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

April 25, 2001

37th Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2001-Apr-25 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Wednesday 25 April 2001 Mercredi 25 avril 2001

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

SMALL BUSINESS COMMUNITY

NORTHUMBERLAND ECONOMY

EDUCATION LABOUR DISPUTES

CUTBACKS

HORSE RIDING SAFETY

PARKINSON'S AWARENESS MONTH

EDUCATION LABOUR DISPUTES

ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES LEGISLATION

CONESTOGO DAM

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

STUDENT HEALTH AND SAFETY

PROGRAMS ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LES PROGRAMMES

DE SANTÉ ET DE SÉCURITÉ

POUR ÉTUDIANTS

LIMITATIONS ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LA PRESCRIPTION

DES ACTIONS

CITY OF ELLIOT LAKE ACT, 2001

REMEMBRANCE DAY OBSERVANCE AMENDMENT ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 MODIFIANT

LA

LOI SUR L'OBSERVATION

DU JOUR DU SOUVENIR

HORSE RIDING SAFETY ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LA SÉCURITÉ

DES CAVALIERS

BACK TO SCHOOL ACT

(TORONTO AND WINDSOR), 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LE RETOUR

À L'ÉCOLE (TORONTO ET WINDSOR)

BRAIN TUMOUR

AWARENESS MONTH ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LE MOIS

DE LA SENSIBILISATION

AUX TUMEURS CÉRÉBRALES

GREATER JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS

ACCOUNTABILITY ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001

SUR UNE OBLIGATION ACCRUE

DE RENDRE COMPTE EN CE QUI CONCERNE LES NOMINATIONS

À LA MAGISTRATURE

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

SMART GROWTH

EDUCATION LABOUR DISPUTES

SMART GROWTH

EDUCATION LABOUR DISPUTES

SMART GROWTH

ORAL QUESTIONS

EDUCATION LABOUR DISPUTES

HYDRO RATES

EDUCATION LABOUR DISPUTES

NORTHERN MEDICAL SCHOOL

SMART GROWTH

GOVERNMENT SPENDING

EDUCATION LABOUR DISPUTES

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

GOVERNMENT APPOINTMENTS

INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM FINANCING

HEALTH SERVICES

VICTIMS OF CRIME

NATIONAL CHILD BENEFIT SUPPLEMENT

EDUCATION LABOUR DISPUTES

AIR QUALITY IN LEGISLATURE

PETITIONS

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

HORSE RIDING SAFETY

HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING

EMPLOYMENT STANDARDS

PAPER SLUDGE

SALE OF SCHOOLS

HORSE RIDING SAFETY

MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING /

IMAGERIE PAR RÉSONANCE MAGNÉTIQUE

PRIVATE HOME DAYCARE

ORDERS OF THE DAY

THRONE SPEECH DEBATE /

DÉBAT SUR LE DISCOURS DU TRÔNE

Wednesday 25 April 2001 Mercredi 25 avril 2001

The House met at 1331.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

SMALL BUSINESS COMMUNITY

Mr Mario Sergio (York West): I'll take the opportunity to speak a bit about the announcement by the Minister of Consumer and Business Services

this past Monday. The announcement concerned the registration of vital statistics on-line and I'm very disappointed. This doesn't do anything for the small business community in Ontario. The small

business community in Ontario is normally used to the extolling of the importance, the virtues and the contribution that they make to our province and indeed to all the people in Ontario. But when

it comes to help on a daily basis, we see absolutely nothing coming from this particular government.

There are a number of areas where the small business community is looking to the government to assist them in providing much necessary help. Tax is the number

one enemy of the small business community in Ontario. Now, the deregulation and the sale of Ontario Hydro is going to affect in a very adverse manner the operations of the small business people in

Ontario. They have limited resources to face the challenges on a daily basis, new technologies which they cannot afford. Accessing new financing for the small business community is absolutely vital

to continue to thrive in a very competitive market.

I hope, when the minister engages himself in this consultation process with the stakeholders, that he will come back to this House and announce good reforms,

good changes that will bring long-term stability to the small business community in Ontario.

Do I have another 40 seconds, or are we going back in our time? I'm delighted to take them.

Interjection.

Mr Sergio: Yes, indeed. I have to bring this message to the House, not only to you, Mr Speaker, but to the members of the government, that when

it comes to extolling the virtues of small business, we say that small business people in Ontario have created 80% to 85% of the jobs in the last five to seven years, but on an individual basis the

small business community is left on its own.

This is what I want to tell the minister: Do come back to the House and bring reforms that indeed will bring long-lasting stability and sustainability to the

small business people in Ontario.

NORTHUMBERLAND ECONOMY

Mr Doug Galt (Northumberland): I rise in the House today to talk about an excellent example of how working together indeed achieves results. Two

weeks ago, federal member of Parliament Paul Macklin, County Warden Bill Finley and myself combined efforts to coordinate an economic summit in my riding of Northumberland. This day-long conference

was held at the beautiful Golden Beach Resort on Rice Lake. The reason for organizing this event was to discover ways to reinvigorate our local economy. It was an opportunity for local leaders to

review our present situation and discuss opportunities for future initiatives.

More than 80 people attended this brainstorming session, including representatives from economic development offices, post-secondary institutions, government

officials and local business owners. All in all, the day was a great success, leaving participants enthused about our prospects for moving forward with a great county-wide economic development

strategy.

A clever man once said, "If we don't hang together, we will most assuredly all hang separately." That being said, I take this opportunity to thank all of those

who took part, and to commend Mr Macklin and Mr Finley for working with me to improve Northumberland's economic environment.

EDUCATION LABOUR DISPUTES

Mr Michael Bryant (St Paul's): Fury, outrage, shame: these are the words that the people of St Paul's have shared with me, and these are the

words that I feel describe what Mike Harris has done to our public education system. We have a system in crisis and a system in turmoil, and we now have an incredibly sad and shameful situation

where the symbolism has met with the reality and the schools are literally infested with rodents. They literally stink. They're literally full of garbage. Of course, right now we have 560 schools

closed in Toronto, affecting over 300,000 students. Over 20,000 students have been out in Toronto for four weeks.

On the other hand, instead of taking the $1.8 billion out of education that Mike Harris did and instead of tying the hands of everybody with their funding

formula, Dalton McGuinty and the Ontario Liberals have put forward positive solutions for peace and progress in our public education system. I urge the residents of St Paul's to call me if they

want details on that.

The parents have told me that they think this government doesn't care about kids and working families and public education, they think they're warring with

workers for the sake of warring with workers, and that they would forgo their $200 cheque in a second if their kids could get some quality public education. It's time for the government of Ontario

to act on the solutions put forward by the Ontario Liberals, for the sake of the kids now and for the next generation.

CUTBACKS

Mr Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): I have a little story that was allegedly written by the Premier. It reads in the following manner:

(1) For considerable periods, the four oboe players had nothing to do. Their number should be reduced and their work spread out over the whole orchestra.

(2) Forty violins were playing identical notes. This is unnecessary duplication and the

section should be drastically cut. If a larger volume of sound is

required, it could be achieved through an electronic amplifier. However, no extra funding will be provided for the amplifier. The musicians must raise the funding for this themselves.

(3) Musicians will only be paid for the number of minutes that they are actually performing. This does not include rehearsal time. Rests in the music will be

added up and deducted from each paycheque.

(4) The lesser instruments, such as tuba and trombone, do not need time with a qualified conductor. A music technician could be contracted to do the job

instead.

(5) No useful purpose is served by repeating with horns the passage that has already been handled by the strings. If all such redundant passages were eliminated,

the concert could be reduced to 20 minutes.

The Premier is a cultured man. He knows what he's talking about.

HORSE RIDING SAFETY

Mrs Tina R. Molinari (Thornhill): As spring arrives in Ontario, many children start to think of their upcoming birthdays and to plan an activity

to make their party the best among their friends. Children love horses, and a day at the riding stable with their friends is a fantastic birthday party event. An ever-increasing number of Ontarians

are choosing to go horseback riding for recreational purposes, but many of these weekend riders are inexperienced and have no idea what to expect.

Many of the riders are children who do not have the strength to control a large and unpredictable animal. Several of these children have been hurt and some have

been killed in accidents which could have been prevented. A riding helmet, boots and breakaway stirrups are simple pieces of equipment which need to be worn every time, every ride.

If 10-year-old Elizabeth Hader had been provided with safety gear on that April Sunday in 1999, she might be alive today. It is nothing less than a tragedy that

a little girl who loved horses was involved in such a senseless accident.

For this reason, I would like to take this opportunity to inform the House about an important piece of legislation,

An Act to increase the safety of equestrian

riders, which will be introduced today. My private member's bill is scheduled for second reading on May 3.

An Act to increase the safety of equestrian riders is a much-needed piece of legislation to provide minimum safety standards to an unregulated industry. By

requiring that riding establishments provide certified helmets and proper footgear to riders under 18, we will be putting the safety of our young people first, and we will be doing everything we

can to see that preventable accidents are just that -- prevented.

I ask for your support of my private member's bill.

PARKINSON'S AWARENESS MONTH

Mr Dave Levac (Brant): Pierre Elliott Trudeau, Janet Reno, Michael J. Fox: there are common threads among these people. I would like to read a

proclamation to the House:

"Whereas the Parkinson Society of Canada is a national non-profit voluntary organization; and

"Whereas the Brantford and Area Parkinson Support Group provides information and support to Parkinsonians and their families that meet the second Wednesday of

every month from 2 pm to 4 pm at the Church of the Nazarene; and

"Whereas the Brantford and Area Parkinson Support Group actively supports research to find the cause and the cure of Parkinson's disease;

"Therefore, I proclaim the month of April 2001 as Parkinson's Awareness Month."

This proclamation, read into this record, the federal record and the municipal record, was spearheaded by a local citizen who became involved in this

organization due to his own situation. This is a letter he wrote that was published in the Brantford and Area Parkinson Support Group magazine, and I quote:

"I am 49 years old and I was diagnosed with Parkinson's four years ago. My symptoms became severe enough to go on disability last year. Brantford was holding its

first annual Superwalk in September, where the local MPP was a guest speaker and was to lead the walk. Knowing I had Parkinson's, he invited me to come along, so I did, one half-hour before the

start. Needless to say, I had no sponsors.

I was so impressed with the people that I met that I started to attend the support meetings. I felt I could be of some help, so I asked the facilitator to give

me some sponsor sheets for the next year. She gave me about 50. I have, as of April, filled 45 of them and have asked for 200 more. My plan is to make more than all of Brantford did last year, and

at $6,350 I am well on my way.

"I volunteered for the Superwalk committee ... and have begun as co-facilitator in Brantford. With help, I lined up four guest speakers.... These people are so

nice and very supportive. God bless them all."

He now devotes his time to educating schoolchildren and raising funds for researching Parkinson's disease. I personally offer my thanks and prayers to my brother

and his family as they fight this courageous fight.

EDUCATION LABOUR DISPUTES

Mr R. Gary Stewart (Peterborough): I'm very disappointed when I hear of the current condition of schools in the Toronto District School Board

due to the strike of the public school support workers.

In our homes, I would hope we would not create and leave garbage around as is happening in the schools. In our homes and businesses, do we not pick up after

ourselves? We don't vandalize our buildings, furnishings and other items we need and use daily. I understand that, in some schools, stairs and walls have been smeared with eggs. Paint bombs have

been thrown at the outside of the buildings. Toilets have been plugged with paper and other objects. Garbage is accumulating in the hallways. Windows, historically valued art work and other items

have been smashed. Who is creating this mess and destruction, strikers or students?

We all know the value of education and how fortunate we are in Ontario and Canada to have the opportunity to go to school. Why, then, do we have to close our

schools due to vandalism and lack of personal responsibility for garbage and dirt that those who attend the schools have created? Maybe we should teach more about life skills, respect and

responsibility.

ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES LEGISLATION

Mrs Marie Bountrogianni (Hamilton Mountain): On April 1, I received a letter from a constituent who is wondering when the legislation for the

Ontario disabilities act will be passed. I will quote from Susan's letter:

"My husband has multiple sclerosis and is in a wheelchair. We have had to make many renovations to our home in order to make it accessible for the wheelchair. We

didn't have a choice....

"Every day of our lives we are faced with barriers. Recently I took my husband to the eye specialist. We get in the office and the secretary doesn't know if the

wheelchair will fit. It doesn't, off we go -- we were told that the appointment should have been made through McMaster." This is fine, given that even with three weeks' notice, we can't get DARTS

to accommodate him. "On our way out my husband has to use the bathroom. I ask the lady at the snack bar where is there an accessible bathroom." She said yes: "It is down in the basement."

"On New Year's Eve we went out for dinner. We started researching an accessible restaurant, we asked all the right questions." Unfortunately we didn't check it

out physically. "It was accessible as far as getting in the door," but once we were in, "forget it. Our friend and myself pretty well had to dismantle the wheelchair to get it in the bathroom,

stand guard outside the door...." Imagine, Mr Speaker, what this does for the dignity of the gentleman. "You get past," Susan says, "being embarrassed when you are angry."

They visited their daughter and had trouble accessing the bathrooms there. The hotel was only partially accessible. Susan says these are only a few examples of

what they encounter.

These are legitimate complaints. I agree with my constituent. If a society is judged by how it treats its weak and vulnerable, Mike Harris should be ashamed of

himself with respect to what he has done to society in Ontario.

CONESTOGO DAM

Mr Ted Arnott (Waterloo-Wellington): I rise on a crucially important issue in my riding of Waterloo-Wellington, and that is the need to repair

the Conestogo dam.

Described by the Globe and Mail as one of Ontario's largest dams, Conestogo dam controls water flow for the Conestogo River and the Grand River, affecting the

water supply for much of Waterloo region and the city of Brantford.

The gates on this dam, which normally control the flow of water, are broken, and it's estimated that it will cost between $1.2 million and $1.5 million to repair

them. In the spring, without repairs, the dam could fail or collapse, resulting in a catastrophic flash flood in which lives most likely would be lost.

In the summertime, when the river water flow is low, the dam gates are opened to raise the levels and cleanse the water downstream. If the gates aren't working

properly, drinking water could become dangerous. These are worst-case scenarios, but they're identified as realistic by the Grand River Conservation Authority. They believe the province must be a

major partner in paying for the repairs to make absolutely certain that these worst-case scenarios never happen.

I support this position. I have raised this issue with the Premier in a private meeting earlier this year, with the government caucus, and I want to thank the

Minister of Natural Resources for meeting with leaders of the Grand River Conservation Authority. The minister also attended the recent meeting that I arranged for GRCA officials with David

Lindsay, president and CEO of the SuperBuild Corp. Yesterday, I had a chance to raise this issue with the Deputy Premier and the Minister of Finance.

My position on this matter is clear: the province of Ontario cannot abdicate its responsibility to assist conservation authorities in necessary flood control

projects. I will continue to raise this issue until it's resolved.

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): I beg to inform the House that today the Clerk received the first report of the standing committee on government

agencies. Pursuant to standing order 106(e), the report is deemed to be adopted by the House.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

STUDENT HEALTH AND SAFETY

PROGRAMS ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LES PROGRAMMES

DE SANTÉ ET DE SÉCURITÉ

POUR ÉTUDIANTS

Mr Gravelle moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 9,

An Act to bring health and safety programs to Ontario students / Projet de loi 9, Loi visant à offrir des programmes de santé et de

sécurité aux étudiants de l'Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried. The member, for a short statement.

Mr Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North): As you know, this coming Saturday, April 28, is the national day of mourning for workers who

lost their lives on the job. It is with that in mind that I have reintroduced my private member's bill,

An Act to bring health and safety programs to Ontario students.

What better tribute could we pay to those who have lost their lives than to bring forward legislation that could save lives in the future? This legislation,

which was initiated almost five years ago by Ross Singleton of the Ontario Network of Injured Workers Groups in Thunder Bay, will guarantee needed health and safety instruction in the classroom for

all Ontario students.

I hope that all members of the House will support the need for this guarantee to be legislated into law and will support it throughout the process.

LIMITATIONS ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LA PRESCRIPTION

DES ACTIONS

Mr Young moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 10,

An Act to revise the Limitations Act / Projet de loi 10, Loi révisant la

Loi sur la prescription des actions.

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

Hon David Young (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs): This bill, if passed, would reform and dramatically modernize the

existing Limitations Act, and that is a law that was passed in 1910.

a decade.

The proposed Limitations Act, 2001, would consolidate many limitation periods into one statute and create two very clear and very fair time limits. Our

government believes there are certain circumstances, however, where there should be no restrictions placed upon a lawsuit. Those circumstances would provide special exceptions to protect vulnerable

people, to protect the environment and to protect the public purse.

If passed, the bill would eliminate confusion and would balance the interests of plaintiffs with the interests of defendants. For plaintiffs, this would mean

they would have enough time to discover a claim and start a law suit. For defendants, this would mean that after a set period of time they would have greater certainty in their lives.

CITY OF ELLIOT LAKE ACT, 2001

Mr Brown moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill Pr4,

An Act respecting the City of Elliot Lake.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Pursuant to standing order 84, this bill is referred to the standing committee on regulations and private

bills.

REMEMBRANCE DAY OBSERVANCE AMENDMENT ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 MODIFIANT

LA

LOI SUR L'OBSERVATION

DU JOUR DU SOUVENIR

Mr Wood moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 11,

An Act to amend the Remembrance Day Observance Act, 1997 / Projet de loi 11, Loi modifiant la Loi de 1997 sur l'observation du jour du

Souvenir.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried. The member, for a short statement.

Mr Bob Wood (London West): This bill grants employees the right to take a leave of absence from work without pay of three hours between 10 am

and 1 pm on each Remembrance Day so that they may participate in observances for those who died serving their country in wars and in peacekeeping efforts.

Attendance was up at Remembrance Day ceremonies last year in many communities in Ontario, and this was due in part to the fact that many were not at work on a

Saturday. This bill, if passed, will give almost everyone the chance to observe Remembrance Day in the way he or she deems most appropriate. This bill is substantially similar to one I introduced

in the last session.

HORSE RIDING SAFETY ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LA SÉCURITÉ

DES CAVALIERS

Mrs Molinari moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 12,

An Act to increase the safety of equestrian riders / Projet de loi 12, Loi visant à accroître la sécurité des cavaliers.

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

The member for Thornhill for a short statement.

Mrs Tina R. Molinari (Thornhill): The purpose of the Horse Riding Safety Act, 2001,a private member's bill, is to increase the safety of horse

riders under the age of 18 by requiring the operators of riding establishments to ensure that riders use proper safety equipment, including safety helmets.

I am bringing this bill forward in memory of Elizabeth Hader, who passed away just two years ago on April 18, 1999, and countless other children throughout the

province who have met untimely deaths as a result of unsafe riding conditions in the province of Ontario. The bill also amends the Highway Traffic Act and makes it an offence for any rider under

the age of 18 years to ride or be mounted on a horse on a highway without the proper safety equipment.

Parents and guardians of riders under the age of 16 would also be guilty of an offence if they authorize or knowingly permit young riders to contravene the

proposed provisions.

BACK TO SCHOOL ACT

(TORONTO AND WINDSOR), 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LE RETOUR

À L'ÉCOLE (TORONTO ET WINDSOR)

Mr Stockwell moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 13,

An Act to resolve labour disputes affecting the Toronto District School Board and the Windsor-Essex Catholic District School Board / Projet de

loi 13, Loi visant à régler les conflits de travail qui touchent les conseils scolaires de district appelés Toronto District School Board et Windsor-Essex Catholic District School

Board.

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

All those in favour of the motion will please say "aye."

All those opposed will please 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 1358 to 1403.

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

Ayes

Agostino, Dominic

Arnott, Ted

Baird, John R.

Barrett, Toby

Beaubien, Marcel

Boyer, Claudette

Bradley, James J.

Brown, Michael A.

Bryant, Michael

Caplan, David

Clark, Brad

Cleary, John C.

Clement, Tony

Coburn, Brian

Colle, Mike

Cordiano, Joseph

Crozier, Bruce

Cunningham, Dianne

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duncan, Dwight

Dunlop, Garfield

Ecker, Janet

Elliott, Brenda

Flaherty, Jim

Galt, Doug

Gerretsen, John

Hardeman, Ernie

Hastings, John

Hodgson, Chris

Hudak, Tim

Jackson, Cameron

Johns, Helen

Johnson, Bert

Kennedy, Gerard

Klees, Frank

Kwinter, Monte

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Martiniuk, Gerry

Maves, Bart

Mazzilli, Frank

McGuinty, Dalton

Miller, Norm

Molinari, Tina R.

Munro, Julia

Mushinski, Marilyn

O'Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Phillips, Gerry

Pupatello, Sandra

Runciman, Robert W.

Sampson, Rob

Sergio, Mario

Spina, Joseph

Sterling, Norman W.

Stewart, R. Gary

Stockwell, Chris

Tsubouchi, David H.

Turnbull, David

Wettlaufer, Wayne

Wilson, Jim

Witmer, Elizabeth

Wood, Bob

Young, David

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

Nays

Bisson, Gilles

Christopherson, David

Hampton, Howard

Kormos, Peter

Lankin, Frances

Marchese, Rosario

Martin, Tony

Clerk of the House (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 64; the nays are 7.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

The Minister, for a short statement.

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of Labour): I'll have a minister's statement.

BRAIN TUMOUR

AWARENESS MONTH ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LE MOIS

DE LA SENSIBILISATION

AUX TUMEURS CÉRÉBRALES

Mr Wood moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 14,

An Act to encourage awareness of the need for the early detection and treatment of brain tumours / Projet de loi 14, Loi visant à favoriser

la sensibilisation à la nécessité du dépistage et du traitement précoces des tumeurs cérébrales.

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

Does the member have a short statement?

Mr Bob Wood (London West): Mr Speaker, this bill points out that early detection and treatment of brain tumours are vital to survive from this

devastating disease.

Brain tumours strike people of all ages, from newborns to seniors, crossing all economic, social and ethnic boundaries and all walks of life. Brain tumour

research, patient and family support services and awareness among the general public are essential to promote early detection and treatment of brain tumours.

The bill proposes that the month of October in each year be proclaimed Brain Tumour Awareness Month. I hope that October 2001 will be the first such month.

This bill is substantially similar to one which I introduced in the last session, and in response to which I have received over 100 letters of support from across Canada.

GREATER JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS

ACCOUNTABILITY ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001

SUR UNE OBLIGATION ACCRUE

DE RENDRE COMPTE EN CE QUI CONCERNE LES NOMINATIONS

À LA MAGISTRATURE

Mr Wood moved the first reading of the following bill:

Bill 15,

An Act to provide for greater accountability in judicial appointments / Projet de loi 15, Loi visant à accroître l'obligation de rendre

compte en ce qui concerne les nominations à la magistrature.

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

All those in favour of the motion will please say aye.

All those opposed will please say nay.

In my opinion, the ayes have it. Carried.

Does the member have a short statement?

Mr Bob Wood (London West): Mr Speaker, this bill is intended to provide greater public accountability for judicial appointments. It proposes

to do that by making the appointment process for justices of the peace the same as that for judges: having the Judicial Appointments Advisory Committee publish the criteria used in assessing

candidates; permitting the Legislature by resolution to set or change these criteria; having the names of all the people found qualified and suitable for appointment submitted to the Attorney

General for consideration; and requiring approval by the Legislature of all proposed appointments before they become effective.

For the first time in the history of this province, the Legislature would set the criteria for judicial appointments and the Attorney General would be

responsible to the Legislature for following them in each and every appointment. Surely, it is time to take this process out of the back rooms and put it fully in the hands of all the elected

representatives. Transparency and democracy do work.

This bill is substantially similar to one which I introduced and which received first reading in the last session.

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): On a point of order: I seek unanimous consent to debate and pass a resolution which I have

already tabled. Briefly, the title of the resolution is a Liberal back-to-school plan. It would have the effect of quickly and fairly resolving the disputes presently in Toronto and Windsor.

The Speaker: The leader of the official opposition has asked for unanimous consent to introduce a motion that deals with ending the education

strikes. Is it agreed? I'm afraid I heard some noes.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

SMART GROWTH

Hon Chris Hodgson (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): It gives me great pleasure to rise in the House today to address the ninth step

in our government's action plan to keep Ontario strong: Smart Growth. Over the past six years our government has put conditions in place so that Ontario is strong, growing and competitive. We are

building not only for today; we are building for tomorrow. Smart Growth builds on our vision for Ontario's future. It's a vision that encourages growth. It's one that will make sure all regions in

the province, from the smallest village to the largest city, can reach their economic potential.

Growth improves our standard of living. It allows for sustainability of our health system and our social safety net. Growth must also improve our quality of

life. Smart Growth is based on three main principles: a strong economy, strong communities and a healthy environment. Our vision is for a made-in-Ontario plan, and it will mean a brighter future

for people in every part of our province.

All Ontarians understand the need for planning. Just as you plan for a new home or a vacation or retirement, so must our government plan for the future of our

province.

To date, our government policies have led to more than 822,000 net new jobs in Ontario. More than 578,000 people have escaped welfare. Businesses are investing

again and expanding. Homes are being built at a very rapid pace. Since 1995, more than 300,000 new homes have been built in the province. Over the same period, more than 80,000 homebuyers have

benefited from this government's land tax rebate transfer programs.

The population too is growing. From nine million people in 1985, Ontario grew to 11.5 million in 2000 and is expected to be home to 14 million people by the

year 2015. That's a lot of people who will need schools, hospitals, homes and roads, and our government has recognized the need to plan for this growth. We must plan for more than just

infrastructure. We must plan, and plan smartly. It is important that we consider all the needs in all areas and use our resources wisely, strategically and well.

Smart Growth offers provincial and local decision-makers a forward-thinking, long-term approach for doing just that. We will ask tough questions: what kind of

life do we want for ourselves and for our children five years out, 10 years out, 20 years from now? Will we live in cities or in suburbs? Will we live in rural or in urban? How can we ensure the

best use of land in each? How do we reduce gridlock? How do we save our air, and where do we put our parks? With our commitment to a strong economy, strong communities and a healthy environment as

a guide, Smart Growth will provide a filter, a context to help us respond to these questions.

It will also help us direct resources so that we can consume fewer natural resources while enabling more ambitious development goals. It will help us

revitalize our city cores. It will focus on making our communities more livable. It will support using the infrastructure we have effectively, and building and using any new infrastructure in an

efficient way. It will link decisions on transportation, infrastructure, planning and public investment.

Smart Growth is all about promoting growth and managing it well. It will offer Ontarians choice and flexibility, no matter where they live in the province. It

will help Ontario grow responsibly, for our benefit and for the benefit of our children and our grandchildren.

Our vision of Smart Growth has as one of its three main pillars an economy that is strong, growing and competitive. As you know, it is through a strong economy

and new jobs that Ontarians gain hope, opportunity and prosperity. It is also through a strong economy that government can support those services that mean so much to the people of Ontario, like

quality health care and education. But economic growth just does not happen on its own. It stems from difficult choices, like cutting taxes and balancing the books and reducing red tape. Our

government will continue to make the tough decisions needed to keep Ontario on the right track.

Smart Growth will not just happen either. It too will require tough decisions and right choices. That's why today I'm announcing that this spring, our

government will continue to hold consultations across Ontario to build co-operation among partners and gather the innovative ideas necessary to support a successful made-in-Ontario Smart Growth

strategy.

Interjections.

Hon Mr Hodgson: I realize there are other parties that don't like to consult the people of Ontario. They like to prefer to rely on American

experts. That's not our approach.

The government will review the Planning Act and then propose amendments necessary to meet the Smart Growth needs of the 21st century.

SuperBuild Corp will help increase investment in Ontario's infrastructure by exploring and developing innovative partnerships with businesses and other levels

of government.

The government will introduce legislation to encourage the clean-up and revitalization of former industrial and commercial sites, known as brownfields.

The government stands firmly behind our commitment to the redevelopment of Toronto's waterfront.

We have set ourselves ambitious, yet achievable goals. Our goal is for Ontario to enjoy the best-performing economy and the highest quality of life in North

America. Our made-in-Ontario vision of Smart Growth is instrumental to this goal, where it will be synonymous with a strong, efficient and competitive economy, sound neighbourhoods and communities

and a clean, healthy environment. It will allow us to meet the challenges of the 21st century and it will mean a better quality of life for all the people of Ontario.

Hon Brad Clark (Minister of Transportation): During the past six years, our government has made tough choices, and as a result Ontario is once

again one of the best places in the world to live, work and raise a family.

My ministry's contribution to Smart Growth will be to provide more effective, more efficient transportation services and lower transportation-related

pollution. A more effective and efficient transportation system will support continued economic investment and the creation of new jobs. It will also preserve our quality of life.

Every day, millions of people travel our highways. Businesses rely on our highway system to get the materials that go into their products. When these products

are finished, the highways are used to get them to market.

I am pleased to be able to announce several new initiatives today. First, Ontario must prepare for the dramatic population and economic growth of the future.

We must ensure access to markets in the United States and support our tourism industry, so we will work with other governments to create modern international gateways at the Windsor and Niagara

borders.

This spring the government will review the results of the Niagara Peninsula needs assessment study. In addition to being one of Ontario's principle economic

gateways, the Niagara Peninsula is also one of our province's prime tourist spots, and we will take decisive action to address the area's long-range transportation requirements.

As we look to promote economic development throughout the Niagara and Hamilton areas, we will also look to reduce the pressure on the tender-fruit lands of

Niagara. These are one of our province's most important agricultural assets and they must be preserved.

Smart Growth means that as we develop a highway system to meet Ontario's future needs, we are also sensitive to the needs of both communities and the

environment.

Our government will also explore adding carpool and commuter bus lanes to provincial highways to improve traffic flow and air quality in Ontario. This

initiative will reward commuters who relieve highway congestion by carpooling. It will also reward those who reduce the number of vehicles on the road by taking buses.

Earlier this spring I announced my ministry would undertake several transportation needs assessments. These studies will help us preserve and protect future

highway corridors and identify which existing roads need to be --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): It's a little too loud in here. We give a little bit of leeway, but it's getting past that, where I can't hear.

Just remember, you get a reply to this and if you start, the other side is going to start. So I'd appreciate your co-operation.

Sorry, Minister, for the interruption.

Hon Mr Clark: Thank you, Mr Speaker. When it comes time to undertake this work, we must consider how we can best utilize public partnerships

to expand the province's highway network. To that end, the Ministry of Transportation and the Ontario SuperBuild Corp will lead an interministerial task force coordinating a review of the expansion

of our province's 400 series. Their goal will be to find ways to build new roads without putting the fiscal burden on the taxpayers.

Our government will also work with municipalities to re-establish a consistent, driver-friendly system of designation for Ontario's provincial highways and

municipal roads.

In a sixth new initiative, we will consult with the coroner, emergency crews and others to explore ways of opening highways more quickly following accidents.

We expect to have their recommendations by the end of this year.

I would like to conclude today by noting that my ministry is very pleased to be able to take an active role in contributing to the government's made-in-Ontario

Smart Growth strategy. In the weeks and months to come, I am confident that our efforts, along with those being made by other ministries and agencies, will lead to a healthy and prosperous future

for Ontario.

EDUCATION LABOUR DISPUTES

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of Labour): As members are aware, staff of the Windsor-Essex Catholic District School Board have been on strike

since March 26 and staff at the Toronto District School Board have been on strike since March 31. In both situations contract bargaining has come to an impasse. It should be obvious to all members

that with the continuance of the current disruption, the successful completion of the students' studies at both boards is adversely affected.

As a responsible government, we cannot allow our children's education to be held hostage by labour negotiations which at this time are going nowhere. We have

given the school boards and the unions time to achieve a mutually acceptable negotiated settlement. Now the priority is to get the children's education back on track. That is why today I've

introduced a bill entitled the Back to School Act (Toronto and Windsor), 2001. This bill would get students back into the classrooms and end both strikes.

The government always prefers that disputes be resolved through the collective bargaining process. The bill, if passed, would order school boards to resume

normal operations as soon as possible, at the latest, two days after the act comes into force.

If negotiations fail, the matters at both boards will go to mediation-arbitration. Under the legislation, if passed, a neutral third party will be appointed as

a mediator-arbitrator for each dispute. In particular, Ross L. Kennedy would be appointed for Windsor and Stephen C. Raymond for Toronto.

would provide for maximum penalties of $2,000 for individuals and $25,000 per board or union for non-compliance. Each day of non-compliance would be a separate offence.

We want the parties to reach an agreement and achieve a quick ending to their labour negotiations. We want school boards and their employees to be able to

negotiate a fair and reasonable contract. But this must be done without disruption to students in the classroom. The best solution is a local solution, where the school board and the union achieve

a mutually acceptable, fiscally responsible negotiated settlement. In fact, in many cases, local solutions have been reached with agreements that are fair to both employees and taxpayers.

Like parents, the government does not want children's education disrupted because of disputes between school boards and unions. We want students to benefit

from Ontario's challenging new curriculum and assure the province of quality provided by province-wide standards. That is why we are continuing to put students first by introducing the proposed

Back to School Act (Toronto and Windsor), 2001.

If passed, this bill would provide a fair and balanced approach. It would get Toronto's students back in their classrooms, it would allow the school boards and

the unions to continue to negotiate toward a fair settlement. If the school boards and unions are unable to resolve their differences, the act would provide them will access to

mediation-arbitration to help reach a settlement.

I know the children in Toronto and Windsor-Essex want their schools to return to normal. We want these students in school, learning and growing. I ask all

members to support this legislation and to allow us to proceed to second and third readings today, so our children's education will get back to normal as soon as possible.

Hopefully, with all-party support this bill could be passed in this House today and we could have the children back in school as soon as possible.

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): I wish to respond to the Minister of Labour's statement and his legislation.

Today, I am proud to announce that we have tabled a back-to-school plan. It's a plan that is fair, it's a plan that is fast and, most importantly, it's a plan

that is in the best interests of our working families. If the government will endorse this plan, we can have our children back in school tomorrow in Toronto and in Windsor.

Our plan calls for the following: schools to reopen immediately; striking support workers and the school boards to take the dispute to binding arbitration with

a significant new component, and that component is the following:

We would give the arbitrator the power to order the Harris government to invest more in education in order to reach a fair settlement. In other words, the

arbitrator would be able to take into account the boards' ability to pay and the province's ability to fund education properly.

The plan is fair. It makes it perfectly clear that the buck stops with the provincial government, which is the source of funding in education and this is the

source of the current crisis in our schools.

I can tell you the plan is fast. If the government will endorse this plan, we can have our kids back in school tomorrow. Back-to-work legislation, on the other

hand, could take several days to pass as the third party has signalled its intention to slow its passage. We urge the government to put the interests of our children and the interests of our

working families first.

We urge the government to adopt our resolution and make the necessary amendments to legislation. This will allow the reopening of our schools in a way that's

faster and fairer and in the best interests of Ontario families.

We on this side of the House are on the side of working families. Schoolchildren in Windsor are into their fifth week of a strike. In Toronto, many of the

children have been out of school for four weeks running now. Working families are looking to us to do two things for them. First of all, they want their children back in school. Secondly -- and we

are working actively on this front -- they are looking for a new government that puts the interests of their children ahead of ideology.

Unlike this government, we are working hard to earn the trust of Ontario's working families. That's why we brought forward a peace plan that will return

extracurricular activities to our schools. It's a good plan, but today's headlines tell us the government still prefers labour war to peace in our schools. It's also why we put forward a plan to

invest in our schools, starting with smaller class sizes. Again, the government has failed to adopt those of our ideas which require an investment in the future.

We urge the government not to make that same mistake for a third time running. We urge the government to instead adopt our back-to-school plan, a plan that is

fairer and faster and in the best interests of our children and our working families.

SMART GROWTH

Mr George Smitherman (Toronto Centre-Rosedale): For the third day running, I had a chance today to witness part of the Mike Harris nearly dead

tour. Today the issue is smart growth, where made-in-Ontario smart growth has been exposed as smart growth by dummies. Today's announcements on smart growth do nothing to get at the core issues.

They do nothing to help the commuters in Ontario deal with it.

There was one new initiative, though, to the credit of the government: it wants to remove the carnage from the roads faster after accidents. If only could we

wish that we could more quickly remove the carnage of that government from the Legislature and get on with reducing gridlock in a meaningful way in developing better communities.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Stop the clock. Just before we begin, the member for Simcoe North, come to order. You've been shouting out. I've

yelled, "Order," three times now. This is your last warning; and while we're at it, the member for London-Fanshawe, it's his last warning as well.

Mr Ted McMeekin (Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Aldershot): I'll take my five-minute speech and deliver it in 20 seconds.

Fundamentally, we on this side of the House want to know, like in the old Wendy's commercial, "Where's the beef?" Einstein, a famous scientist, once defined

"insanity" as doing things the same way as they've always been done and expecting a different result. I hope that isn't what you mean by Smart Growth.

EDUCATION LABOUR DISPUTES

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): I have a few comments on the government's so-called back-to-work legislation. First I want to respond

directly, though, to the comments made by the Minister of Labour where he says, "Contract bargaining has come to an impasse."

That is not true. Here in Toronto they are still trying to bargain, and in Windsor the representative of the board has written a letter asking the union to

continue bargaining. So we need to have it established right off the bat that the parties want to continue to bargain, and they are continuing to bargain.

Further, if the government's priority is that children be back in school, then why don't you put back the $16 million your government has pocketed during this

labour dispute for the Toronto Board of Education and the $4 million you've pocketed in Windsor during the labour dispute there? There we would have the makings to ensure that a collective

agreement could be negotiated and signed.

Everybody in this province should read this back-to-work legislation. It is abominable, and I want to quote from it. First of all, the government says there

are going to be neutral arbitrators. Read the legislation. It says, "If a mediator-arbitrator is unable or unwilling to perform his duties ... the minister shall forthwith appoint a new

mediator-arbitrator and notify the parties of the name...." But in appointing a replacement arbitrator, "the minister may appoint a person who has no previous experience as an arbitrator," who "has

not previously been or is not recognized as a person mutually acceptable" to both the union and the employer, "is not a member of a class of persons which has been ... recognized as comprising

individuals who are mutually" acceptable to the union and the employer.

This legislation is abominable. It's astonishing. You don't even have to be an arbitrator to go and decide these matters. That's how important this government

thinks our children's education is. You don't even have to be mutually acceptable.

But there is something that is worth reading in this legislation because it exposes what's going on here. It says that when the arbitrator makes a decision --

"consistency with Education Act and regulations... The mediator-arbitrator shall make an award that ... is consistent with the Education Act and the regulations" thereunder.

What does that mean? It says to us that the real problem all along here has been the funding formula. The funding formula is restrictive and the arbitrator

will have to absolutely abide by the government's funding formula.

If you want a deal, and you want a deal tonight because the parties are still bargaining, put the $16 million that you've taken from the Toronto board of

education during the labour dispute, take it out of your pocket, give it back to the board so they can go to the table with it and you'll have a settlement by tonight. The same would apply in

Windsor.

SMART GROWTH

Just a few words about Smart Growth. I searched in vain to find what the government was talking about in terms of smart growth in their statement. I see that

they're going to sit down with municipalities and talk about putting new signs on the highways. Let me tell you why they need to do that. After the government downloaded all kinds of highways on to

the municipalities, there is no consistency any more. You've created a horrendous problem. But that's not smart growth. That's just covering up your own mistake.

Next, the government wants to consult with coroners and emergency workers about how to clear highways after accidents. The priority should be to ensure that we

have the rapid transit systems in place so that we have less accidents on our highways and our highways are less crowded. We don't see that, either.

The government plans to build seven new expressways, but they have no money for urban transit. That, by definition, is not smart growth. That, by definition,

is making the problem worse. If you live in dense, urban areas, you have to devote time, attention and money to urban transit. It is the most efficient, the most cost-effective way to move a large

number of people within urban areas. Yet the government talks about smart growth. It has no strategy, no plan for rapid transit; no plan, no strategy for urban transit. There is no smart growth

here; there's just a buzz word, and underneath the buzz word, it's empty.

ORAL QUESTIONS

EDUCATION LABOUR DISPUTES

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the Minister of Education. Sadly, and all too predictably, we find ourselves

now in the face, once again, of strikes which are affecting thousands of Ontario schoolchildren. We have put forward a back-to-school plan which we are asking you now to consider. I outlined the

details of the plan a few moments ago, but I think of real importance here is the fact that you've got some legislation that the Minister of Labour has tabled today. The third party is telling us

that they intend to block or delay passage of that bill. That could mean that this bill would take up to a week to pass.

I've got a plan here to put schools --

Interjections.

Mr McGuinty: I've got a plan to get our kids back to school today. I won't be delaying passage of this bill. I won't be working to block

passage of the bill. But I've got something here, Madam Minister, which can get our kids back to school today. Will you support our back-to-school plan?

Hon Janet Ecker (Minister of Education, Government House Leader): The honourable member knows we have already introduced legislation that will

actually solve this particular dispute. With all due respect to the honourable member, we have been in this House not that long ago when his party did promise to support legislation to bring the

students back in Hamilton-Wentworth, and that didn't come to pass.

The other thing is that we haven't seen the plan from the honourable member. We have shared our legislation with his party. But we know what his plan has done

before. We've heard what he wants to do. When we want a stronger curriculum, he wants to weaken it. When we want standardized testing, he wants to stop that. When we are prepared to live with our

financial responsibility, he wants to absolve all responsibility for the taxpayers' money and simply hand it to arbitrators. His solution for extracurriculars was to increase the students' workload

to pay for the decrease in the teachers' workload. That's not an appropriate solution.

Mr McGuinty: Madam Minister, it would be nice if at some point during your part-time career as Minister of Education you devoted yourself to

the interests of Ontario's schoolchildren. We are putting forward -- and I'll ask you to speak to the matter which I've put forward today and just ease off on the rants. We're talking about an

effort here to put schoolchildren back in their classes. That's what working families want us to do. You've got a couple of options on the table now. You've got legislation -- and I understand that

when the only tool in your toolbox is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a nail. I understand that's the way you people over there operate. But there's a better way to do this. We can

resolve this today. We can have schoolchildren in Windsor and Toronto back to class today.

That's why we've tabled this plan. It's realistic, it is practical, it's fair and it's fast. I ask you once again, Madam Minister, will you, in the interests

of our children, support this plan?

Hon Mrs Ecker: With all due respect to the honourable member, I'll stack my hours on my job up with his any day, by the way. Secondly, this

government has a plan for quality education in this province. It includes back-to-work legislation that we brought in today, which -- I agree with the honourable member -- could resolve it today,

and we'll see what happens this afternoon. But our plan also consists of a good, strong curriculum to give our kids what they need, more money for the classrooms, a comprehensive teacher testing

program, and student testing so we know how well our kids can do, so parents can actually have the information they need to make intelligent choices about their children. That is the plan we have

put forward. That is the plan we have the courage to implement. We will continue to do what parents and students need to have done and want to have done in our education system in this

province.

Mr McGuinty: Minister, Ontario's working families understand the havoc you have wreaked in our public education system. You have robbed our

children's teachers of their enthusiasm, you have sapped our schools of their spirit and you have taken away our children's extracurricular activities. We've got 60 work stoppages under the terms

of the Mike Harris government. That is the record. That speaks for itself.

I'm asking you to do something today that is decidedly different. I'm asking you to act in the interests of Ontario's working families and their children. I'm

asking you to support a plan that will get our children back to school today in Toronto and in Windsor. On behalf of those working families, Minister, why won't you support our plan today?

Hon Mrs Ecker: First of all, a resolution from the opposition leader -- I'm sure he would know this -- doesn't accomplish anything.

Legislation, which this government is introducing, will accomplish something. It can resolve this strike if the members of this House support it.

Havoc is not higher standards. Havoc is not new curriculum. Comprehensive teacher testing, a code of conduct: those are the things parents want. Act in the

interests of students? You didn't act in the interests of students in Hamilton-Wentworth. You didn't act in the interests of students when you said "Let's increase their workload to pay for a

decrease in teacher workload." That's not in the interests of students either.

We're going to stick to the commitments we made to the taxpayers, to teachers, to students, to parents. Quality education reform, performance-based system,

parental choice: those are things that the parents and the students want out there.

Mr Gerard Kennedy (Parkdale-High Park): Minister, you said that you're doing things in the interests of students probably 10 times in the last

three minutes. I want all the members across to look right over here in the gallery. Right over here in the gallery are students, student trustees from across the province. They've had the

misfortune to live with the double-edged rhetoric that is coming forward from your side of the House. So I want you to address those students today and I want you to address, in a way you avoided

with my leader, another proposition. I want you to address their message to you today about extracurricular activities in this province.

Minister, you're very bold to say that somehow we're going to put them at a disadvantage. What they've said about your plan today is that it would be a

travesty. The students of this province, their elected representatives here today, have condemned the idea that you would enact the other part of Bill 74. I want you to stand up and tell them, are

you going to enact the other part of Bill 74? If you're not, which solution --

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Order. The member's time is up.

Hon Mrs Ecker: With all due respect to the honourable member, I should really hope his research department was better than the front page of

the Toronto Star.

No, we're not. We've had this discussion in this House before. This continued scaremongering does not help teachers, does not help students.

The reason we have student trustees is because this government thought it was so important to have students on school boards, to have their voice. I was at the

founding meeting of the association of student trustees. I've met with them. They have official stakeholder status with our ministry. They are giving and will continue to give us advice on all of

the education quality initiatives we are putting in place.

Extracurricular activities are exceedingly important for our students. But you know what, Mr Speaker? We've had disagreements with the education system under

Liberal government, under NDP government, under Conservative government. Disagreements are not new. Taking those disagreements into the classroom is wrong and it's not fair to students. Those

individuals who do it should stop it.

Mr Kennedy: Minister, sitting over here is Karl Baldauf, who's the president of the student trustees of this province. There are

representatives from school boards around the province. They sit in those classrooms when they aren't affected by the other misery you're inflicting on them, and they're the ones who want to know,

245 days into the school year, what is your solution? You have taken extracurricular activities away from them. You have, Minister. Last year, 70 of 72 boards had them, except for the two boards

that cover your area. This year your staffing plan has caused them to go missing.

Minister, four months ago we gave you a peace plan. It has been approved by trustees, it has been approved by students, it has been approved by teacher

federations, it has been approved by parents. Today there were minimum guidelines given to you by the student trustees. Your ministry staff were there to listen to them. Will you stand in the House

today and guarantee to those students that what they say is in their interests -- those minimum guidelines -- will be met, and will you tell them the date you're going to meet them on for a

solution to extracurricular activities?

Hon Mrs Ecker: I think the terms, the comments the student trustees made today, the conditions are very good. I've read them; I've heard them.

I think they are excellent conditions. But what has taken away extracurricular activities from some of those students where this has occurred is the work to rule by some individuals in our

schools.

The opposition likes to talk about the task force report, which I have said is good and has good solid recommendations. We're doing the work to look at moving

forward with those recommendations. But where are they on the recommendations that said the union should stop penalizing teachers who are doing extracurricular activities? I don't hear the Liberal

Party expressing any support for that particular recommendation from our task force.

Mr Kennedy: You have one last chance. There are students here today. At the beginning of this year you were asked. You were given the chance.

We said, "Take the cover page off our plan." Even before that, other groups said to you that there would be trouble, there would be problems. You were initiating it. You were asked --

Interjection.

The Speaker: Would the member for Beaches-East York come to order. As you know, you try to get down to that last question. We're not going to

get to it if I have to stand up. I stopped the clock. We're going to continue.

The member for Parkdale-High Park.

Mr Kennedy: Minister, in your last response you broke one of their principles, which is to say these things need to happen peacefully. They

need your urgent action. They want you to solve things in time for next fall.

You have refused to be the Minister of Education, to say you will take charge of this problem, that you will put one proposal on the table that you agree with

that will fix things. You can't blame everybody else, surely, every single one of the 245 days since you took away extracurricular activities. Give these students today a commitment of something

specific that you will do to solve this problem, to guarantee there will be extracurricular activities, if not in time for the rest of this year, which we would certainly hope, at least for next

year, which requires you to act right away.

Hon Mrs Ecker: With all due respect to the honourable member, there are several proposals on the table. The task force did a good job of

putting many recommendations on the table for consulting with the partners. They've given that to our government. We are looking at those recommendations and, as I said, I think some of them are

very good.

Let's also be very clear. They talk about their so-called plan, which are the proposals the union had brought forward earlier. I appreciate that they want to

put solutions on the table, and we all appreciate that you were doing that. But as I've said before, the difficulty with that plan -- the students have not said they support your plan; the students

have said they want long-term, sustainable, workable solutions. You were asking the students to increase their workload, for them to pay for a decrease in teacher workload. That's not the solution

either. Those students deserve a solution. They deserve their extracurricular activities that have been denied because of a work-to-rule campaign. I don't agree with that. I think it's unfair to

the kids. I also think it's unfair when political disputes and labour disputes --

The Speaker: Order. I'm afraid the minister's time is up.

HYDRO RATES

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Minister of Energy. This is information from your own ministry's Web site. One

of the things it points out is that today, even after your 8% rate increase, people in Detroit who consume electrical power pay 60% more than people in Toronto.

Your government says you're going to sell off Ontario's hydroelectric system to private companies. Minister, if you were at one of those private companies and

you then could decide where you were going to sell the power, would you sell the power in Toronto for 60% less or would you sell it in Detroit for 60% more?

Hon Jim Wilson (Minister of Energy, Science and Technology): There is a requirement in the Energy Competition Act of 1998 that this

Legislature passed that the people of Ontario be looked after first. The government has appointed an independent market operator to ensure that's done.

Furthermore, and I've answered this for the honourable member before, it's physically impossible to transmit any more than a fifth of the daily power, the

electricity, in this province. There just aren't enough wires in the United States, and by the way, the electrons go both ways. So although there's enough wire there for 4,000 megawatts of power in

a 20,000 megawatt day, at any given time half the power's going this way because it goes back and forth all day.

So you couldn't physically sell enough power to the United States to put a dent in the price in our market at this point in history.

Mr Hampton: This Web site also provides other interesting information, because as you're preparing to sell off our hydroelectricity system,

you are actually building more transmission lines to the United States. Your own Web site points that out, that you are increasing the capacity right now to take Ontario's electricity and sell it

into the United States.

My point remains the same: if a company can get 60% more by selling the power in Detroit, or 72% more by selling it in Boston or 145% more by selling it in New

York city, and you yourself said the other day that once these power stations are sold off to private companies they're in a free market, what are you going to do, Minister, to stop them from

selling the power in the United States and to stop them from saying to Ontario consumers, "If you want power, you pay the same the price we're getting in Detroit or Boston or New York"? What are

you going to do to stop that?

Hon Mr Wilson: It is the Ontario Energy Board, headed by the Honourable Floyd Laughren, who has ordered that additional wires be built into

the United States. It wasn't the government. It's for reliability purposes. One only has to remember the ice storm of three years ago, where we needed power from the United States. Power goes back

and forth all the time. The honourable member may want to know that millions of dollars are made each year after Ontarians are looked after. Millions of dollars are made each year, by the old

Ontario Hydro and now Ontario Power Generation, in flowing electricity, when it's appropriate, to the United States. It's called excess electricity in Ontario. We don't need it.

When you're running nuclear plants and they're running well, they have to run full out. That's the way a Candu reactor works. It takes months to shut down.

It's not like flicking a switch on and off. So when you're running them and the Power Workers Union is doing a good job pumping out that electricity, why not make millions of dollars and help pay

off the debt your party did nothing about?

Mr Hampton: Here goes the Minister of Energy trying to change his story again. You acknowledged yesterday that we've been paying debt charges

at Hydro for some years, so don't try to change the story again.

The issue is this: once you have created a market for international energy corporations, you will not be able to tell them what price they can sell their power

at and where they can sell it. California tried to do that. After opening up the market, they tried to say to energy corporations, "You must sell power here and you must sell it at this price." You

know what happened in California. Are you going to try to repeat that mistake too, Minister?

Hon Mr Wilson: You know, you totally lost me in that argument. We're not California. You can just stop making the comparisons because not one

you've made in the last three days has anything to do with Ontario. You're trying to stretch some sort of facts. We're not California and we're not deregulating the market like California.

Our problem is we've got lots of power, unlike California and Alberta. We've got one company that produces 90% of that power. It has no competition. It's cost

has never been checked. People have never been able to buy green power. There's never been any choice and we think consumers deserve choice. They deserve to get out of the malaise of power

generation in this province and the sins of the monopoly of the past, and to move forward, build new plants and not tax their grandchildren by putting them further and further into debt like what

happened over the last several decades with the old electricity system in this province. We're not going down that road any more. We have a positive new era in electricity. Wake up. The private

sector is asking and consumers are asking us to open the market as soon as we can.

EDUCATION LABOUR DISPUTES

Mr Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): He's a funny guy. My question is to the Minister of Education. Madame, why are you jumping on the

strike now, when the two sides are so close to deal? I think, Minister --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Stop the clock. Come to order. Sorry for the interruption, member.

Mr Marchese: Well, Minister, you either know that they're negotiating or don't know -- and if you don't know, it's worse. But I'm assuming,

since you've got so many staff, that you know they're negotiating and that they're very close. I believe a solution is within reach, I do, and we all want to see the kids go back into the

classroom. My question to you, Madame, is, why are you sabotaging a negotiated end to the strike?

Hon Janet Ecker (Minister of Education, Government House Leader): I refer this to the Minister of Labour.

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of Labour): We've been in contact with the negotiating parties, obviously, and have tried to keep abreast of the

situation. The situation is fairly clear. The school board has taken the position that they are not in negotiations. One of the union officials has suggested that there has been an offer that has

floated back to the school boards. The school boards considered the offer to be not significant and in fact not truly an offer that was worthy of further consideration.

So from all conversations that we've had, we have been informed that there are not meaningful negotiations taking place and there isn't meaningful opportunity

to settle the strike in the very near future. I think any reasonable and responsible government at this point in time, with the thought of the parents and children in mind, would take this position

of introducing legislation to protect the school year and protect those children who are trying to get through their school year in a timely fashion. So if you're suggesting there's meaningful

legislation and they're this close to a deal, the only one who appears to be suggesting that is you, my friend.

Mr Marchese: The only suggestion I want to make to you is that I see your government arrogantly standing in the way of a possible solution

here. There is a golden opportunity for you here to be accountable in a different way and that is that both in Toronto and in Windsor efforts are being made to negotiate a deal. I'm saying to you,

get out of the way so that negotiation can take place in good faith. My question is, can you do that?

Hon Mr Stockwell: With great respect, we have not been involved in either of these negotiations, one being five weeks and the other being four

or five weeks. Without any movement by this Legislature -- and apparently with the opposition of your caucus, which will extend the period of time for which the children will be out, causing

concern for the children and the parents. The action needed to be taken because if we don't get co-operation from this whole House, it's going to take a number of days to pass this piece of

legislation.

Now, I understand that your House leader is very proud of this. I find it reprehensible and you should be ashamed, because there is no close deal in place

here. If there were, we wouldn't be involved. So to make the suggestion to the public out there that they're close to a deal is both unfair and impractical. Furthermore, to stand in the way of

children going back to school after four and five weeks of strike is beyond reprehensible. You should be ashamed and you should support this bill and pass it in 15 minutes. That's the responsible

act to take.

NORTHERN MEDICAL SCHOOL

Mr Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North): My question is to the Minister of Health. Minister, I'd like to ask you a specific question

related to the creation of a medical school in northern Ontario. While all of us would like to believe that your announcement yesterday meets the goals of the proposal put forward by Lakehead and

Laurentian universities, there are some legitimate concerns being expressed as a result of your statement in the House, as well as comments made by the Premier yesterday.

Minister, your strong emphasis on e-learning --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Stop the clock. If the member for Beaches-East York and the Minister of Labour want to carry on this

conversation, do it outside. I can't hear. You're yelling across at each other. If you want to do it, go in the back and talk to each other. You can yell all you want at each other. You have loud

voices and I can't hear. He's less than 20 feet away and I can't hear him.

Sorry, go ahead.

Mr Gravelle: Minister, we have some legitimate concerns we'd like you to clarify, if you could. Your strong emphasis on e-learning, as well as

the Premier's comments about the importance of Internet-based technology, leads some of us to question whether this school will be a free-standing, independent institution. In addition, your

remarks yesterday that the medical school will be on a site or sites suggests you may not be committed to the co-location of the institution at Lakehead and Laurentian universities. Therefore, my

question is, does your commitment to a northern medical school mean you are accepting and will implement the proposal put forward by Lakehead and Laurentian universities, and specifically, will you

confirm that Lakehead University in Thunder Bay will be one of the sites for the medical school?

Hon Tony Clement (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I thank the honourable member for the question. Indeed, yesterday was an historic

day for medical education and for remedying the physician shortage in Ontario. I think we can take pride in the fact that yesterday's announcement was all about this government making an important

decision and saying we will go ahead.

The honourable member is asking for some details. I caution the honourable member that Rome wasn't built in a day. We want to get the kind of detail from the

community as well as from the medical education experts. I can tell you that the response thus far has been very positive. My point of view is that it goes beyond a virtual school -- I know that

was the concern of the honourable member the other day, and other honourable members as well. This is more than a virtual school. It needs a site or sites. We are quite looking forward to

conversing with Laurentian, Lakehead, Windsor and all other interested post-secondary sectors to get their proposals on how to do it best.

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): You've had the proposal from the north for a long time. I know, and I'm sure, you would have done a business

impact study before making this announcement, because that's your government's rhetoric. So could you please provide some more details to the people of northern Ontario? Would you please stand in

your place today and tell the people in northern Ontario how many capital dollars you have allocated to this project, and will you stand in your place and assure the people of Sudbury that the

bricks and mortar of the medical school you're talking about -- one part of it -- will be located in Sudbury at Laurentian University?

Stand in your place right now and say "yes" to that question, give us a capital dollar amount, and do you know what? I'll pop the champagne cork.

Hon Mr Clement: I'm very pleased to stand in my place today and say that the priority of the Mike Harris government is for more medical

students, more family physicians, more specialists for rural and northern areas. That is our priority, and I stand in my place proud of that.

If the honourable member wishes to know what Sudbury thinks of this, I would like to quote Jim Gordon, who is chair of the Northern Ontario Mayors' Coalition

and mayor of the city of Greater Sudbury, who said, "We commend Premier Mike Harris and his cabinet for this historic decision. ... Today, I want to thank the province for demonstrating its

commitment to northern Ontario.... Having Premier Harris, a son of the north, support this school makes a powerful statement." I couldn't have said it better myself.

SMART GROWTH

Mr Joseph Spina (Brampton Centre): My question is for the Minister of Municipal Affairs. The phrase "smart growth" was launched by the Premier

in January, and you made an extensive statement earlier today. I guess what I'm looking for is, what exactly will it mean to the people of my riding and our city of Brampton, and who will you be

talking to?

Hon Chris Hodgson (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): It's a very good question, and I know the member is keenly interested in this.

Our vision is a pro-growth plan that builds on the principles our party has had for 40 or 50 years from leaders such as Drew and Frost. They thought more in terms of long-term planning for the

province and what we need in terms of infrastructure and policies to attract and maintain growth and, at the same time, improve our standard and quality of life in the province. That's what has

made this a great province to live in.

So we're undertaking consultations to implement this vision with a strategy based on what we hear from the people of Ontario around more choices for people,

around co-ordinating levels of government in municipalities, listening to their concerns and their solutions, and encompassing that into a strategy that will deliver results.

Mr Spina: Minister, you spoke about the phenomenal growth that's been experienced in our area and around Ontario and the projections into the

future. Nobody faces the problem of growth more than those of us in the 905 belt, and particularly in Brampton. Members of the opposition talk about what Bill Davis did. He committed Highway 410.

The Liberals started it but, like a lot of their initiatives, it was only half finished. In fact, Highway 410 right now is euphemistically referred to as 205 because it's only half finished. The

NDP in five years in office never did a thing to it.

So as a result of some of the issues in our area -- the incompletion of Highway 410, the choking off of Highway 7 -- the gridlock is killing the commuters who

are coming from Brampton, through Brampton and from Peel to the core of Toronto and back.

How can my constituents' concerns be heard and considered in your plans for Smart Growth?

Hon Mr Hodgson: It's true that we have experienced a lot of growth under the leadership of Mike Harris because of tax cuts or removing

barriers to economic growth and we're seeing some of the pressures that more people and more growth have on a province that hasn't been actively planning for the future since, as you mentioned, the

corridor of the 410, planned in the late 1950s, early 1960s, and the 407, planned in the late 1960s, early 1970s. It takes time to protect these corridors and we must think ahead beyond the next

election, about 10, 15 years out.

Your constituents should contact our ministry. We will be having regional consultation meetings with myself and with my parliamentary assistant and other

members of the government and our ministry. We're opening up a Web site where they can contact and add to the discussion.

The Liberals want to reinvest the urban planners' dream of the 1950s, where experts come in and tell people how and where they should live and what choices

they should make. We believe in consulting with ordinary working families of this province to get their ideas on how we, as a government, can work for them in implementing their choice on where

they work and what mode of transportation they take and making sure that the infrastructure --

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

GOVERNMENT SPENDING

Ms Caroline Di Cocco (Sarnia-Lambton): My question is to the Deputy Premier. I don't see him, though.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Stop the clock, if you could, just for a quick moment. Here he comes. We'll just give him a second. I think he

can hear you now.

Ms Di Cocco: Thank you, Speaker. My question is actually quite straightforward, and it is to the Deputy Premier. It's regarding cabinet

office. I understand it's the central agency that supports the Premier and cabinet and it also provides administrative support to the office of the Premier and other organizational units.

What I found incredible, and you talk about smaller government, more efficient government, is that the cabinet office costs have more than doubled since 1995.

The cost in 1995 was $7,858,149.00; the cost in 2000 was $15,816,386.00, and these are actuals. I'd like to know why the operational costs of cabinet office have more than doubled and every other

sector of this province has been nickeled and dimed to death for the last six years.

Hon Jim Flaherty (Deputy Premier, Minister of Finance): I thank the member opposite for the question. In terms of the size of government, I'm

sure the member knows that today in the government of Ontario we have fewer ministers and fewer political staff and at less cost to the taxpayer than in the previous, NDP government. The NDP

government had five more ministers, with 15% more staff than we have now. Just before the election in June 1995 the previous government had 29 ministers and 352 political staff, compared to our

current 24 ministers with 303 staff.

Ms Di Cocco: In 1995, when the Legislature had 130 members, the extra cost for cabinet ministers and parliamentary assistants and the Premier

was almost $752,000. In March of this year, the cost of your cabinet ministers and their parliamentary assistants is $1,103,488, and we have a smaller Legislature. These are facts and figures. How

do you explain one rule for the rest of the province and one rule for your cabinet offices and for your ministers?

Hon Mr Flaherty: I can tell the member opposite that during the budget preparation process we're in now and the business plan process that all

the ministries are going through, we look, of course, at the size of the provincial public service, at the full-time employees in the provincial public service. There will be a budget on May 9 and

we'll address some of those issues there, as you know.

In terms of political staff, the NDP in 1994-95 budgeted over $18 million for political staff. Last year our government spent 27% less than that, even before

you factor in inflation. So in terms of political staff, we certainly have instituted substantial savings in the government of Ontario.

EDUCATION LABOUR DISPUTES

Mr John Hastings (Etobicoke North): My question is directed to the labour minister and it concerns the school board strikes. Last Friday

morning I had a meeting with four women, four young mothers from my constituency, two of whom are getting near to graduation from Humber College, one in robotics. One young mother has two children.

The purpose of their meeting was to come and talk to us about the problems they were facing regarding the closure of the schools, particularly with the Toronto District School Board. They pleaded

with me to see if we could come up with a solution, because in the one case --

Laughter.

Mr Hastings: It may be a laughing matter to the member from Fort York, but at least I'd like to know from the minister the specific provisions

in the legislation and why we are taking this drastic set of actions at this time, in response particularly to these constituents in my riding.

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of Labour): I thank the member for Etobicoke. We've experienced the same thing in my riding as well. I know

members in Windsor and Toronto have expressed the same concerns to me.

Obviously we would rather see a collective agreement. The vast majority of agreements are collectively negotiated. When you're put in a situation where you

have people out on strike for four and five weeks and you have closed schools, you have to make a decision. That decision is detailed legislation that orders people back to work.

It can't be a resolution; it can't be a motion; it has to be legislation. You can come into this House with resolutions like the Leader of the Opposition that

accomplish absolutely nothing -- it is completely meaningless, absolutely no substance at all -- or you can act decisively, show some leadership, protect parents, teachers and in fact students,

like this government has done, and legislate people back to work to protect the taxpayers of this province, not resolutions which do nothing.

Mr Hastings: My follow-up is a supplementary. I implore our friends in the New Democratic Party to look at the crucial nature of what is

happening in the Toronto schools and to look at how this is adversely impacting working families in Toronto and in Windsor. Why won't they support this legislation instead of dragging it out for

two more weeks? Minister, it may even end up jeopardizing the graduation plans of these two young mothers who want to get back to work in this province.

Hon Mr Stockwell: Obviously the question is spot on; it's exactly right. I remember being in this House when the members of the NDP ordered

the Windsor school board back to work without even getting a jeopardy ruling. When they were in government, they didn't worry about getting jeopardy. They just ordered people back to work.

I've been in this House when we got the Liberals across the floor telling us, "We will give back-to-work legislation in Hamilton-Wentworth speedy passage."

Interjection: What did they do?

Hon Mr Stockwell: What does that mean? They voted against the bill when it came here.

You've got to show some leadership in this place. You've got to do the right thing. Sometimes the right thing means legislating individuals back to work for

the benefit of parents and students.

To answer you, member for Etobicoke, we need to show direction. We have given that direction. This is not a resolution, it's action. I can only presume, since

they promised to support the last bill and voted against it, that they must be opposed to this one and they'll vote for it.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Minister of the Environment. Yesterday at the Walkerton inquiry, the former

ministry officials clearly identified that after 1995 your government told Ministry of the Environment enforcement officers not to enforce the law. It was shocking to find out that you said, "Back

off. Don't enforce the law any more. Don't do any inspections." But what's even more shocking is that you spent $800,000 on the Gibbons report to try to dress up your cuts to the Ministry of the

Environment and make it sound as if somehow it was new policy.

It's pretty clear that the people of Ontario want you to enforce environmental laws and want a Ministry of the Environment that is capable of enforcing

environmental laws. What are you going to do to make sure that happens?

Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Minister of the Environment): I agree with the leader of the third party. It is extremely important that we have a very

strong enforcement presence in Ontario, because it does act as a deterrent to non-compliant industry. I would like you to know that, since 1999, the government has hired more than 130 new

enforcement and investigative-related staff to ensure protection of health and the environment. The number of charges laid in 2000 increased by 25% from 1999, and the fines issued in 2000 were more

than $2.6 million, a 74% increase from 1999. We have a new, tough environmental penalties act, and we are moving forward with very strong enforcement measures.

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): That's all very well, but seven people died under your watch, and you started to put a little bit of

what you took away back into the ministry in 1999.

I want to get back to the Gibbons report. What it says is, "Don't worry so much about prosecuting polluters." It sets the stage to weaken the ministry even

further and to privatize our water and sewer systems. It further justifies your plan to cut the environmental budget next month. You even had to bring in an outsider to write this report, because

no self-respecting environmental enforcement person at your ministry would do it, given the cuts and deregulation you've done already.

So, Minister, stand up today and tell us you will reject this nonsense of the Gibbons report and build up the budget and the resources in the ministry so it

can do its job and protect the environment and the people of this province.

Hon Mrs Witmer: I'm extremely disappointed that the member would characterize Ms Gibbons in the way she has. She is a highly respected former

deputy minister. Her report has been extremely well received. It talks about a new vision for the environment, one where we all work co-operatively in an interministerial manner. It talks about

moving beyond minimum standards into continuous improvement. It talks about moving forward with partnerships with all the stakeholders in this province. I can assure you that report will be

implemented by our government and you will see there will be tremendous improvements. In fact, we will have the best Ministry of the Environment anywhere.

GOVERNMENT APPOINTMENTS

Mr Bruce Crozier (Essex): My question would be best answered by the Premier, but I will direct it to the Chair of Management Board, who was --

but there's no one --

Interjection.

Mr Crozier: Well, I'm not starting it. The Chair of Management Board was here.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Stop the clock. Don't start that stuff. It's a back way of getting around to it. When you start that, you lead

on. Just ask the question. You know the ministers are here. You can look across, you can see them, you can say, "He's here, he's here, he's here." So that's the answer. Don't get around it by doing

that, because it'll start on the other side. You know you can't mention attendance in here, and I'm not going to put up with it. You got around it the other way. Don't tell me that. I sat here and

heard what you said. You were trying to get around to, "I'd like to ask it to the Premier and I have to ask it to somebody else." We know what you're trying to do, and I'm saying to you don't do it

or you won't ask the question, because you'll be named. Member for Essex.

Mr Crozier: Recently, N. Scott White was appointed as chair of the Ontario Realty Board Corp. Mr White was vice-chair of Colliers

International, a multinational real estate firm that donated more than $30,000 to the Tory party since you came to office.

It seems that Mr White has friends in high places. I asked Mr White if he asked for the appointment. He said, "Blake Wallace was the one who suggested to me

and then asked me if I would allow my name to stand for consideration to this appointment." As we all know, Blake Wallace is a well-known Tory insider, friend of the Premier and an Adams mine

lobbyist.

My question to the minister is this: why is an unelected, unaccountable party insider like Blake Wallace arranging an appointment that is this important? Is

that accountability?

Hon David H. Tsubouchi (Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet): First of all, there's a real difference between getting some information on

the positions available as opposed to some sort of decision-making, which is not done. That's why there's a process in place where any of these appointees are accountable to a committee of the

Legislature, which, I must say, the members of the opposition certainly are part of. They have an opportunity at that time to indicate their concerns, and quite frankly there's a very important

process that goes through.

Having said that, if we look at the ORC, the ORC has a mandate right now to bring a lot more professionalism into what they're doing to make sure there's a lot

more accountability. Frankly, this is what is happening throughout the whole process, whether it's the pool of qualified brokers through to management. That's why it's very important for this

process to be very public. As the member knows, it is very public, and certainly the member knows that the opposition had a chance to ask questions as well.

Mr Crozier: When Mr White told us about Blake Wallace's involvement, we were looking forward to asking Mr Wallace directly about his

involvement in this process. Unfortunately, after we learned of this involvement the government decided to withdraw his appointment -- being Mr Wallace's to the McMichael board -- so we wouldn't

have a chance to question him.

We on this side of the House believe the government appointments should be given the utmost respect. This means that appointments should not be subverted by

individuals who are not accountable to the Legislature, and we know that Blake Wallace has been responsible for at least one appointment but do not know how deep this goes. We've seen the ORC

rocked by scandal and cronyism, and this doesn't seem to restore any accountability. I would like to ask the minister to tell us if Blake Wallace has made any other decisions affecting Management

Board appointments?

Hon Mr Tsubouchi: The subject of the question is Mr Scott White, who went through the process. Clearly there was a process that we all agree

upon, all sit upon, all members of this Legislature. It's one thing to be able to hear about a position being available -- in fact perhaps the question to be asked, then, is, how did someone like

Gilles Morin hear about the position when he was appointed to the Ontario Highway Transport Board, or Bernard Grandmaître, who was appointed to the Assessment Review Board, or Frank Miclash,

for another example, who was appointed a full-time member of the Social Benefits Tribunal? I'm sure he heard about these positions from some of his colleagues. I would gather that they didn't have

much of a say in terms of the actual decision, other than going through the process of committee, but that's why the process is here. The accountability is clearly to the Legislature; that's why we

have the committees. The process is one we all support. Quite frankly, we're talking about Mr White here. Is he concerned about someone who wasn't appointed?

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Order. The minister's time is up.

INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM FINANCING

Mr Bert Johnson (Perth-Middlesex): My question is for the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation. As you know, many of the recreation,

culture and tourism facilities in the province are in need of repair, upgrades and even expansion, but for many small communities such as several in my riding the tax base is simply not large

enough to fund major infrastructure. People in my riding tell me these facilities are important to them and essential to their communities. What are we doing to protect these facilities that are

badly in need of repair?

Hon Tim Hudak (Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation): I want to thank the member for Perth-Middlesex for the question. Not only is he

an outstanding Speaker, but he is working hard, obviously, for the constituents in Perth-Middlesex.

I had the chance to visit St Marys, Stratford and Milverton in the member's riding just this past week. He had a tour that he took me on of the Milverton

Arena, which is one such project he refers to in his riding, an arena that I think is about 50 years old. I'm pleased the people of Milverton are investing in this new program, the $300-million

sports, culture and tourism partnership, a record, an innovative program of the Mike Harris government to invest in health and safety issues as well as to renew and rebuild our infrastructure and

tourism attractions, sport and recreational facilities such as arenas, rec centres, art galleries, theatres etc. The Mike Harris government knows full well, understands and supports the key role

these investments will make in communities like those in Perth-Middlesex.

Mr Johnson: Minister, as you know, there is a committee of some eight or 10 members in Perth East who have been meeting regularly over the

last months, and they were ever so glad to have the opportunity to meet with you last weekend.

I agree that this program will help communities improve some of their most important infrastructure, but I understand that the demand for SuperBuild sports,

culture and recreation funding is very high. Some organizations in my riding that have applied to the program are wondering whether they will be successful. Could you inform the House about the

process for this particular program? Specifically, my constituents would like to know how their projects will be evaluated, given the demand for funding.

Hon Mr Hudak: Not only do I want to thank the member for Perth-Middlesex, but also Mayor McTavish, Grant Whittington, Jeff Erwin and Audrey

Nicholson and some other concerned citizens who told me about the importance of this investment to their community. Certainly Milverton, like many others, is very excited about participating in the

sports, culture and tourism partnership, the $300-million Mike Harris investment.

It's open to health and safety issues, as I mentioned, for municipalities as well as provincially important tourism and such attractions. No doubt because of

this excitement the Mike Harris government is provoking in communities across Ontario, there are a lot of people interested in participating. Only the best projects are going to qualify for this

program. It's important for the projects to demonstrate the importance to the community, the business impact on the community and the participation of partnerships. Try to be innovative in working

with businesses in the community, community groups and municipalities, because we're looking forward to maximizing our investment in Ontario for sports, culture and tourism.

HEALTH SERVICES

Mr Jean-Marc Lalonde (Glengarry-Prescott-Russell): My question is to the Minister of Health. For the last two years my riding has had bad

experiences with privatization of radiology services. DiagnostiCare Inc, the private company from Alberta that bought up and operates these clinics in my riding, is holding our doctors and

constituents hostage. In the letters I have here with me today, the company has clearly stated that due to government clawbacks, their bottom line has suffered to the point that they are once again

planning on closing down the Rockland, Plantagenet and Clarence Creek offices. That is after having already closed the Alfred clinic. These closures would be disastrous to our communities. Doctors

would leave the area. Patients would suffer, as we don't have any public transportation to the larger centres.

I ask you, Minister, what are you prepared to do to ensure that the people of Glengarry-Prescott-Russell are provided with X-rays, ultrasound and other

radiology services?

Hon Tony Clement (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): Certainly I'll take the honourable member's question under advisement. If he can

provide me with some details, I'd be happy to do some further research. I can say generally, on a couple of fronts, of course one of the things we have been concerned about and had an excellent

dialogue with the federal government on was the state of medical equipment in Ontario. I'm pleased to report to this House that an agreement was reached a few weeks ago with the federal government

and money has started to flow in terms of diagnostic equipment and other forms of medical equipment.

In terms of cancer care and its investments, I can again say to this House that the taxpayers' dollars flowing to cancer care investments here in Ontario have

multiplied and have increased by more than 40% since the start of our investments in this area as a government. So if there's a particular problem, I'd be happy to deal with it.

Mr Lalonde: Since DiagnosticCare bought up these clinics, X-ray services have been reduced, and in some areas ultrasound services were

completely eliminated. Due to the lack of public transportation in my riding, I am concerned that many people who require X-rays will not get them because of their inability to travel to Ottawa.

The equipment is not a factor.

DiagnosticCare suggests in their letter of April 2 this year that in order for them to continue operations and also to meet their bottom line, the local

doctors in their search for funding should request a subsidy, as it may be more attractive and could then be used as leverage with government to guarantee that radiology services continue in their

communities.

I ask you, Minister, do you think this is the way our health services should be operated, with threats? Once again, what can you do to ensure that the people

of my riding are provided with these necessary services?

Hon Mr Clement: The answer is clearly no, I don't think the health care system should be operated on a series of threats, although that has

never stopped some people before. Certainly that's not the way it should go. It should go on the basis of need. It should go on the basis of the best care delivered in the community, and that's

what we stand for on this side of the House. That's why for each and every year of the Mike Harris government the health care dollars invested by this government has gone up; indeed it has gone up

by 27% over the last five years.

If the honourable member has a particular problem in his constituency, then we can deal with that. But the numbers don't lie. It is clearly an area of the

highest priority of the Mike Harris government, and it will continue to be so.

VICTIMS OF CRIME

Ms Marilyn Mushinski (Scarborough Centre): My question is for the Attorney General. On March 22, the Globe and Mail published an

article

stating that the Law Society of Upper Canada is considering a very disturbing proposed rule of professional conduct. If adopted, this rule would allow defence lawyers to conceal physical evidence

relevant to a crime from authorities if it could play a valuable strategic role at trial and if turning this evidence over to authorities would reduce this strategic value. For example, Bernardo

lawyer Ken Murray's suppression of videotapes showing the torture of Kristen French and Leslie Mahaffy would become legitimate if this proposed rule of professional conduct were passed.

Attorney General, my constituents in Scarborough Centre are appalled by this and want to know what measures would be taken to seek justice for victims.

Applause.

Hon David Young (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs): I thank my colleagues and I thank you, Mr Speaker, and I thank

the member for Scarborough Centre for what is a very important question. I must tell you that I share her concern. It is a very legitimate concern on a very important issue. Frankly, the proposed

rule -- and I want to emphasize it is a proposed rule -- is unacceptable. I expressed that view to the treasurer of the law society and to other senior officials from the law society shortly after

the rule was tabled.

Frankly, it's my hope that representatives of the law society will reconsider this matter -- I have some indication to believe that they will do so -- because

it would be inappropriate for this rule to be passed in its current form.

I will say as well, before I take my seat again, that I would encourage all members of the Legislature who have received similar calls from their constituents

or --

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Order. I'm sorry, the member's time is up.

Ms Mushinski: Minister, I'm delighted to see that you share my view and the view of my constituents that this proposed rule is unacceptable.

Since 1995 the Mike Harris government has proven time and again that it stands firmly on the side of victims of crime and their families. Despite the opposition of some groups, some of which of

course come from the other side of this House, the Mike Harris government continues to ensure that victims have a voice in our justice system.

Minister, can you remind this House about the important initiatives that the Mike Harris government has adopted on behalf --

The Speaker: Minister.

Hon Mr Young: Shortly after this government took office in 1995, we came forward with a series of measures, a series of initiatives that were

somewhat unprecedented throughout the country and in fact Ontario remains one of the first and only jurisdictions to have passed legislation that entrenches the protection of victims. You will

undoubtedly recall the Victims' Bill of Rights which passed in 1995. Most recently we've come forward to entrench and make permanent the Office for Victims of Crime. That office will ensure that

that bill of rights is enforced throughout.

In addition, in the last fiscal year, 2000-01, our government is very proud to say that we spent $135 million on no less than 40 programs, all of which will

assist victims across this province.

NATIONAL CHILD BENEFIT SUPPLEMENT

Mr Tony Martin (Sault Ste Marie): My question is for the Minister of Community and Social Services. Minister, every month your government

takes money away from the poorest of our children. These children are supposed to get about $100 a month back from the national child tax benefit supplement, but you've clawed back dollar for

dollar from children whose families are on Ontario Works and on the Ontario disabilities support program. This is wrong. That's why I'm leading a campaign to stop this clawback. I'm asking you

today to make quick work of my campaign and tell the people of Ontario that you'll stop taking this money away from our most vulnerable children. Would you do that today, Minister?

Hon John R. Baird (Minister of Community and Social Services, minister responsible for children, minister responsible for francophone

affairs): This government has done a lot to try to improve the lives of children in this province. One of the things that we're committed to do is not just to provide supports to help

people move from welfare to work, but to do more for those real heroes in our society, those working families with low and modest incomes for whom government has traditionally done very little, to

give and encourage an attachment to the labour force. That's why the national child benefit supplement was designed by the Harris government and Jean Chrétien, all 100 of his Liberal MPs. I'm

so very pleased to tell you that the member for Don Valley East's mother supports this policy each and every day and she votes for it.

It was designed by the government to encourage attachment to the labour force. Jane Stewart, the Minister of Human Resources Development, said, "What we are

trying to do is build a platform so that there is incentive to work." Pierre Pettigrew, the then minister, said, "We are trying to reduce and eventually eliminate the welfare wall. Too many

families are in the welfare trap. Families on welfare will never be really rich. It's a job that's key." That's what this government has designed to do, to provide an incentive, to encourage

attachment to the labour force.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): The time for question period is over.

EDUCATION LABOUR DISPUTES

Hon Janet Ecker (Minister of Education, Government House Leader): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: notwithstanding standing order 69(a), I

seek unanimous consent to put forward a motion to consider second and third reading debate of a bill entitled

An Act to resolve labour disputes respecting the Toronto District School Board and the

Windsor-Essex Catholic District Board.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Is there unanimous consent? I'm afraid I heard some noes.

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of Labour): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I would then request unanimous consent to begin second reading of

the same act immediately following routine proceedings today, in order to begin second reading of that aforementioned bill.

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

Hon Mr Stockwell: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: Considering that there was not unanimous consent, the NDP opposing us on second reading

starting after routine proceedings, may I then seek the unanimous consent of this House to begin second readings after the dinner break tonight so we can begin second readings on the bill to put

children first and get them back to school.

The Speaker: Unfortunately, or maybe fortunately, depending on how you feel about it, the House isn't sitting tonight. You need a motion for

that.

Interjection.

The Speaker: OK, we'll start with that. Unanimous --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Wait until I've finished. I'm betting on the answer.

Is there unanimous consent to sit tonight? No. So we therefore can't do it. I heard some noes, unfortunately.

AIR QUALITY IN LEGISLATURE

Mr John Hastings (Etobicoke North): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: My point of order concerns the atmosphere in this House in terms of the

humidity and the heat. What I would like to request of the Speaker is whether he could ascertain why it is, year in and year out --

Interjections.

Mr Hastings: If the folks from the New Democrats want to leave, that's their privilege.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. I can't hear the member. I did receive a notice that he did want to bring this up; he sent me a handwritten note. To tell

you the truth, I thought he was kidding about it. But on a point of order, the member for Etobicoke North.

Mr Hastings: I would request that the Speaker undertake an investigation to determine why we cannot have cool facilities in this whole

precinct --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Where's my wrench? The member for Niagara Centre on the same point of order.

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: If I could be of assistance to the Speaker and to the member, perhaps if

you removed your tie and doffed your jacket, you'd be a little cooler and more comfortable.

Interjections.

The Speaker: It may be the same point of order, I don't know.

Interjection: It's not the same.

The Speaker: OK. A point of order, and then I'll reply.

Mr Hastings: Our friends in the socialist line may consider this a facetious request, but I would outline that we wear ties normally in

respect of and for decorum in this place.

Interjections.

Mr Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): Speaker, I just want to seek assistance to let me know if the government's on a filibuster this

afternoon. I'm wondering if they're trying to slow the House down.

The Speaker: All of you should try wearing this wool robe and see what it's like in here. In fact, I would tell you it has been hot after the

last few days, and I got back last night and both my wife and I have a touch of the flu and I actually had a temperature. I thought it was hot in here because of the heat and the wool garments that

I wear. It turned out I had a little touch of the flu, so it has been extremely hot.

Having said that, the problem with this system is that we have a very old building. We do, I am pleased to inform you, have --

Interjection.

The Speaker: Be very quiet so we can hear. I know we're having a little bit of fun, but the member does want to hear.

We do have some plans to improve it, which will be brought in our capital plan, and the member may want to speak to the Board of Internal Economy. It will take

some money. If he's not familiar, we will give him the names of the people on the Board of Internal Economy. We have some things that we would like to do in terms of health and safety in this

building, but it will take some money to do that.

So I suggest that the member for Etobicoke North speak with the government House leader and the members of the Board of Internal Economy. We also have the

capital plan that we can bring in tomorrow at the table if you will come down and take a look at it. I would encourage all members who feel the way I do -- this is a lovely, lovely building, a

historical building, but it does need some work to upgrade it into the next century. We have some plans to do that, and so I'm hoping that the members of the board will encourage all the members to

support the plan.

Mr Dwight Duncan (Windsor-St Clair): On a more serious matter: in light of the fact that the NDP have not given consent for the government's

bill, I seek unanimous consent to debate Mr McGuinty's resolution, which will bring the kids in Windsor and Toronto back to school tomorrow.

The Speaker: Is there unanimous consent? No.

PETITIONS

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, which reads as follows:

"Whereas many residents of St Catharines and other communities in Ontario are unable to find a family doctor as a result of the growing doctor shortage we have

experienced during the tenure of the Harris government;

"Whereas cancer patients in Ontario requiring radiation treatment face unacceptable delays and are often forced to travel to the United States to receive

medical attention;

"Whereas many prescription drugs which would help patients with a variety of medical conditions such as macular degeneration, multiple sclerosis, arthritis,

diabetes and heart failure are not covered by OHIP;

"Whereas many assistive devices that could aid patients in Ontario are not eligible for funding from the Ontario Ministry of Health;

"Whereas community care access centres have inadequate funding to carry out their responsibilities for long-term and home care;

"Whereas the Harris government has now spent over $235 million on blatantly partisan government advertising in the form of glossy brochures, television and

radio ads;

"We, the undersigned, call upon the Conservative government of Mike Harris to immediately end its abuse of public office and terminate any further expenditure

on political advertising and instead invest this money in the health care system in the province of Ontario."

I affix my signature, as I am in complete agreement with the sentiments of this petition.

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

Mr David Christopherson (Hamilton West): I continue to receive petitions from workers and unions regarding cancer in the workplace, and I have

more to present today. These are forwarded to me by Cathy Walker, the national health and safety director of the CAW. The petition reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas this year 130,000 Canadians will contract cancer and there are at minimum 17 funerals every day for Canadian workers who died from cancer caused by

workplace exposure to cancer-causing substances known as carcinogens; and

"Whereas the World Health Organization estimates that 80% of all cancers have environmental causes and the International Labour Organization estimates that one

million workers globally have cancer because of exposure at work to carcinogens; and

"Whereas most cancers can be beaten if government had the political will to make industry replace toxic substances with non-toxic substances; and

"Whereas very few health organizations study the link between occupations and cancer, even though more study of this link is an important step to defeating

this dreadful disease;

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

"That it become a legal requirement that occupational history be recorded on a standard form when a patient presents at a physician for diagnosis or treatment

of cancer; and

"That the diagnosis and occupational history be forwarded to a central cancer registry for analysis as to the link between cancer and occupation."

On behalf of my NDP colleagues, I proudly add my name to those of these petitioners.

HORSE RIDING SAFETY

Mr Raminder Gill (Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale): I've got a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

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

"Whereas many of these inexperienced riders are children; and

"Whereas currently there are no minimum safety standards regulating riding establishments; and

"Whereas coroners' inquests into horse riding fatalities from as long ago as 1977 have called for the mandatory use of riding helmets and boots; and

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

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows: to pass into law the private member's bill introduced by Tina Molinari, MPP for

Thornhill, entitled the Horse Riding Safety Act, 2001, in order to increase the safety of horse riders under the age of 18 by requiring the operators of riding establishments to ensure that proper

safety equipment is used, and to amend the Highway Traffic Act and make it an offence for any rider under the age of 18 to ride a horse on a highway without the proper safety equipment."

HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING

Mr Alvin Curling (Scarborough-Rouge River): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas in 1998 the Mike Harris government forced hospitals in Bancroft, Belleville, Picton and Trenton, Ontario, to amalgamate into the Quinte Healthcare

Corp;

"Whereas the fiscal management of each of the aforementioned hospitals prior to amalgamation was prudent, efficient and accountable to their communities;

"Whereas amalgamation and provincial government cutbacks have created a $5-million deficit for the Quinte Heal