might point out that you've been the government for three and a half years—

Interjections.

The Speaker: Stop the clock. I need to be able to hear the member for Parry Sound—Muskoka. He needs to be able to place his question.

Mr. Miller: To the Premier: Premier, this project was to cost some $221 million in 2002. You've been the government for three and a half years. For three and a half years the people of North Bay have been waiting for this hospital to get going. Now we find out that the minister responsible for lotteries, the same minister who's responsible for public infrastructure, has been asleep on both of these files, and we find out that the cost has gone from $221 million to $551 million—that's what you had in the paper at the second groundbreaking—and now to $1 billion for this hospital.

I say to the Premier, is it not time that this minister who has been asleep at the switch on both these files step aside?

Hon. Mr. Caplan: I'm very proud to compare the record of this government to Mr. Miller and his government. In the year 2002, as my colleague reminds me, they closed 28 hospitals. We're rebuilding over 100 hospitals. In the North Bay hospital there was no design, there was no contract, there was no plan and there were no dollars. The question for Mr. Miller, Mr. Tory and his colleagues in the Conservative caucus is, how would they build the hospitals if they're going to cut $2.5 billion from our health care system? The answer is quite clear.

We have a government of the day that is committed to repairing and rebuilding our health care capital. We have a party opposite that have phony plans, phony announcements, phony groundbreakings and have planned a cut for Ontario's health care system. I'll take substance over that phony baloney any day of the week.

NUCLEAR ENERGY

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora—Rainy River): My question is for the Premier. The Provincial Auditor's report on the Bruce nuclear refurbishment deal reveals the dirty little secret of your planned $40-billion nuclear mega scheme. When it comes to nuclear power, hard-working hydro consumers will end up paying for cost overruns either after the fact or through higher rates built into the initial agreement. At the Bruce nuclear station, it comes to a 44% increase in hydro rates over the going rate.

Premier, what are you going to tell Ontario hydro consumers when they're forced to shell out an extra $16 billion or $17 billion in cost overruns on your planned $40-billion nuclear mega scheme?

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

Hon. Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy): As is typical of the member opposite, there is absolutely no factual accuracy in anything he just said. He has twisted numbers; he has interpreted numbers inaccurately and ineffectively.

The member opposite says there's no need to redevelop power in Ontario. We say there is. There is a need to redevelop clean, renewable power. We're doing that; he voted against that. He attributes comments to the auditor that the auditor did not make. He's applying his own

interpretation. In fact, if you read the auditor's report very carefully, the auditor says specifically that you can't aggregate those numbers, that you would then in fact be distorting the accuracy of the report. But that is common.

The reason this government asked the auditor to do that report and made it public two hours after we got it was because we had to make a good deal. We made a good deal. The people of Ontario are protected by this government, and they're not well-served by distortion and inaccuracy in the member opposite's comments.

Mr. Hampton: The Provincial Auditor is very clear: The McGuinty government is going to pay 7.1 cents a kilowatt hour for electricity that should only cost 4.9 cents a kilowatt hour at the Bruce nuclear station.

Tom Adams from Energy Probe is even more clear. He says that the McGuinty government tried to hide these figures by all sorts of manoeuvres. But however you cut it, that's a 44% increase over the going hydro rate.

My question to the Premier is this: How do you explain to hard-working Ontarians who are paying the hydro bill that the first phase of your $40-billion nuclear mega scheme means that they're going to have to hand over an extra $1 billion over what you told them initially?

Hon. Mr. Duncan: The simple answer is that the numbers the leader of the third party just quoted are false and inaccurate—deliberately distorted, in my view. You cannot interpret the Auditor General's report in that line.

It's interesting to see the leader of the third party sharing common cause with Mr. Adams, who is a coal advocate. Mr. Adams routinely supports the expansion of coal power. Mr. Adams is also the individual who said that Mr. Parkinson was unfairly treated. I suppose he agrees with him on that. Finally, Mr. Adams also supports private power, fully deregulated. It's good to see where you really stand.

I'd also remind the leader of the third party that since we signed the deal, we're actually paying 6.1 cents, not 6.3 cents. It's a good deal for Ontario. This government will keep the lights on.

UNPARLIAMENTARY LANGUAGE

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Stop the clock. Order. I think this would be a good time. I'm going to remind members of a statement I made to this Legislature on December 4 of last year. I think it's worth reiterating.

"I am disturbed by the increasing use of intemperate language. There's frequently a stunning lack of regard for the traditional hallmarks of parliamentary discourse and, specifically, respect for the Chair and the integrity of all members. To engage in such behaviour is to be destructive not just to the member or members targeted but to all of us and to this institution."

I think we're going down that path rather rapidly in the last few weeks, and I would ask all members to take regard of our traditions and of our practices here in this place.

AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH

Mr. Kim Craitor (Niagara Falls): My question will be asked very respectfully to the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. As the minister knows, agriculture in the Niagara Falls riding, which is my riding, is the second-largest industry, capable of yielding the highest return per acre of anywhere in Canada. We have flourishing greenhouse, cut flower, tender fruit and, of course, grape and wine industries.

I was particularly delighted to see our government make a major investment in re-energizing the Vineland Research Station, which after many years of neglect was dying on the vine, so to speak. I was also pleased to see that Niagara This Week, in its editorial, wrote a lengthy report stating, "Vineland Centre Rebirth Overdue," and congratulating the governments for the investment.

My question to the minister is, can you tell the House how this investment will help the farmers and growers of my community?

Hon. Leona Dombrowsky (Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs): I am very happy to receive the question from the member, who is a tireless advocate not just for the Vineland Research Station but certainly for the agricultural interests in his riding.

Vineland, by the way, has celebrated its 100th anniversary. I was there with a number of members from this Legislature in August to celebrate that, and it was at that time that I think everyone who had been focusing on that special event realized that Vineland was indeed a tired facility and needed some special consideration. So I set up the Vineland advisory panel to bring me recommendations on what would be necessary to make it a world-class, state-of-the-art facility.

They brought me some excellent recommendations, and I'm very happy that last week I was able, in conjunction with my federal colleague, to announce an investment of $12.5 million from the province of Ontario and $15.5 million from the federal government. This money is going to contribute to the revitalization of Vineland that will make it a model for research—

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you. Supplementary?

Mr. Craitor: Minister, I'm glad that our government is building partnerships and supporting research that will improve the agri-food industry and the quality of life for rural Ontarians.

As you know, Minister, Brock University, Niagara College and the University of Guelph all play a role in agricultural development of our wine industry. Can you tell us how Ontario's $12.5 million will foster research and innovation for the Niagara grape and wine industry, and what roles will continue to be played by these educational centres of excellence in our community?

Hon. Mrs. Dombrowsky: I'm very happy to have the opportunity to identify for the folks in Ontario who perhaps don't live in Vineland that our government is seized of the research and innovation agenda because of the leadership of our Premier. We have recognized that by investing in research and innovation, particularly in the agriculture sector, we are going to enable the industry for generations to come and make it more sustainable. We recognize that when the government makes investments, that enables the facility to leverage dollars from other levels of government and from the private sector.

That has in fact happened at Vineland, as Flowers Canada and the Niagara fruit and vegetable growers' association have also now contributed to the research station. Donald Ziraldo, a private individual, has made a commitment.

After all of this, what we will have in Ontario will be a model for research facilities everywhere in the province and the country. We will have increased the capacity to serve the horticulture—

The Speaker: Thank you. New question.

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

Mr. Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): My question is for the Premier. We're joined today by yet another victim of the lottery scandal allowed to fester under your watch. In the west gallery, interested in your response to this question, is my constituent Mr. David Menzies from Richmond Hill.

On the very day that the Ombudsman released his scathing report on the scandalous goings-on of the OLG, Mr. Menzies spoke with Mr. Gough, the chair of the OLG, told him about his outstanding lottery ticket issues and received a commitment that he would immediately hear from the OLG's security department. That was now more than two weeks ago: not a phone call, not a letter, and Mr. Gough is refusing to take Mr. Menzies's calls.

What has changed at the OLG? Can you tell Mr. Menzies what he needs to do to get the attention of the OLG to look into his lottery scandal?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): Let me say that obviously, as a result of raising this matter here today, this has elevated it automatically as a priority, I'm sure, for the OLG. If there's anything at all that the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal might do to draw this to the attention of OLG, I'm sure he is prepared to do that.

I do know that there have been more than 700 complaints brought to the fore at Ontario Lottery and Gaming. I believe that 500 of those have now been separately investigated, so I know that OLG is working as quickly as it can. We will ensure that this particular matter, on behalf of this particular gentleman, is fully brought to the attention of OLG.

Mr. Klees: Mr. Premier, this is Mr. Menzies's second experience with the OLG.

As a winner of a perfect Pro-Picks sports lottery, Mr. Menzies had to threaten litigation with the OLG to be paid out on his jackpot, but only on the condition that he sign a non-disclosure agreement.

Here's my question to you: Why would a legitimate winner of a lottery be asked to sign a non-disclosure agreement by a crown corporation to receive winnings that are rightfully his? If there's nothing to hide, why this kind of action?

Can I have your undertaking, on behalf of Mr. Menzies, first of all that that question would be answered—why the necessity for a non-disclosure agreement?—and second, your undertaking that Mr. Menzies will in fact have his rightful day with the OLG to look into his circumstances?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I can't speak to any specifics, but what I can do and what I undertake to do on behalf of the honourable member opposite and Mr. Menzies is to ensure that this is brought to the attention of the OLG, complete with a request that they do everything within their power to ensure that this gentleman is treated fairly.

I can say to Ontarians broadly that a number of changes have been put in place to ensure that there are more protections for the many, many Ontarians who participate in lottery games on a daily basis. In fact, as you well know, many, many recommendations have been brought to the fore now from both the Ombudsman and KPMG, who turned other matters over to the police. We will do whatever we have to do in order to ensure that people like Mr. Menzies and others throughout the province can have confidence in their gaming system.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): New question.

Ms. Cheri DiNovo (Parkdale—High Park): I have a question for the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal. Minister, let me share an excerpt from the government agencies committee report on the OLG. On November 29, 2006, Mr. Tascona, Ms. Scott and myself voted to reopen hearings. We were voted down by government members Mr. Gravelle, Mr. Milloy, Mr. Parsons, Ms. Smith and Mr. Wilkinson. I then suggested that a front page or a lengthy paragraph insert be included explaining that this was a snapshot report based on hearings held before the recent allegations came to light. That too was voted down.

Why did members of your government turn down this opportunity way back then to investigate the OLGC?

Hon. David Caplan (Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal, Deputy Government House Leader): I in fact do have a copy of some of the Hansard from November 22, where the member opposite says, "I would support that, and Mr. Johnston's"—the researcher's—"comments. We could be involved in an endless rewrite here, but I think we need to reflect where we were. We're making changes, but not substantive change at this point." That's what the member for Parkdale—High Park said on November 22 at the standing committee on government agencies, an all-party committee at the Legislature in fact chaired by Mrs. Munro.

The Premier earlier had indicated that the standing committee on government agencies had not met for eight years or called a government agency in eight years. That practice changed with this government because we believe in openness and transparency and giving members of this Legislative Assembly an opportunity to interview, to make recommendations. In fact, I can share with members that I have received not only the recommendations, but the members of the committee are receiving the responses, and the implementation is ongoing.

Ms. DiNovo: The letter of dissent is right in the report, and I invite the minister to actually read it. The government agencies committee is the place where the investigation of the OLGC could have happened, should have happened and didn't happen, and it didn't happen because this government shut it down way back in November. I would like to ask you again and maybe get an answer this time: Why did you shut it down?

Hon. Mr. Caplan: In fact, the government agencies committee did take a look, I believe, at Hydro One, LCBO and OLG and made several excellent recommendations which are currently being implemented. And I would say that the response is coming back to the committee on the status report of those recommendations.

But it goes even further than that. An independent officer of this Legislature, the Ombudsman, had a chance to look into the particular matters that were alleged in the CBC's The Fifth Estate broadcast and issued I thought a very fair and balanced report complete with 23 recommendations. Taken with KPMG's 40, there were 60 recommendations in total, 17 of which have already been implemented, 25 will be complete by the end of June and the remaining 18 are ongoing. I look forward, with the board, to seeing the rest of those being implemented.

In fact, the Ombudsman does comment. He says, "I commend the minister and the government for their openness and responsiveness to my report and recommendations and for their immediate"—

The Speaker: Thank you. New question.

EDUCATION FUNDING

Mr. David Orazietti (Sault Ste. Marie): My question is for the Minister of Education. On this side of the House we understand that to reach every student, we need to continue to improve opportunities for our First Nation, Metis and Inuit students. In fact Janet Wilkinson, director of education for the Keewatin-Patricia District School Board, recently said with respect to our support, "I am so proud of what this government has done by acknowledging for the first time that education for aboriginal students has to be recognized.

There is recognition for the first time in the funding model for aboriginal students, and the projects being supported will generate new approaches to ensuring aboriginal students have equal opportunity."

I was pleased to take

part in an announcement with Minister Ramsay this past week in Sault Ste. Marie outlining our new funding as part of our government's ongoing commitment to work with all aboriginal organizations and communities to build a better future for First Nation, Metis and Inuit children and youth. Minister, can you elaborate on the specific enhancements for aboriginal students in Ontario?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne (Minister of Education): First of all, thank you for the question, to the member for Sault Ste. Marie. I want to acknowledge the work that he did when he was the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Education. He worked to lay the framework for aboriginal education.

This is a very important change to the funding formula. It's very interesting that the leader of the third party made reference to the Keewatin-Patricia board, because in fact it is Janet Wilkinson, who is the director of the Keewatin-Patricia board, who has been advocating for this kind of change. Mordechai Rozanski said we needed to have a supplement in the funding formula, so we have made this change. What this will do is provide increased funding for native language programs.

It will provide increased support for boards to offer any of the 10 native language studies courses that are in the Ontario curriculum and offer additional funding for support programs that assist aboriginal students. The Keewatin-Patricia board alone this year will get $1.1 million. There will be no cuts to that board's funding this year. They will have increased funding and specific funding for aboriginal students. It's a very important change.

Mr. Orazietti: I'm sure the First Nation communities were pleased to hear that this grant was one of three additional changes we've made this year alone to the funding formula. We're taking the flawed formula drafted by the previous government and making the necessary improvements to fix it. It reminds me of the MPAC disaster under the past government. We're providing resources for schools and students because we understand the unique challenges of rural and northern boards. In Sault Ste.

Marie we have invested almost $4.5 million in additional education funding alone, bringing our new investment to over $18 million, boosting per pupil funding by over 30%, an average of $2,800 per student in my community.

It's great to see the Liberal education funding formula working well in Ontario. Minister, what are the additional changes we've made this year, and how will they benefit students across the province?

Hon. Ms. Wynne: In addition to the new First Nations, Metis and Inuit education supplement, we've made two significant additions to the funding formula. The funding formula has to be changed and has been changed by adding more money. So $3.5 billion of new money has gone into education since we've been in office. The members opposite want to minimize that, but that is a significant amount of money that has bought more teachers and more resources.

What we did this year is add a new grant—the program enhancement grant, which is $35 million—that allows boards to invest in things like outdoor education, music, arts and phys ed programs that allow a little bit of flexibility, which is exactly what boards asked us for. We talked to them. They said, "We have these programs that historically we have offered. We don't have direct funding for them. We need some flexibility." So the program enhancement grant begins to address that issue.

The third area that we've added into the funding formula this year is the supported schools allocation. What this grant does is recognize the isolated schools in our communities. This is additional funding that will support 177 schools, and these are schools—both elementary and secondary—that are far away from other schools in their board. What this money does is guarantee that there will be a minimum number of teachers in both elementary and secondary—7.5 teachers in elementary and 14 teachers in secondary—so that programs can be delivered to their students.

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

Mr. John Yakabuski (Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke): My question is for the Deputy Premier, I suppose. I understand the Premier had to leave.

Over the last several weeks we've seen a number of people from the lottery corporation as actual and perceived fallout as a result of the lottery scandal. The list includes former CEO Duncan Brown; former vice-president for security, Michael Sharland; and former chief marketing officer, Alan Berdowski. Will you provide the House with a complete list of people who have been let go or have opted to leave the OLG as a result of this scandal on your watch?

Hon. George Smitherman (Deputy Premier, Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): The Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal.

Hon. David Caplan (Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal, Deputy Government House Leader): I can speak to the individuals involved. Mr. Brown and the board reached a mutual agreement that separation was appropriate. I can tell you that Mr. Sharland is currently on temporary leave with the corporation.

I would highlight to the member opposite that the Ombudsman has indicated exceptional and exemplary support and co-operation with his investigation. I would expect as well that with the OPP—they've referred the matter on to the Toronto police force to conduct the appropriate review—that the appropriate and necessary co-operation will be there. Of course, the Ombudsman does indicate, on page 68 of his report, "I commend the minister and the government for its openness and responsiveness to my report and recommendations and for their immediate and resolute commitment to ensuring change."

Along with the board, I want this member and all members to know that we will ensure that the Ombudsman's recommendations—

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you. Supplementary.

Mr. Yakabuski: It seems this government is always in a rush to sign a deal with somebody when it's the taxpayers' money.

This list is important because these are the people who will be able to provide the full picture of what actually went on between the OLG and the Premier's office and the minister's office during this scandal cover-up.

We know that the practice of the OLG, when they sign agreements with people like the late Bob Edmonds, is to have them sign a gag order. Will the Premier please advise the House as to whether or not those who have left the OLG in the wake of the lottery scandal have been asked to sign gag orders, and will those gag orders be enforced if these individuals are called in to participate in an investigation into what went on in this cover-up scandal?

Hon. Mr. Caplan: The Ombudsman was very clear when he said in his media conference back a couple of weeks ago, on March 26, "I conclude that they"—the OLG—"put profits ahead of public service. I think there was a point, a crossroads, in 2002." Of course, the member from Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke might not want to ask his colleague who sits right in front of him, just to the left, what role they did or did not have. I note that none of the members opposite want to in fact share what they did or what they didn't do. But the Ombudsman goes further. He says, "At that point, the OLG could have gone two ways.

It could have said, 'We'll apply the law and take the measures to act diligently.' But a month later, Bob Edmonds surfaced, and they pretended that binding law from the Superior Court didn't apply. Then it became a slippery slope."

These were the actions and this was the corporate culture in 2002. Unfortunately, folks at the time turned a blind eye or swept this under the carpet. This government—

The Speaker: Thank you. New question.

MANUFACTURING JOBS

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): In the absence of the Premier, I'll direct my question to the Deputy Premier. Concern is deepening over your government's lack of action in the avalanche of job losses in communities like Hamilton and surrounding areas. Thousands of steel and manufacturing sector workers have been thrown out of work, including another couple of hundred announced on the weekend by Stelco, which is mothballing its hot strip mill. Thursday's sudden closure of GenFast Manufacturing in Brantford adds 210 more people to the McGuinty government job loss column.

My question is very simple: Where is your plan for saving good-paying manufacturing jobs in communities like Hamilton?

Hon. George Smitherman (Deputy Premier, Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): To the Minister of Economic Development and Trade.

Hon. Sandra Pupatello (Minister of Economic Development and Trade, minister responsible for women's issues): This is a very important question for the people in many regions of Ontario where there is more challenge today than before, especially in the manufacturing sector. We know this is a world-wide phenomenon. Our government is unique in that in these recent years there has not been a government providing this level of support to the manufacturing sector.

I'd look forward to offering this list to this member, who has the nerve to ask the question, who has voted against every budget that our government has tabled—every budget, including our OAIS plan, our AMIS program, all of these incentives for the manufacturing sector to invest. This is the same member who voted against every single measure. You've got a nerve standing up in the House and suggesting what you're suggesting in your question. You come on over here; I've got a list to show you.

Ms. Horwath: You know, it's really the unique support that this government is not showing that gives me the nerve to ask these hard questions that the minister refuses to answer. I don't think her answer was very good at all.

GenFast was company of the year in 2000. So much for your unique support that kept it here. It was bought by a carpetbagging Michigan company called MNP Corp., which then ran it into the ground under your watch and let it slide into receivership in order to shift production to the USA.

Your complacency in the face of so many manufacturing jobs being lost in communities like Hamilton and Brantford is alarming, to say the least. You refuse to pass the NDP's job protection act, which was designed to prevent exactly that kind of inexcusable corporate behaviour here in the province of Ontario, so what are you going to do, Minister? Where is your plan?

Hon. Ms. Pupatello: I really do appreciate the opportunity, but let me say one thing: You are one person I would not have on my sales team marketing Ontario as a place to invest. What we are telling the world right now and what we are doing—we're going to the world to invest in Ontario, because we do have the best skilled trades, the most educated workforce, including in this very member's own hometown.

I think you should be proud of the workers of Hamilton and be proud of the message that we can send around the world that Hamilton is the place to invest because we can give those companies the opportunity to make a good business there, good for the communities. But this, I must say, is the same member who voted against every single measure that put half a billion dollars in the auto strategy, half a billion dollars in the advanced manufacturing strategy. What did this member do? She voted against those—

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Sit down. New question.

GOVERNMENT CONSULTANTS

Mr. John Milloy (Kitchener Centre): My question is to the Minister of Government Services and it concerns our government's efforts to combat government waste. As members are aware, every year the Auditor General issues a report containing observations and advice on how the government should be managing its resources.

When it came to the previous government, one area of particular concern was the use of private consultants. I'd like to quote from page 400 of the 2004 Auditor General's report:

"Over the five-year period from 1998 to 2002, there was a substantial increase in annual consulting services expenditures at Ontario ministries, from $271 million in 1998 to $662 million in 2002.... [C]onsulting services were not acquired and managed with due regard for value for money."

"There was a heavy dependence on the use of consultants. Hundreds of consultants were engaged at per diem rates that were on average two to three times higher than the salaries of ministry employees performing similar duties."

I'd like to ask the minister what measures our government—

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Minister?

Hon. Gerry Phillips (Minister of Government Services): Well, I anticipate the question. I think it was, what measures have we taken?

Let me just say that we have looked very carefully at the use of consultants, and the auditor was right. What we found was that many consultants were used essentially rather than civil servants, at two and three times the cost. So we examined quite a number of positions. We found that there were probably about 940 people who were consultants who should have been public servants, at considerable cost. We repatriated those jobs, and we saved taxpayers $38 million in doing that. We reduced consulting expenditures by roughly 33%.

There will continue to be the need for consultants, but what we did there, rather than the per diems, we've moved to fixed contracts. So we have a fixed contract. We are insisting that the government of Ontario and the people of Ontario get the best possible price from the consultant. That's written into our requests for proposals. We're putting stricter time limits on consultants.

So we've moved very aggressively in this area. I might add for the public's information that in our budget there are nine full pages that are worth reading, from page 106 on, on other measures we've taken to make sure that we are saving the taxpayers dollars while giving them the best possible public service.

PETITIONS

LONG-TERM CARE

Mr. John O'Toole (Durham): I'm pleased to read a petition from my riding of Durham, which reads as follows:

"Whereas Ontario will not meet the needs of its aging population and ensure access to hospital services unless long-term-care homes can provide the care and services that residents need; and

"Whereas staff are now run off their feet trying to keep up and homes are unable to provide the full range of care and programs that residents need or the menu choices that meet their expectations; and

"Whereas dietary, housekeeping and other services that residents and their families value are being put at risk by increasing operating costs; and

"Whereas some 35,000 residents still live in older homes, many with three- and four-bed ward rooms and wheelchair-inaccessible washrooms; and

"Whereas, on November 23, 2006, this Legislature unanimously passed a private member's motion asking the government to introduce a capital renewal program for B and C homes; and

"Whereas such a program is required to support the limited-term licensing provisions in the proposed new Long-Term Care Homes Act;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to increase long-term-care operating funding by $390 million in 2007 and $214 million in 2008 to provide an additional 30 minutes of resident care, enhance programs and meal menus and address other operating cost pressures, and introduce a capital renewal and retrofit program for all B and C homes, beginning with committing to provide $9.5 million this year to renew the first 2,500 beds."

I'm pleased to sign that in support of this petition on behalf of my constituents.

REGULATION OF ZOOS

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): This is a petition to the Ontario Legislative Assembly to regulate zoos to protect animals and communities:

"Whereas Ontario has the weakest zoo laws in the country; and

"Whereas existing zoo regulations are vague, unenforceable and only apply to native wildlife; and

"Whereas there are no mandatory standards to ensure adequate care and housing for zoo animals or the health and safety of animals, zoo staff, the visiting public or neighbouring communities; and

"Whereas several people have been injured by captive wildlife and zoo escapes are frequent in Ontario; and

"Whereas these same regulatory gaps were affirmed recently by the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario in his annual report;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to support MPP David Zimmer's bill, the Regulation of Zoos Act."

I have signed this and send it to the table by way of page Jordan.

GRAVESITES OF FORMER PREMIERS

Mr. Jim Brownell (Stormont—Dundas—Charlottenburgh): I have a petition signed by a number of members from the Cornwall Township Historical Society, and it reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Premiers of Ontario have made enormous contributions over the years in shaping the Ontario of today; and

"Whereas, as a result, the final resting places of the 18 deceased Premiers are among the most historically significant sites in the province, but have yet to be officially recognized; and

"Whereas, were these gravesites to be properly maintained and marked with an historical plaque and a flag of Ontario, these locations would be a source of pride to the communities where these former Premiers lie buried, and provide potential points of interest for visitors;

"Now therefore, we, the undersigned, petition the Legislature Assembly of Ontario as follows:

"Enact Bill 25,

an act that will preserve the gravesites of the former Premiers of Ontario."

As I agree with this petition, I affix my signature and send it with Craig.

LABORATORY SERVICES

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound—Muskoka): I have a petition signed by thousands of people in Parry Sound—Muskoka regarding lab services at Muskoka Algonquin hospital, and they read:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas Muskoka Algonquin Healthcare (MAHC) has indicated its support for moving significant parts of its laboratory operations to the Royal Victoria Hospital in Barrie; and

"Whereas MAHC has also indicated that it intends to cease doing community-based lab work if it does not receive $150,000 more in funding from the province of Ontario; and

"Whereas the impact of such decisions will negatively affect timely health care delivery to residents of Muskoka, while increasing the overall cost to taxpayers;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to work with Muskoka Algonquin Healthcare to maintain hospital and community-based lab services at the existing facilities in Bracebridge and Huntsville, including restoration of lab services that have recently been contracted out to hospitals in Sudbury and Barrie."

I support this petition.

SHORELINE RIGHT OF PASSAGE

Mr. Kim Craitor (Niagara Falls): I am pleased to introduce a petition that has been signed by many students from Fort Erie and a number of residents from Fort Erie as well. It's addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario and it simply reads as follows:

"Access for All Great Lakes Right of Passage

"We, the undersigned, support the MPP from Niagara's right-of-passage bill which was just introduced today."

MACULAR DEGENERATION

Mr. Bob Delaney (Mississauga West): It's always a pleasure to stand and to support my seatmate, the member for Niagara Falls, with this petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. It reads as follows:

"Whereas the government of Ontario's health insurance plan covers treatments for one form of macular degeneration (wet), and there are other forms of macular degeneration (dry) that are not covered,

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

"There are thousands of Ontarians who suffer from macular degeneration, resulting in loss of sight if treatment is not pursued. Treatment costs for this disease are astronomical for most constituents and add a financial burden to their lives. Their only alternative is loss of sight. We believe the government of Ontario should cover treatment for all forms of macular degeneration through the Ontario health insurance program."

It's my pleasure to sign this petition and to ask page Cody to carry it for me.

PHYSICAL EDUCATION

Mr. Kim Craitor (Niagara Falls): The petition reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas over the past 25 years, obesity rates have more than tripled for Canadian children between the ages of 12 and 17; and

"Whereas in Ontario, less than half of students beyond Grade 9 take gym classes, a small fraction are involved in school sports programs, and adolescents who are inactive at school are unlikely to be physically active elsewhere; and

"Whereas Canada's Physical Activity Guide recommends that adolescents get at least 60 minutes of moderate physical activity daily; and

"Whereas a second compulsory physical education credit for secondary schools would result in an increase in adolescents being active;

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

"That the Ministry of Education add a second compulsory physical education credit for secondary schools."

I'm pleased to sign my signature to support this petition.

SCHOOL FACILITIES

Ms. Lisa MacLeod (Nepean—Carleton): I'm pleased to rise today on a very important issue in my constituency. We're trying to get a new secondary school from the public board in Longfields and Davidson Heights.

"Whereas Longfields and Davidson Heights in south Nepean are some of the fastest-growing communities in Ottawa and Ontario; and

"Whereas the Ottawa—Carleton District School Board has voted to authorize the final design phases for a grade 7 to 12 school to serve the Longfields and Davidson Heights communities; and

"Whereas the government of Ontario has lifted a three-year moratorium on school closings in order to make way for new educational facilities;

"We, residents of Nepean—Carleton, petition the Parliament of Ontario to ensure that the Ottawa—Carleton District School Board continues with plans to build a new grade 7 to 12 school no later than autumn of 2008 to serve" the constituents of "the Longfields and Davidson Heights communities."

I present it to page Katrina.

MACULAR DEGENERATION

Mr. Kevin Daniel Flynn (Oakville): I'm the only guy standing.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the government of Ontario's health insurance plan covers treatments for one form of macular degeneration (wet), and there are other forms of macular degeneration (dry) that are not covered,

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

"There are thousands of Ontarians who suffer from macular degeneration, resulting in loss of sight if treatment is not pursued. Treatment costs for this disease are astronomical for most constituents and add a financial burden to their lives. Their only alternative is loss of sight. We believe the government of Ontario should cover treatment for all forms of macular degeneration through the Ontario health insurance" plan.

I agree with the petition and I'll sign it.

LABORATORY SERVICES

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound—Muskoka): I have more petitions to do with community lab services at Muskoka Algonquin Healthcare. It reads:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the residents of the communities served by Muskoka Algonquin Healthcare ... wish to maintain current community lab services; and

"Whereas maintaining community lab services promotes physician retention and benefits family health teams; and

"Whereas the funding for community lab services is currently a strain on the operating budget of" Muskoka Algonquin Healthcare; and

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

"Whereas the operating budget for MAHC needs to reflect the growing demand for services in the communities of Muskoka-East Parry Sound;

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

"That the McGuinty government and the Minister of Health increase the operating budget of Muskoka Algonquin Healthcare to permit continued operation of community" laboratory services.

I support this petition.

PHYSICAL EDUCATION

Mr. Kuldip Kular (Bramalea—Gore—Malton—Springdale): This petition is on behalf of my colleague from Niagara Falls. It's to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas over the past 25 years, obesity rates have more than tripled for Canadian children between the ages of 12 and 17; and

"Whereas in Ontario, less than half of students beyond Grade 9 take gym classes, a small fraction are involved in school sports programs, and adolescents who are inactive at school are unlikely to be physically active elsewhere; and

"Whereas Canada's Physical Activity Guide recommends that adolescents get at least 60 minutes of moderate physical activity daily; and

"Whereas a second compulsory physical education credit for secondary schools would result in an increase in adolescents being active;

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

"That the Ministry of Education add a second compulsory physical education credit for secondary schools."

I agree with the petition. I put my signature on it as well.

HERITAGE CONSERVATION

Ms. Lisa MacLeod (Nepean—Carleton): I'm so excited to read this petition into the Legislature, particularly since you're in the chair right now and you were able to visit this wonderful location I'm about to speak to.

"We Call on the Government of Ontario to Ensure Dickinson Square Remains a Public Place

"Whereas the Rideau Valley Conservation Authority, a provincial regulatory agency, is scheduled to move out of Dickinson Square, Manotick, in the summer of 2007; and

"Whereas the designated buildings of Dickinson Square are steeped in Canadian and Ontario history and are the city of Ottawa's only and one of the few remaining working industrial heritage sites in the province of Ontario; and

"Whereas these five buildings of Dickinson Square are now at risk to potential non-heritage use development; and

"Whereas recent public consultation has resulted in overwhelming support to retain all five buildings in public ownership and management; and

"Whereas community agencies have formed a non-profit organization, Dickinson Square Management, to build upon the successful management of Watson's Mill and create a vibrant, public-owned arts and heritage cultural space within the square;

"That we, the residents of Manotick and surrounding areas in the city of Ottawa, call upon the government of Ontario to take a leadership role in working with the Rideau Valley Conservation Authority and the city of Ottawa in order to ensure the historic site of Dickinson Square remain under the auspices of public ownership and management."

I fully support this petition and present it to page Alistair.

PHYSICAL EDUCATION

Mr. Jeff Leal (Peterborough): I have a petition today from the good citizens from the Niagara Peninsula who are very concerned about physical activity in our secondary schools.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas over the past 25 years, obesity rates have more than tripled for Canadian children between the ages of 12 and 17; and

"Whereas in Ontario, less than half of students beyond Grade 9 take gym classes, a small fraction are involved in school sports programs, and adolescents who are inactive at school are unlikely to be physically active elsewhere; and

"Whereas Canada's Physical Activity Guide recommends that adolescents get at least 60 minutes of moderate physical activity daily; and

"Whereas a second compulsory physical education credit for secondary schools would result in an increase in adolescents being active;

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

"That the Ministry of Education add a second compulsory physical education credit for secondary schools" in Ontario.

I agree with this petition and will affix my signature to it and give it to page Alyssa.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

BUDGET MEASURES AND INTERIM

APPROPRIATION ACT, 2007 /

LOI DE 2007 SUR LES MESURES

BUDGÉTAIRES ET L'AFFECTATION

ANTICIPÉE DE CRÉDITS

Resuming the debate adjourned on April 4, 2007, on the motion for second reading of Bill 187,

An Act respecting Budget measures, interim appropriations and other matters / Projet de loi 187, Loi concernant les mesures budgétaires, l'affectation anticipée de crédits et d'autres questions.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): Further debate?

Mr. Robert W. Runciman (Leeds—Grenville): For those who may be tuning in on the parliamentary channel, members are allotted 20 minutes during this debate. I could certainly spend much more time than 20 minutes critiquing the latest Liberal budget, but I am going to go quickly over a number of the highlights, or lowlights, as some may describe them, and then talk about some specifics related to my riding of Leeds—Grenville.

Some of the areas that we've discussed over the past couple of weeks that were not dealt with, in our view, in an adequate manner included the fact that Ontario has lost 120,000 high-paying manufacturing jobs over just the last two years. I suspect that number is much higher than that now, because we're seeing on an almost weekly basis new announcements about manufacturing job losses.

Mr. Tim Hudak (Erie—Lincoln): Another 5,000 last month.

Mr. Runciman: Another 5,000 last month, my colleague indicates. We certainly heard one of the NDP members today talking about significant job losses at Stelco in Hamilton being announced last week. That's a concern, and I will get into that in a little more detail later.

Another point: Disposable incomes in Ontario are growing at the slowest rate in the country. Ontario was dead last in economic growth among Canadian provinces in 2006, trailing the next-slowest-growing province, Prince Edward Island, by a substantial 0.6%. Ontario used to be the economic engine of this country, and now it appears under the McGuinty Liberal government that we've become the caboose. In the census which was just recently made public, Ontario reported a net loss of 30,000 people, and that's just in the last year alone.

That's a record, with a record loss of almost 15,000 people in the third quarter moving out of this province because of the lack of job prospects and the significant erosion, the hollowing out, of the manufacturing sector in this province.

A couple of quick points: a $22.4-billion increase in annual spending by this Liberal government since taking office. That translates into an understandable number for most Ontarians: a $4,504 increase per year for every Ontario household. That's a staggering almost $750,000 increase in spending for every hour that this government has been in office. Just think of that: $750,000 for every hour they have been in office. It took 136 years, from Confederation until 2003, for the Ontario government's expenditures to reach $68 billion, but Mr.

McGuinty and his friends have single-handedly managed to increase spending to $91 billion in the coming fiscal year. We know that program spending is increasing a little over 8% a year under the Liberal government. Economic growth has averaged 4%. So they've increased spending during their time in office by double what the average economic growth has been in the province.

A point which is of interest to us—not necessarily one that's going to grab the interest of the public, but I'll put it on the record anyway: From 2003-04 until the last fiscal year, Mr. McGuinty and his colleagues have spent close to $22 billion more than they promised during the campaign, and they've taken in $10 billion more than they expected to take in.

An estimated 1.2 million, or 10% of Ontarians, are without a family doctor. Despite all of this rapid-fire spending, that hasn't changed. Ontarians living in rural Ontario are particularly underserviced. In 2005, the province suffered a net loss of 14 doctors to other jurisdictions. Contrast that with British Columbia, where they had a net gain of 113 doctors in the same time period.

Homeowners remain unprotected from property tax assessments. We've seen these promises in 2008 and this initiative under the budget, but in fact, like so many of the promises they're now making, which Ontarians are going to have a difficult time believing, they are all being postponed until after the election.

More than 8,300 children are on the waiting list for mental health services, and approximately 2,300 of those kids have been on that waiting list for more than a year.

More than $6,000 in additional long-term-care funding was promised in the last campaign, as well as an additional 20 minutes of care, but those promises are not being met.

Numerous school boards have had to slash budgets and raid other spending envelopes, such as special education, to balance their books. Public education has suffered. Split grades are now common, and there are more portables. I saw that when I visited North Grenville. It's unbelievable, the growth of portables over the life of this government. This is probably because of their botched class size cap promise. We know as well that Ontario schools are less safe, and the principals' council recently reported that safety is being jeopardized because of this government's education failures.

Air quality is worse. In 2005 there was a record 15 smog advisories covering 53 days. The previous record was 10 smog advisories covering 27 days. In 2005, for the first time in our history, we had a smog alert during the winter.

There's a shortage of justices of the peace, and this is costing most municipalities millions of dollars in uncollected fines as court dates are cancelled and various serious Provincial Offences Act charges are dropped due to lack of available trial times.

The Ministry of Agriculture: To reduce the amount of money for safety net programs, we've reduced their budget again this year by $100 million.

Tourism: Again, when we see the loss of manufacturing jobs, the fact that they're cutting the tourism budget just boggles the mind. If there's one thing we want to do to counter some of these job losses, it's to attract more visitors to our province. Mr. Speaker, you're very familiar with this issue. Last year we had the most significant drop in US visitors since we started recording that number. How do they address that? They're spending close to $5 million on wasted advertising. No one knows what these ads are all about—full-page colour ads no one can comprehend.

Instead of addressing the need to attract more visitors from south of our border—and that has to be the most significant market that we should be pursuing—they're not doing it. What they're doing is using this money, I guess, to try to enhance their electoral prospects, because there's certainly nothing there that is going to attract the expenditure of tourism dollars.

In my own riding, we have a number of community health centres. The very successful ones—I sat down recently with Portland Country Roads Community Health Center in the Merrickville district. They're having a great deal of problems in attracting talent, especially nurse practitioners. This is a challenge for them that the government has to take a look at because these are significantly important operations in rural communities, and certainly in my riding they are being impacted by the lack of funding they need to attract these professionals into these areas.

We all know about the problems with COMRIF. I'll use a couple of examples: North Grenville. I was talking to the mayor there, Bill Gooch, and Doug Struthers of Merrickville Wolford, where they've been turned down on three occasions. North Grenville is an example. This is a community that looked after itself in the past, kept their infrastructure in good shape and now they are being penalized through the criteria with COMRIF. This is one of the fastest-growing municipalities in Ontario and they're going to be restricted in terms of their ability to meet those pressures because of a lack of support and assistance.

Merrickville Wolford, with their water treatment, their sewage treatment plant, their effluent, is meeting the standards but they've been told that this plant could collapse at any moment. What would that mean to that community and to the Rideau system that could be impacted? Yet again they've been rejected, and we don't get adequate justification for these rejections.

I want to talk a bit about the Brockville Psychiatric Hospital. We had the federal government now encouraged to take a look at one of the soon-to-be-vacant facilities there for perhaps the housing of federal inmates with mental illness. Hopefully, if the federal government has an interest, this will require a commitment from the provincial government through the Ontario Reality Corp. to spend monies to upgrade a building on that site. If you take a look at the secure treatment facility that's operating there now for provincial inmates with mental health challenges, it's been an enormous success.

We have the expertise in place there. This would be an enormous economic boost to the area, to the region. Hopefully the provincial government will not once again be the impediment for this going ahead. We know the McGuinty government, despite Mr. McGuinty's promises before the election—on this site, we had three phases: the secure treatment unit and phases 2 and 3, which would have meant well over 300 good jobs to that region. Mr.

McGuinty was in the area prior to the election, as the opposition leader—and we have this in writing; it appeared in the Brockville Recorder and Times—and he made a commitment in black and white, "Yes, I'm committed; our party is committed to completing phases 2 and 3 of that project."

What happened after the election? One of the first things they did was cancel phases 2 and 3.

Mr. Hudak: There's a surprise.

Mr. Runciman: Yes, not much of a surprise, but certainly a disappointment to those people who believed that promise that the then leader of the opposition, now the Premier, made.

We may have an opportunity to grow jobs on this site through the federal government, but at the end of the day, this will still depend on the Ontario Realty Corp. I have to say that I'm not terribly optimistic. I sent the minister responsible for ORC, the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal—

Mr. Hudak: What did he do?

Mr. Runciman: We toured those buildings, and the grounds of the psych hospital are deteriorating, roofs leaking, heaters shut off even though portable heaters were sitting there. We were told they were just abandoning those buildings. We're talking about heritage properties. I sent the minister over a list of photos that we took of the damage in those buildings. I met with his staff. Nothing happening. We phoned to ask ORC if they were going to do anything. Nothing. There were no RFPs—nothing. So we sent those pictures to the local media. We sent them to the local heritage preservation group.

Then all of a sudden there was a front-page story about the damage to these buildings and all of a sudden Minister Caplan says, "Oh, we have an RFP to repair those." We have an RFP responding to a front-page story in the Brockville paper, but of course, everything before that was no, no, no, deny, deny, deny. That's a message we hear from that particular minister on regular occasions.

I'm hoping that in the future we don't have to embarrass the government by going to the media. We tried to work in a very co-operative way. That was our first effort. We tried to work with the minister, with the minister's offices. We provided him with pictures. And then he pulled that one on us. So in any event, we now believe they're going to be protected.

I talked about 120,000 manufacturing jobs. We've seen Domtar in Cornwall close—and I want to talk about eastern Ontario very specifically—Collins and Aikman in Gananoque, Mahle in Gananoque, Nestlé in Chesterville, Siegwerk in Prescott. This is just a few; most recently, the Hershey announcement in Smiths Falls, 500 jobs in a community of 900 people.

The eastern Ontario secretariat—we've had a couple of very positive things happen. We've suggested to this government in a co-operative way an eastern Ontario secretariat, an eastern Ontario prosperity fund. There's nothing in the budget to deal with those. The feds, through FedNor, put about $28 million into eastern Ontario in the last couple of years. That's leveraged another $66 million in investments. We're getting nothing from these folks. In fact, they've cut the tourism budget, they've cut the agricultural budget, and I said they have effectively abandoned eastern Ontario or small town, small city, rural eastern Ontario.

Interjections.

Mr. Runciman: The member from Cornwall does nothing but sit in here and interject. Why isn't he doing something for eastern Ontario in a meaningful way instead of criticizing people who are fighting for that region of the province, like our colleagues are? Why hasn't he brought in an eastern Ontario secretariat? Why doesn't he stand up and fight for that? Why doesn't he talk about an eastern Ontario prosperity fund instead of sitting in here trying to upset my speech when I'm fighting for eastern Ontario and he's not doing the job for those people?

I talked about abandoning—

Interjections.

The Acting Speaker: I would ask the member for Stormont—Dundas—Charlottenburgh to please come to order and allow the member for Leeds—Grenville to make his points. I'll look after you at the end of your speech.

Mr. Runciman: One of the newspapers in my riding talked about this and said, "While we don't necessarily agree with abandoning"—they thought that might be too strong a word. But I think "neglect" is certainly a word that stands up to scrutiny.

I only have four minutes or so left, and I want to talk about Hershey and the impact of that closure in conjunction with the closure of Rideau Regional, which the Liberal government has fast-tracked to close. That's going to have another significant impact.

One of the things that I think this government could play a role in, if they really want to do something about helping a small community and that part of eastern Ontario, is talk to the municipality and some of the employees with respect to the possibility of forming a company, and perhaps with government assistance and working with Hershey, see if there's a possibility of fulfilling contracts for specific product lines for Hershey and perhaps other chocolate makers like Cadbury and Nestlé.

I raise this possibility because I've seen it in my own riding with Black and Decker: Former employees of Black and Decker were able to work out a deal with Black and Decker where they're now providing the Workmate product out of the Brockville plant. They rent space from Black and Decker, and they also bid on other Black and Decker product lines. These are former employees. The equipment was there, they worked out a deal to purchase the equipment and enter into contracts and I think there's a new contract coming up in a short while for the continuation of the Workmate product line.

Phillips Cables, which closed down in my community: A number of the employees were able to locate angel investors and purchase equipment from the Phillips cable company. They now have a firm called Northern Cables, which has taken part of the niche market from the Phillips company and is working with Phillips in a cooperative way. That's the sort of thing I think we should be exploring, because this facility is so important not just to Smiths Falls and the surrounding area, but also to eastern Ontario.

A lot of people don't realize that the Hershey plant has about 400,000 to 500,000 visitors—tourists—who come to that Hershey plant every year on an annual basis. It's a very significant tourist draw, so we should be looking at that. I