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

October 17, 2001

37th Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2001-Oct-17 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Wednesday 17 October 2001 Mercredi 17 octobre 2001

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

FRANK CLAIR STADIUM

ROBERT BALDWIN DAY

GOVERNMENT COMMITMENTS

MIKE HARRIS'S LEADERSHIP

STUDENTS WITH SPECIAL NEEDS

EDUCATION

GREAT BLUE HERON

CHARITY CASINO STAFF

ACQUIRED BRAIN INJURIES

YORKWOOD LEARNING CENTRE

VISITORS

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

1205458 ONTARIO LTD. ACT, 2001

ORAL QUESTIONS

MINISTRY OF HEALTH

AND LONG-TERM CARE STAFF

PUBLIC LIBRARIES

ONTARIO SECURITY FUND PLAN

FLU IMMUNIZATION

MINISTRY OF HEALTH

AND LONG-TERM CARE STAFF

IPPERWASH PROVINCIAL PARK

COMMUNITY LIVING FUNDING

CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION

COMPETITIVE ELECTRICITY MARKET

SITE OF EARLY PARLIAMENT

ACCESS TO PROFESSIONS

AND TRADES

CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY

LABOUR RELATIONS

PETITIONS

AUDIOLOGY SERVICES

MUNICIPAL TAXATION

CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

COMMUNITY CARE ACCESS CENTRES

CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

COMMUNITY CARE ACCESS CENTRES

CENTRES D'ACCÈS

AUX SOINS COMMUNAUTAIRES /

COMMUNITY CARE ACCESS CENTRES

ONTARIO PUBLIC SERVICE

CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

COMMUNITY CARE ACCESS CENTRES

AUDIOLOGY SERVICES

PODIATRIC SERVICES

AUDIOLOGY SERVICES

SOCIAL AUDIT

OHIP SERVICES

ORDERS OF THE DAY

FOOD SAFETY

AND QUALITY ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LA QUALITÉ

ET LA SALUBRITÉ DES ALIMENTS

IMPROVING CUSTOMER SERVICE

FOR ROAD USERS ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR L'AMÉLIORATION

DES SERVICES À LA CLIENTÈLE

OFFERTS AUX USAGERS DE LA ROUTE

ORDER OF BUSINESS

PROHIBITING PROFITING

FROM RECOUNTING CRIMES ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 INTERDISANT

LES GAINS TIRÉS

DU RÉCIT D'ACTES CRIMINELS

Wednesday 17 October 2001 Mercredi 17 octobre 2001

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

FRANK CLAIR STADIUM

Mr Richard Patten (Ottawa Centre): Yesterday I was in my riding attending an announcement for which many in the capital city of Canada have been

waiting five years. On July 1 next year, the refurbished Frank Clair Stadium will once again ring to the sounds of CFL football. Pro football is back in Ottawa.

In addition to the return of football to Ottawa, the CFL announced yesterday that they will play host to the 2004 Grey Cup. Many football fans will recall that

when we last hosted the Grey Cup, in 1988, it pumped close to $20 million into the local economy. So there's an excellent economic spinoff. Many hard-working small businesses will benefit, as will

hundreds of students in my riding, who will gain part-time employment during the season and in the run-up to the festivities of Grey Cup Week in 2004.

Earlier this week I had the pleasure of meeting with the ownership group in my home a few blocks away from the stadium and was very impressed with their

dedication, their keen sense of business and their long-term commitment to returning a winning product to Ottawa. As the new owner, Brad Watters, said, "Ottawa has proven to me that it should never

have lost the team in the first place."

I know that members from all sides of the House, including my friends from Toronto and Hamilton, look forward to having a competitive Ottawa team in the CFL

again. Football is back.

ROBERT BALDWIN DAY

Mr Doug Galt (Northumberland): A few years ago I tabled a bill for the recognition of a Robert Baldwin Day to honour a great Ontarian who did

much to create the legislative process that we depend on today.

Mr Baldwin's accomplishments include the creation of responsible government where power depends on the will of elected representatives. He also argued for the

creation of municipal government in Canada so that local concerns could be dealt with at a local level. These are but two achievements that have had a profound and lasting impact on Ontario.

Unfortunately, not many Ontarians are aware of what Robert Baldwin accomplished. This is why I was pleased to see that in the latest issue of the Canadian

Parliamentary Review there is an

article written by a former staff member of mine arguing in detail the merits of such a recognition. All politicians can agree that our staff go beyond the call of

duty.

I want to recognize Andrew Redden and his efforts to make all Ontarians aware of their history through the establishment of a Robert Baldwin Day. I wish him well

in his quest and hope that Ontario will one day honour this great man and the achievements that he has accomplished.

GOVERNMENT COMMITMENTS

Mr Ernie Parsons (Prince Edward-Hastings): My statement is to the 50 or so leadership hopefuls on the other side of the House. I thought this

might be a good opportunity to go through the Progressive Conservative Party's Blueprint and tick off what's been done and what hasn't been done so that the new leader would know where to move.

The one commitment in there, the Ontarians With Disabilities Act, you can tick "not done." It's been six and a half years -- still nothing.

The strong commitment in here to agriculture: well, in fact we've seen a 45% cut rather than -- so you may want to tick off that that's not done yet.

There was a commitment to have peace in our schools. That's not done yet. That's something still to work on.

There was a commitment to home care and to strengthen the access centres. That one's not done yet. That's a goal for you to work on.

A moratorium on labour laws, it said. That's not been done yet.

Full public consultation on all legislation: you may want to back up. That's not done yet.

Safer schools: you got rid of principals, you got rid of secretaries, you got rid of custodians, so that's not done yet. You need to work on that.

Going to solve the hospital problems with more doctors and more nurses: not done yet. When you get a chance, you may want to look at hiring some nurses and

doctors here.

Downloading would be revenue-neutral: well, you've done the downloading part, but the revenue-neutral is not done yet. So you need to work on finishing that.

There was a commitment to affordable housing in Ontario. That's not done yet either, so maybe tick that one too.

A commitment that there would be no hungry or homeless children in Ontario: that's not done yet.

MIKE HARRIS'S LEADERSHIP

Mr Bert Johnson (Perth-Middlesex): I have a serious statement. I rise today on behalf of the constituents of Perth-Middlesex to thank Premier

Harris for his visionary and bold leadership of the province of Ontario.

Governing a province as diverse as Ontario requires strong leadership and Premier Harris has provided just that. Governing is about implementing a plan and a

policy agenda, but also recognizing the significance of these decisions for future generations. Premier Harris is keenly aware of this. He has persevered and stood by his convictions to ensure that

hard-working Ontario taxpayers were receiving good government and a good return on their tax dollar.

Premier Harris knows the importance of having a strong and prosperous economy that allows us to pay for and make investments in health care, education, and the

programs and services that Ontarians rely on. His exemplary leadership also helped our province eliminate an $11-billion deficit and realize three consecutive balanced budgets.

I also want to express my sincere appreciation to the Premier for his interest in and commitment to the issues and challenges facing rural Ontario. Furthermore,

I want to thank him for his support of Ontario's farmers and agri-food industry.

Since June 1995 Premier Harris has built a solid foundation of policies that have made and will continue to make Ontario the best place to live, work, invest and

raise a family.

On behalf of my constituents, please accept our best wishes and congratulations on a job well done.

STUDENTS WITH SPECIAL NEEDS

Mr Ted McMeekin (Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Aldershot): Day after day, I hear from the parents of special-needs students whose support services

have been reduced or eliminated. These desperate parents know their child needs assistance, and the government's own required independent assessment has objectively confirmed this reality. Yet this

year alone, after identifying the need for over 1,000 education assistants, funding was provided to meet the needs of but 431 students -- another promise spoken, promise broken.

Now more than 500 education assistants short, the Hamilton board has been forced to close 20 special education classes and to warehouse -- yes, warehouse --

students for whom no help is available.

What a shameful indictment of a government which spends millions advertising how it is putting kids first.

Mr Speaker, let me tell this House about two young seven-year-old girls from my riding, Emily Carey and Carleigh Dunbar. Both children are medically fragile.

They live complex and difficult lives. At the start of this school year, their parents were told their assistance was being dropped from full-time to half-time.

We know that there are many more Emilys and Carleighs within the school board in Hamilton and elsewhere who need special assistance. As a result of this

appalling situation, I will tomorrow, God willing, be introducing a new private member's bill entitled Carleigh and Emily's Law. When passed, the new position of special education advocate will be

created. This person will have the power to review all provisions of special education and its funding throughout Ontario and, importantly, to make recommendations to this Legislative Assembly --

in short, to act like an ombudsman, but with one primary objective: meeting the special education needs of vulnerable children throughout Ontario.

EDUCATION

Mr Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): I want to spend a whole minute and a half trying to help the Minister of Education, because that's the

kind of guy I am. I tried to do that yesterday and I'm going to do it again today, because this is an opportunity -- we have a leadership campaign -- for the Minister of Education to say to the

Minister of Finance, "Enough is enough. We don't want the Minister of Education to be run by remote control by the Minister of Finance. It's got to stop."

She's got to begin to show some leadership.

Interjections.

Mr Marchese: Boys, please. She has to show some leadership and begin to advocate on behalf of the educational system, and do that on her own.

She needs my help, and that's why I'm telling her that this is a wonderful opportunity to say that we are going to start investing in our educational system, that we can't afford these cuts, these

massive $2.3-billion cuts to the elementary and secondary educational system, because it's hurting our children. We want the war to end, because only by having teachers on your side will you then

have the parents and students on your side in order to get the educational outcomes you want.

That's what she's got to do. She's got to send a clear message to the Minister of Finance and others that she's finally taking charge and she's finally going to

invest in our educational system. I'm going to be there to help her as she does that.

GREAT BLUE HERON

CHARITY CASINO STAFF

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): I rise in the House to pay tribute to four of my constituents who are staff members of the Great Blue Heron Charity

Casino in my riding of Durham. These dedicated staff members, in their quick response, helped save two lives this past summer.

The Great Blue Heron staff members who provided assistance included Angela Higgins, Keith Heaton, Robert Donahoe and Jason Hawkins. Time does not permit me to

explain all the details; however, these four staff members rescued a customer who was found without vital signs while in the casino on August 3. On August 4, they also administered first aid to a

customer who was found unresponsive outside the building. The casino staff used CPR and automated external defibrillators to restore vital signs, and of course called 911. A number of other casino

workers and passersby also gave assistance.

The quick response of this knowledgeable staff deserves recognition. Locations such as the Great Blue Heron Charity Casino in Scugog township have a very large

number of visitors each day. It is reassuring to know that lifesaving medical equipment is available on those rare occasions when patrons are in need of assistance. It is my understanding that

automated external defibrillators are at all gaming locations in Ontario. Most importantly, there are trained staff members to use them.

Shift manager Andy Wilson tells me that this experience has changed the lives of those involved. An event like this brings fear and stress, but also a true sense

of pride in helping our neighbours. I think it's appropriate that we recognize Great Blue Heron and its staff for their contribution as citizens in the case of an emergency.

ACQUIRED BRAIN INJURIES

Mrs Lyn McLeod (Thunder Bay-Atikokan): Timothy Shaver is a 24-year-old man who sustained a traumatic brain injury in 1994. As a result, he has

become explosive, aggressive and violent. Timothy spent four years in a rehabilitation program in Texas and was repatriated to Ontario in the summer of 1999. Since his return home, he has been in

and out of rehabilitation programs and psychiatric hospitals in both St Catharines and Thunder Bay.

The brain injury support services of northern Ontario have been doing everything possible within their resources to provide support for Timothy, but he simply

requires care well beyond what they are able to provide. Last January, Timothy set fire to his residence in an attempt at suicide. The psychiatric hospital would not admit him, so he was charged

with arson. That way he could at least be kept safe in jail.

Timothy is still in jail today, but on October 22 he will have served his sentence and will be released into the community. Every effort has been made to find a

place for Timothy to go. The brain injury services in London, Hamilton and Thunder Bay have all been involved, along with St Thomas, Penetanguishene and Lakehead psychiatric hospitals. All agree

that if Timothy is released into the community, he will be a danger to himself or to others, yet as of today there is no place for Timothy to go.

The problem is that the mental health system does not feel that they're responsible for Timothy because he has an acquired brain injury, not a mental illness.

The problem for Timothy and for all of us is that he needs at this point to be in a secure psychiatric unit, not in a jail cell and not on his own in the community.

My colleague and I wrote to the Minister of Health on October 9, asking him to intervene to ensure that an appropriate place is found for Timothy. The minister

must act immediately to ensure that the mental health system is there for Timothy when he is released from jail on Monday and that he is not going to be a danger to himself or to others in the

community.

Mr George Smitherman (Toronto Centre-Rosedale): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I'd invite all members to join with me in offering a warm

welcome to the guys from St Michael's Choir School in the great riding of Toronto Centre-Rosedale.

YORKWOOD LEARNING CENTRE

Mrs Tina R. Molinari (Thornhill): It is my privilege to speak in the House today about the official opening of a special learning centre in my

riding of Thornhill. The Yorkwood Learning Centre is a private school for children with learning disabilities, communication disorders, language delays and ADD. The centre's co-operative learning

philosophy promotes academic achievement, while encouraging students to explore their individuality in an environment of discovery and self-esteem.

The efforts of the centre's teachers work toward the development of the child as a whole. Teachers incorporate much more into the curriculum and emphasize the

teaching of life skills, social skills and emotional and behavioural skills.

The Yorkwood Learning Centre is the only one of its kind in York region, and many of the students come from other areas, including Woodbridge and Aurora, to

receive the vital education and services the centre provides.

It was a pleasure to attend the official opening of the centre last Friday to meet the students, parents and teachers. Judging by the many smiles on the faces of

the children who attend the centre, Yorkwood is providing a positive environment for children with learning challenges to help overcome their obstacles.

It is truly an honour to have the Yorkwood Learning Centre in my riding of Thornhill, and I would like to congratulate all those involved in making the centre a

success.

VISITORS

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Just before we begin, we have some honoured guests in the Speaker's gallery. We have members of the Consular

Spouses Association of Toronto. Please join me in welcoming our honoured special guests.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

1205458 ONTARIO LTD. ACT, 2001

Mr Levac moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill Pr23,

An Act to revive 1205458 Ontario Ltd.

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

Pursuant to standing order 84, this bill stands referred to the standing committee on regulations and private bills.

ORAL QUESTIONS

MINISTRY OF HEALTH

AND LONG-TERM CARE STAFF

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): My first question today is for the Minister of Health. Recent events show painfully well that

threats of bioterrorism, including anthrax, are far too real. Incredibly, at this time of need you have decided to fire the last five scientists at the Ministry of Health with expertise in

life-threatening biohazards. These are the very scientists that our province would turn to if a biohazard attack were to occur.

I want you to tell us, Minister, how can you possibly justify firing those people who are standing on guard for our families when it comes to matters of

bioterrorism?

Hon Tony Clement (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): The honourable member is incorrect. There has been no firing of lab testing staff.

The only staff that have been affected do not perform any testing; they're not even capable, do not have the qualifications to perform lab testing. In fact, we are in the process of hiring three

additional laboratory staff and training them in the techniques he is so concerned about.

Mr McGuinty: Minister, if you are not aware of the stories that are running in our newspapers, if you're not aware of what Ontario families

are talking about, then I would ask you to be fully briefed and understand the heightened level of anxieties when it comes to bioterrorism.

Let me tell you something about the five scientists in your ministry who you are firing. Dr Lo: he's the guy who chaired the 1999 conference on terrorism and

the laboratory of the future. Dr Smitka: she's the one who received the prestigious Amethyst Award from Premier Mike Harris for her groundbreaking work on infectious diseases. Dr Preston: he's the

guy who developed the method for fingerprinting E coli 0157, the bacterium made famous by the Walkerton tragedy. Dr Harnett is a noted expert on antibiotic-resistant superbugs, and Dr Stephan Wang

is an expert on chemical toxins.

These are people employed within your ministry whose job it is to act in a preventive way, to be out there on the leading edge, to identify what is going on in

terms of the development of biohazards, particularly in our province. Why, Minister, are you firing these five scientists?

Hon Mr Clement: I will state for the record again, we are actually hiring three additional laboratory staff and training them in the

techniques, to add to the current staff who are already trained. The honourable member is incorrect, and by repeating what is incorrect, the honourable member is contributing, I'm sure

unintentionally, to a fearful situation among our population. I think that is highly irresponsible and I would ask him to retract this kind of line of questioning when he is obviously incorrect and

he is obviously contributing to what we are trying to do, which is to make sure that we have the standards and we have the capability to deal with any sort of bioterrorism threat that comes our

way.

Mr McGuinty: Minister, let me tell you exactly like it is: you are being blinded by your ideology. You think that in all cases the best

government is the least government. We believe that our families are entitled to have these five scientists on the job protecting them.

I disagree profoundly with the approach that you are bringing to this issue. Your job right now is to stop shirking your responsibilities, open up your eyes to

the real fears being felt for our families and act accordingly. It's not enough to spend a million dollars on newspaper ads.

We have scientists on the job. Their job is to protect us from bioterrorism. They've got 150 years of scientific experience, and you decided to fire them. I

ask you on behalf of our families, how can you justify laying these people off?

Hon Mr Clement: I'd be happy to put on the record for the third time that when it comes to laboratory examination of these kinds of threats,

we are adding staff, not subtracting staff. We are training staff, not firing staff.

If there is any blindness in this House, it is the blindness of his unbridled ambition, which forces him to make up these stories and scare the people of

Ontario. That is not the way to govern. That is not the leadership that people expect from aspirants to the chair that our leader, Mike Harris, has so amply filled in his time as Premier.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Order. Sorry to interrupt the minister. It is getting a little bit loud in here. I don't know if you've finished,

Minister. Are we finished? Sorry.

New question. The leader of the official opposition.

Mr McGuinty: I turn to the same minister. Minister, here's a copy of a letter dated December 8, 1998, when you write to Dr Smitka, and you

say, "Congratulations on receiving the very prestigious Amethyst Award today. This award recognizes outstanding achievement and promotes values and best practices within the Ontario public service.

Your nomination speaks highly of your abilities." You go on at some length. You sign this and you write by hand, "Well done."

Minister, I'm not sure how you got yourself into this fix, but I think the real issue now is, what is the right thing to do? Given the context we find

ourselves in, given the heightened anxieties related to bioterrorism, given all the stories that we're hearing day in and day out now about anthrax, how can you justify firing our top five

scientists?

Hon Mr Clement: I'd be happy to explain this for a fourth time to this House. The people he is referring to have nothing to do with testing;

they have nothing to do with laboratory services. They are involved in other services that have nothing to do with the testing that he is so concerned about.

If the honourable member wishes to be concerned about something, he would acknowledge that we are concerned about it. We are adding laboratory testing staff,

three more people to the staff to do the very testing that he seems so concerned about. I would encourage him to get his facts straight before asking such questions because what he is doing is

creating a problem that does not exist. That is not responsible in these times.

Mr McGuinty: I will remind the minister again that he is shirking his responsibilities. There is a difference, Minister, as you well know,

between technologists who perform the tests and scientists who are out there creating knowledge so that we understand where the next E coli is coming from and how to deal with it, so that we

understand where the next anthrax is coming from and how to deal with it. That is the work that is performed by our scientists. They are on the job here in Ontario within your ministry working at

the cutting edge.

I ask you again, understanding the context we find ourselves in, how can you possibly justify firing the five best biohazard scientists we have working for us

here today in Ontario?

Hon Mr Clement: Let me make it effortlessly simple for the Leader of the Opposition: the very people he is referring to are not even capable,

do not have the credentials, are not members of the College of Medical Laboratory Technologists, cannot do the work that he has suggested they do.

I ask the honourable member, check your facts, do the research, be prepared for the leadership responsibilities that you so aspire to, and then you will ask

the right questions on behalf of the people of Ontario, which clearly you are not doing right now.

The Speaker: Final supplementary.

Mr McGuinty: I bring you back to your letter, Minister. In your letter you said, "Today is a very special day for you and one in which we

should take great pride. It is my pleasure to express my sincere congratulations and appreciation. For years to come, Ontarians and Canadians will benefit from your expertise and your professional

knowledge."

In another case, we have a picture of the Premier together with one of the people you are firing today.

I'm going to ask you one more time. Let's set everything else aside now, and I want you to think, as minister, somebody who is charged with a specific

responsibility when it comes to protecting the health of Ontario families. I want you to do the right thing. I want you to say, "It was a mistake. It was an oversight. I'm not sure how it got to

this, but as minister, acting to protect the interests of Ontario families, I'm going to fix it." All you have to do now, Minister, is say, "I'm going to fix it. I will no longer fire these

scientists. I will keep them on the job and they will be there to protect Ontario families."

Hon Mr Clement: Let me read into the record the previous sentence of my letter, which acknowledges their contribution to research -- research,

not laboratory testing, not the testing that is being done right now. They are not capable of doing the testing that he is --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Come to order. Minister?

Hon Mr Clement: Let me say this to the honourable member: this government does not have to take a back seat to anyone, this Premier does not

have to take a back seat to anyone when it comes to preparing this province for any potential attack, this province for the realities after the September 11 attack. We are proud of our Premier. We

are proud that we are leading this country in being prepared. He should do his job, support us, support the preparations, support the kind of leadership that we need in this province, and stop

scaring the people of Ontario.

The Speaker: New question.

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Premier. We've heard you give speech after speech over the last few weeks,

telling the people of Ontario that you want to protect them and ensure their security, but today we learn that your Ministry of Health is going to lay off five scientists who do the dedicated

research work, work that can't be done anywhere else, to ensure that Canadians are protected from bioterrorism. How can you go out there in the public and give speeches about protecting Ontario

citizens from the threats of terrorism while your government is laying off five scientists who are acknowledged leaders in the fight against bioterrorism?

Hon Michael D. Harris (Premier): I think the Minister of Health is doing very well on this question.

Hon Mr Clement: I'd be happy to state for the record again that indeed there have been no cuts to testing or other laboratory services that

are involved on the front line. In fact, we are adding three laboratory staff, of which we are proud. We have the funds available. We are adding three to the current seven who are in place. That is

the kind of commitment we are making to laboratory testing. That record speaks for itself, and we support that record.

Mr Hampton: This Minister of Health is ridiculous. This Minister of Health would have people across Ontario believe that it's all about

testing. What about having the knowledgeable scientists who can do the work?

Just one example: one of the scientists whom this government is going to lay off helped identify the very serious strain of E coli that happened at Walkerton.

Without this scientist's research and knowledge, it would have taken longer to identify the strain of E coli and it would have taken longer to treat it.

Tell the people of Ontario, Minister, how you justify now getting rid of the scientist who was doing the lead research that identified the strain of E coli

that killed seven people and rendered 2,000 ill at Walkerton.

Hon Mr Clement: These individuals are not capable of doing the testing he is concerned about. They are not involved in that aspect of

laboratory testing; they never have been. They don't have the capability. They don't have the qualifications.

The fact of the matter is, they are not involved in laboratory testing, which is what we are involved in expanding in Ontario to meet the immediate threat and

to be sure that the people of Ontario are adequately protected. That is a record that we stand by. We are improving upon that record day by day as we meet the challenge of this particular situation

after the attack on September 11. We are proud of that. We are expanding the laboratory testing services, and we will continue to do so.

Mr Hampton: I do not believe what I'm hearing. I'll send you over this academic paper, although from your answers I suspect it will go totally

above your head. It's an academic paper by one of the scientists who identified the E coli strain at Walkerton. It's an academic paper that addresses that very issue. You ought to have a look at it

before you lay off the scientist.

Another little item: a conference put on by Ontario ministry labs in 1999, terrorism and the laboratory of the future. Who organized this conference, which was

attended by CSIS and other law enforcement agents? One of the very scientists, Dr Lo, that you now want to lay off. How are you going to make use of testing when the very scientists who can tell

you how relevant that testing is are now going to be fired by your government?

Hon Mr Clement: Let me assure this House that we do have laboratory scientists, we do have researchers, Health Canada has scientists and

researchers, and they are working together, as we speak, to deal with this particular situation in which we find ourselves after the attack on September 11. That work is ongoing. It is continuing.

It is being expanded and integrated.

That's the kind of leadership the people expect from Premier Harris and this government as we search for solutions in the wake of the attacks on September 11.

We are proud of the additional resources, we are proud of the focusing of attention in these areas, and it will continue.

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

Mr Hampton: Minister, maybe you need to follow some of the events in the United States. It's not just testing that is taking place but it is

the very specific research that is taking place to determine where strains of anthrax, for example, could have originated and how they are being turned into spores which can most affect people.

It's not about testing; it's about having that scientific knowledge that then can tell you what we do with these tests, what we do with the information we've got and how we most effectively treat

people.

Don't you understand that those people up there are the people who have that knowledge and expertise about how to do the research, the relevancy of the tests

and how the tests relate to various aspects of bioterrorism? They're the very people your government is firing today. Tell the people of Ontario how you justify that, Minister.

Hon Mr Clement: I can assure this House that we are in contact with the Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta; we are in contact with

officials, including scientists at Health Canada; our medical officer of health is in contact with these people on a daily basis, and that will continue. So we do have the research capacity in this

country, we do have the testing capacity which is being expanded in this province, and that will continue.

The answer to your question is, we have the capacity, we are increasing the capacity. The important thing right now is the testing and we are increasing the

capacity in the testing.

Mr Hampton: In case the Minister of Health has missed it, the Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta is rather busy these days. In case you

missed it, Ontario needs some expertise here in Ontario. We don't want to have to wait until Atlanta says, "Oh, we can address your problem now."

Minister, do the responsible thing. Admit that you made a mistake. Admit that in your desire to cut the budget of the Ministry of Health you have made a

mistake. Admit that mistake and tell the people of Ontario that these five dedicated scientists are going to be rehired today.

Hon Mr Clement: As I say, the individuals were involved in internal support. They had nothing to do with laboratory testing or the capacity of

the laboratories. We have added to the capacity of laboratories and we will continue to monitor that. Our first job is to make sure that as a result of the particular circumstances in which we find

ourselves, we test suspicious packages and we ensure that those packages that have to be forwarded on to Health Canada experts in Winnipeg are forwarded on. We are working with Health Canada to

make sure that we have the capacity to do that and we are working with Health Canada, quite frankly, to make sure that they do their job and that we do ours and we don't step on each other's toes.

That is the commitment of this government. We are focused very much on the tragic events of September 11 and we have shown the leadership in this province and this country for which we are very

proud.

The Speaker: New question, the leader of the official opposition.

Mr McGuinty: My question is to the Minister of Health. One of the scientists you decided to fire is Dr Preston. E coli 0157, as you know, is

better known as the Walkerton strain of E coli. Dr Preston's work was instrumental in zeroing in on the source of the Walkerton outbreak. It served as an important resource for the work of Dr

Murray McQuigge and the Walkerton public health unit; indeed, in Dr McQuigge's report he references Dr Preston's work.

You have now had some opportunity to reconsider and to better understand the importance not only of technologists who have to be on the job to protect our

families, but also of scientists who are working at the cutting edge in creating new knowledge when it comes to new biohazards. Now that you've had this opportunity, you've had a moment to reflect,

do you not believe that it is in the interests of Ontario families that you set aside these firings and that you guarantee Ontario families that these people will remain on the job and act to stand

on guard for us against biohazards?

Hon Mr Clement: Let me assure this House and the honourable member that biohazards are a continuing concern. It's a concern that we take very

seriously. So does the chief medical officer of health. We are testing more and more. We are hiring more testers. We had a situation where internal staff were not needed and, quite frankly, we have

to focus in on the testing. We have centres of expertise in this province and this country when it comes to research. That should be acknowledged and supported; I understand that.

But when it comes to our job, our job is testing, safety, identifying hazardous substances from all the range of substances that come into the labs and, in

some cases, forwarding them on to Health Canada. That is our job. We are continuing to do our job and we are continuing to enhance our capability to do that job through more resources. So the

honourable member is incorrect. We are doing the job that is necessary for Ontario and we will continue to do so.

Mr McGuinty: With all due respect, you are not doing your job. Your job is to protect Ontario families. These scientists are the intelligence

agents in the war against bioterrorism. That's what they do. You have to understand the difference between technologists and people working at the cutting edge creating knowledge. These people are

at the cutting edge. They have a combined 150 years of scientific expertise. They have already proven their value to us.

As the Minister of Health, the individual over there who is charged with the special responsibility of protecting the health and well being of Ontario

families, how can you possibly justify letting these people go?

Hon Mr Clement: Let me again say for the record that they do not have the qualifications of medical laboratory technologists; they have never

had those quailfications. We are focusing in on increased laboratory testing. That is what our job is. Other parts of Health Canada and Ontario have different jobs, part of which is research,

I can tell you that I am working with Health Canada and I am working with the federal Minister of Health, because it's important that we integrate each other's

services, that we don't duplicate and waste the resources we have and that we ensure those services are there for the people of Ontario and Canada. We will continue to do so.

PUBLIC LIBRARIES

Mr Bert Johnson (Perth-Middlesex): My question is for the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation. Libraries throughout my riding have

been celebrating Ontario Public Library Week with special events and programs. I was pleased to host you last spring to visit St Marys Public Library in my riding. You saw first-hand the excellent

range of services provided by this community library.

In today's information economy, libraries like the one in St Marys are increasingly expected to provide not only books and research materials but CD-ROMs,

videotapes, computer access and much more. Can you tell us how your ministry is helping community libraries respond to these new demands for services?

Hon Tim Hudak (Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation): I thank the member from Perth-Middlesex for his question. I enjoyed going to St

Marys not too long ago to see the great work being done in the member's riding at St Marys Public Library. It's a good question; in fact, it's a great time to announce to the House that this was

the launch of Ontario Public Library Week. I was with Joe Spina and Raminder Gill at the Brampton Public Library's Chinguacousy branch yesterday to launch Ontario Public Library Week.

Annually, about $30 million has been invested by the Mike Harris government into 1,215 libraries across this province, helping to leverage another $20 million

from local partnerships and approximately $400,000 a year into the library strategic development fund to help with new projects in emerging technologies and innovation in libraries across this

province.

Mr Johnson: My supplementary is for the Minister of Tourism as well. I know that St Marys library has seen many changes since it was built in

1905, and the addition of computers is certainly one of them. My constituents tell me how important it is to have Internet access at their libraries, whether it's to search for a job, find out

Hon Mr Hudak: No doubt, libraries have changed significantly since 1905 and the opening of the St Marys branch. In fact, at the St Marys

branch, we had a giant mouse to launch our new round of Internet connectivity grants to communities across the province. In fact, about $1 million per year from the Mike Harris government goes to

132 community libraries across this province from St Marys to Fort Erie.

I want to express my congratulations to the winner of this year's Ontario Library Achievement Award, the Vaughan Public Library. Congratulations for their

award. As well, the Welland Public Library, in partnership with the Wainfleet Township Public Library, won the Mowat award for their digital Web site about the history of the canals in the Niagara

Peninsula. Congratulations to all the winners during Ontario Public Library Week.

ONTARIO SECURITY FUND PLAN

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): My question is to the Premier. Earlier today I released a plan to make Ontario stronger and

safer. Unlike the Minister of Health, we believe that it is important for us to act in the better interests of Ontario families and do whatever we can to make sure they're safe.

I am proposing today that we create something new: an Ontario security fund. If we were to dedicate to our security just 10% of the billion dollars that you

have promised but not invested yet in capital, we would have $100 million to pay for projects to make our province safer.

I offer this plan as a constructive proposal to secure our province. Will you act on our plan, Premier?

Hon Michael D. Harris (Premier): As always, we appreciate positive suggestions on areas that we can move on. It is a time when I think we need

to be (

a) calm and (

b) working co-operatively together, all parties, all Legislatures in Canada, and with the federal government as well.

The proposal you've put forward doesn't seem to be one that talks about where to spend the money but how to find the money, and let me assure you that there

are a couple of concerns. One, your plan also calls for accelerated capital funding in other areas, which, as you know, we have made several announcements on. Second, what we prefer to do is look

at programs that are necessary and things that we need to do and then cost them out and allocate the money. I assure you that we will make available every cent required to have the safest province

in Canada.

Mr McGuinty: I want the Premier to understand that my proposal would not cost the government a single extra cent. I am talking about money

that you've already committed to capital projects you have yet to allocate, you have yet to spend. I'm asking, Premier, that you consider setting 10% of that aside.

Let me give you some idea of what we could do with that funding. We're about to require municipalities to update their emergency response plans. I think that's

a good idea and we all support that on this side of the House. But that law will be meaningless if those municipalities can't afford to develop those plans and train their people. I think we should

be providing assistance to those municipalities to help develop those plans and train those people.

Provincially, we need to protect locations that are potential targets, like oil and gas pipelines, hydro stations, transportation corridors and public

buildings. That's what we could do with the 10% of the capital dollars which you have already committed but which you have yet to spend. I think we should be meeting the special circumstances of

the day, and those dictate that we address security issues. That's what I would do with that 10% funding. I ask you again, Premier, what do you think of this plan and why can we not move forward

with it?

Hon Mr Harris: As I say, I appreciate suggestions. I don't know how I can accelerate capital with those existing funds and then take $100

million of those funds and reallocate them into other areas. You've given me two conflicting challenges there and, as a number of my caucus have indicated, you identify a pot of money and then you

spend it about 35 times, which is like the NDP. They only spend it 34 times.

I appreciate the suggestion. A lot of the programs we're looking at, though, are ongoing programs; we're not just interested in being the safest province for

the balance of this fiscal year. Capital is one-time money. What we are looking at is a lot of the programs that I think have to go on beyond this fiscal year. They need to be ongoing programs and

there will be ongoing costs. I wouldn't want to dismiss out of hand any suggestion on ways to find money, but I want to assure you that we want to be safe next year too. I don't think it's

responsible to put one-time dollars into what are going to have to be ongoing programs so that we can be safe today, next month and next year.

FLU IMMUNIZATION

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): My question is to the associate Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. I could just reach down and speak to you, but

in the interests of the House, Minister, as you know, we are entering the fall season and the weather is getting colder. Clearly, the flu season has begun. Influenza affects a vast number of

Ontarians each year and it's not something we as a government take lightly. Thousands become seriously ill each year and influenza could result in death.

I think back to the winter of 1999, when the flu had a serious impact on many Ontario citizens. Clinics had long waiting times, emergency rooms were full, and

many missed days of work. In fact, it was a very serious problem. The next year, our government moved quickly to lessen the impact of influenza by investing $38 million and by creating the first

ever influenza immunization program in Canada. Every Ontarian had the choice of receiving free flu vaccine.

Minister, on behalf of my residents and constituents -- I think of nurses, doctors, daycare workers, the elderly, people who are vulnerable from other diseases

-- they need this service. Are we going to --

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): The member's time is up. Associate Minister of Health.

Hon Helen Johns (Minister without Portfolio [Health and Long-Term Care]): I would like to thank the hard-working member from Durham for the

question. We all know that.

Let me say that our government has pledged to ensure we have a strong health care system in the province. We also pledged to make sure the flu shot is

universally accessible to people of the province so that we can keep them healthy. Last year, as the member noted, we started this program and it was a complete success. It moved us toward an even

higher quality of health care in the province of Ontario.

The flu shots for this year were started at the beginning of the month, and the vaccines are already available at the health units. So I ask everyone to move

forward to get those shots. There are 5.7 million doses available to the people of Ontario, and the government has invested $44 million in this process. This is just another initiative that the

Minister of Health has brought about so that the people of Ontario --

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

Mr O'Toole: Minister, you can virtually feel your compassion and commitment to the citizens of Ontario. It's important to understand that we

have a sustainable, efficient health care program, not just in my riding of Durham but indeed for all Ontarians. Not only is the flu program a preventive option for the people of Ontario; it also

potentially saves lives, time and money. The people of Ontario need to have access to emergency services in a timely fashion. The influenza immunization program will ease pressures on emergency

rooms and save lives. As well as the positive impact on people's lives, it will also help our economy. I can't help but think of the influenza program as simply saving lives and helping

hard-working Ontarians.

Minister, what further commitments in rolling out this program can I expect in the near future?

Hon Mrs Johns: I'd like to thank the member again and just say that the government has further increased the pledge that it made last year by

pledging to focus on the workplace as well as people in their homes. The flu is a contagious disease and we know that it causes negative impacts not only at work, in the companies and

organizations, but also on employees and on their families at home. So we have to make sure, as we move forward with the immunization, that we work with the business community as well.

A random trial that was done and published by the New England Journal of Medicine showed the cost savings to employees and employers of holding flu clinics. It

showed there was a saving of about US$50 per vaccination for employees. So we urge all citizens in the province and all workplaces to open their doors so that we can ensure the quality of health

continues to increase as we do many health promotion items to protect the people of Ontario.

MINISTRY OF HEALTH

AND LONG-TERM CARE STAFF

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Premier. I don't think your Minister of Health gets it, so I'm going to ask you

to intervene in this. One of the scientists your Minister of Health wants to lay off is an expert in fungi and infectious diseases. In fact, she has designed 15 of the diagnostic tests that your

Minister of Health refers to when he says, "We want to do the testing." The very person who has designed 15 of the diagnostic tests which help public health officials determine when there are

biohazards present, your government is now going to fire.

Premier, I'm asking you to intervene and overrule your Minister of Health. At this point in time, with the threat of bioterrorism, this is exactly the kind of

knowledge and expertise that we want to keep in Ontario and definitely not the kind of expertise and talent to be fired. Will you overrule your Minister of Health?

Hon Michael D. Harris (Premier): I would suggest to the leader that, contrary to his assertion, he seems to be the one who doesn't get it. The

priority area right now as defined, and working in conjunction with Health Canada, is, as the Minister of Health has outlined to you, all available resources to testing and ensuring that any threat

assessments are dealt with as quickly as possible. As the minister has indicated to you, this is the priority area all the experts have identified. In fact, this is the area where hiring is taking

place. This is the emphasis that we want: to reassure Canadians, particularly here in the province of Ontario, working co-operatively, that they are as safe as they possibly can be. You just don't

seem to get that.

Mr Hampton: Premier, I'm going to send over a picture of this scientist, a picture taken with you. This scientist has been recognized

internationally for the diagnostic tests that she has designed that allow us to isolate and determine certain biohazards.

But I also want to point out one of the other scientists to you especially. This scientist is Dr Preston. Dr Preston developed the test and the research

technique to quickly identify the very E coli bacteria strain that killed people at Walkerton. So the very scientist who developed the test and the research technique so that we could identify the

strain and treat people more quickly and save lives, your government is now going to fire.

A lot of people tried to warn you about Walkerton and you didn't listen. Now it's time to listen. Don't fire the very scientist who helped you to respond to

Walkerton after mistakes were made initially. Overrule your Minister of Health and ensure that this doesn't happen.

Hon Mr Harris: I thank you for the photograph. I'm very proud of all of our public servants, as I said yesterday, and particularly the

scientists who have created a number of the tests that now are our emphasis, and now the resources are being put to carry them out.

I thought maybe by way of response I would share with you a quote that I think you and the leader of the official opposition are engaging in. It comes from one

of my greatest supporters in Ottawa and it says, "The biggest disease we have to face right now is fear." I think you and the Leader of the Opposition are playing into that. That's my good friend

the Honourable Allan Rock, from the Ottawa Citizen, October 10, 2001. I happen to agree with Allan Rock on this.

IPPERWASH PROVINCIAL PARK

Mr Gerry Phillips (Scarborough-Agincourt): My question is to the Premier; it has to do with the shooting death at Ipperwash. Almost everything

that the public was told about that episode turned out not to be true. The First Nations people were not armed. There was evidence of a burial ground. You have said all along that you left it

entirely to the OPP. The one note we have on your meeting is that the Attorney General was instructed by the Premier that he desired to remove it within 24 hours.

The park is still closed and we still don't know the truth, Premier, of what happened at Ipperwash. Will you do the right thing and will you commit today to

hold a full public inquiry into that shooting death?

Hon Michael D. Harris (Premier): I have committed, as you know, to assure you, the George family and all Ontarians that I had no involvement

and I continue to do that. There is a matter of a court case. I will be testifying in that court case. This is a matter that is now before a judge, where you want to have it. I'm sure you're not

suggesting this judge is not as impartial as any that's there. I didn't initiate this process; somebody else did. But I intend to see it through.

Mr Phillips: The George family from the start, Premier, have begged you to not proceed with the civil case and to go to a public inquiry. They

have sent you a personal note saying they would drop in an instant the civil case. You would never do this at Walkerton. You wouldn't force the people of Walkerton to take you to court. That's why

a public inquiry was called at Walkerton. The same thing should happen here.

The poor George family are being dragged into bankruptcy by you. You have already spent over $500,000 of taxpayer money fighting them. Again I say to you, this

is fundamental to the province of Ontario. Will you do the absolute right thing? Will you, in these dying days of your premiership, finally do the right thing and call a public inquiry into what

happened at Ipperwash?

Hon Mr Harris: I will continue to do absolutely the right thing in these very active days of my leadership.

COMMUNITY LIVING FUNDING

Ms Marilyn Mushinski (Scarborough Centre): My question is for the Minister of Community and Social Services. Earlier this year, on Community

Living Day, I spoke of the importance of developmental services in my community and of the new investments made by our government in the May 2001 budget. Since then, I have been approached by a

number of families and individuals in my riding of Scarborough Centre, telling me about the challenges they face and how they need this new money to be spent. They told me that staff recruitment

and retention is a major problem. They also speak of the need to expand the number of community living spaces so that they can do more to meet the demand for these spaces.

Clearly, government action is needed on a number of these fronts, Minister. I would like to know what action you have taken to make sure the agencies in the

Toronto area can expand their services to help more people.

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

affairs): The member has been a strong advocate for community living in Ontario, as have a good number of colleagues on all sides of the House. We strongly support the need to do more for

people with a developmental disability in our province.

The government announced in the May budget $55 million of new support, growing to $197 million a year over the next five years, which is a considerable amount.

In fact, it's the biggest investment in supports for people with developmental disabilities. We recognized a whole range of needs, from attracting and retaining top-quality staff to the importance

of places to live for people with developmental disabilities, not just as a support for them but as a support for their aging parents.

Some $7.3 million of this initial investment will go to help find places for people with developmental disabilities to live, and that includes $1.2 million in

the city of Toronto, where it will add five spaces at the Toronto Association for Community Living, a phenomenal group that has a great history of providing supports to community living, as well as

five spots at Christian Horizons in the city of Toronto.

Ms Mushinski: Thank you for that response, Minister. One issue that comes up in every discussion I have with people who work in this sector is

the whole issue of staffing pressures. People in the sector are worried about their ability to provide salaries that will attract and keep staff. The work these people do, we know, is often

difficult and often thankless, yet their commitment to serving their clients is second to none. They play a big

part in helping them live their lives in the community with dignity. Considering the

immense human resource pressures that these agencies face on a daily basis, what action are you taking to help these agencies so that they can continue to provide these vital services?

Hon Mr Baird: I share the concerns expressed by the honourable member. Obviously attracting and retaining quality staff in this profession is

something that's incredibly important. Many agencies around the province were having shifts going unfilled, with huge pressure being put on managers and staff to work considerable amounts of

overtime because of lack of support to provide help. In fact, for a good seven or eight years no additional supports were given to many associations for community living to deal with this staff

retention and recruitment challenge.

We are providing a majority of the new funding, some $31.7 million to 260 of the 400-odd agencies around the province, some with the most incredible needs.

That will include about $3.6 million in the city of Toronto. This is the first part of a five-year investment to help ensure that we revitalize the agencies and their capacity to provide supports

to some of our most vulnerable citizens.

CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): My question is to the Minister of the Environment. Under the Drive Clean program, your ministry is now

providing confidential information about drivers in this province and the vehicles they own, information that could be traced back to identify individual owners, and those drivers are not aware

this is the case. We know the Ministry of Transportation sells information to the private sector. We know that the Province of Ontario Savings Office gave a pile of private information about

people. Will you now assure the House that you will abandon your plans to sell the information from the Drive Clean program to private companies such as the one in Virginia which wishes to obtain

that information and use it for its own purposes to make a profit?

Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Minister of the Environment): I certainly appreciate the question that has been placed to me. I would simply indicate to

the member opposite that anything that would happen in the future obviously needs to be thoroughly consistent with the practice of ensuring that there would be absolutely no confidential

information that would ever, ever be shared with anyone else.

Mr Bradley: There has been, in fact, an exercise going on in your ministry which involves this. The minister in charge of privacy and

information, Mr Norm Sterling, the Minister of Consumer and Business Services, has indicated he does not think -- I think I'm not misquoting him. In his opinion, he wonders whether the information

commissioner of the province of Ontario would allow this to happen, and he's developing a new bill to protect the privacy of people.

So I'm asking you if you will totally abandon any efforts on the part of your ministry to sell this information. Clearly your ministry was in the process of

negotiating with some American companies, one of them in Virginia.

Hon Mrs Witmer: First of all, to the member opposite, I think I need to make it abundantly clear that our ministry is not selling any

information. I would also share with you the fact that any information that our government would share at any time would be totally consistent with all of the privacy rules.

COMPETITIVE ELECTRICITY MARKET

Mr Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): My question is for the Minister of Energy. There have been some articles in the papers in the local and

provincial media about aggressive marketing by electricity retailers. I'd like to know what the government has put in place to ensure consumer protection measures with respect to electricity

restructuring.

Hon Jim Wilson (Minister of Energy, Science and Technology): I thank my colleague for the question. It's an important question because some

nine million contacts have been made with the people of Ontario by electricity retailers over the last year. We take very seriously complaints that come into the ministry. The Ontario Energy Board,

as the regulator, takes very seriously the complaints that come into its office.

I just want to let consumers know: if they're not sure of the pitch or they're not sure of what they are signing, please don't sign anything. If you do sign

something and you have second thoughts, there's a 10-day cooling-off period which we built into the law.

I think Jean-Marc Lalonde brought to our attention the other day that in his part of the province, Glengarry-Prescott-Russell, there was a retailer apparently

saying, "If you don't sign within 20 minutes, your electricity will be cut off." That's unacceptable, and we encourage people to complain, to call the ministry, to call the Ontario Energy Board, so

that we can get to the bottom of these matters.

Mr Dunlop: Thank you very much for that response, Minister. Also, how are you educating consumers about these safeguards and helping them to

make informed choices in the new competitive market?

Hon Mr Wilson: In February 2000, last year, we began a public education campaign. That campaign has been ongoing. If people look in the

newspapers, particularly the big Toronto newspapers, there are banner ads that publish the toll-free number where they can get information about electricity restructuring, they can get consumer

information that they need to know before dealing with marketers at their doors. Finally, that number can also be used to complain if somebody is not abiding by the code of conduct that's been put

in place for good business practices by retailers.

Again, I can't stress enough that people need to bring those complaints forward to us. We sincerely want to deal with concerns that people have. It's a matter

of good consumer protection, and this government is committed to it. We have brochures out and we have a mailing coming out in the next couple of months to every household in the province --

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

SITE OF EARLY PARLIAMENT

Mr Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): My question is to the Minister of Culture. Minister, archaeologist Ron Williamson has confirmed that

the remains of Ontario's first Parliament building have been found. Thousands of artifacts have been uncovered, helping to shed light on the cradle of our democracy, yet the site presently houses a

truck rental, a car wash and a limousine service. It could be a museum that we could all be proud of, that you could be proud of, a magnet for culture and tourism. Today's special exhibit opens at

St James Cathedral, which allows the public to see the artifacts.

Minister, will you buy the site of Ontario's first Parliament so it can be preserved for future generations?

Hon Tim Hudak (Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation): I appreciate the question from the member opposite. I appreciate his interest in

this important historical issue. It's very exciting news recently that strong evidence of the first Parliament site may have been discovered, very strong evidence that is the case, here in the city

of Toronto.

I think it's obviously important for my staff and myself as minister to review the report to understand the options that exist and to make sure that we have a

good understanding of what exists at the site: what are the remains, what kind of artifacts are there, the condition that is currently there, as well as the businesses that have been on there since

the time of the Parliament burning down. Quite a history there; many buildings built on top of it. I think it's important for me as minister to review that report and see what the options are.

Mr Marchese: I'm happy that he appreciates my interest, and I'm hoping to interest him in buying this site. What I'm saying to him is that we

need to invest in our future, of course, but also in our past.

Montreal has developed an archaeological site into a world-class museum of its history. If Montreal can do it and preserve its history, so can we. And that's

what I'm asking you to do.

This is not the first time I have brought this to your attention. I brought it to the attention of the previous minister as well. You know that. I'm saying you

can reduce the cost if you work with the private sector and do a land swap with the existing owners.

All I'm saying to you is that you've had plenty of time to review it. Please, act now, buy the site and preserve Ontario's first Parliament.

Hon Mr Hudak: Again, I think it's obviously very important to help preserve the heritage, a very proud history, of the province of Ontario.

There's no doubt the Mike Harris government is making significant investments in heritage under this government; for example, over $10 million in the heritage challenge fund throughout this

province.

Recently in fact I invested, through the ministry, $5 million for an open, existing facility at Fort Henry, and I hope the federal government will come through

for matching funds at this site owned by the federal government.

I appreciate the member's point. An important point is the price tag. I think we have to keep these in balance in terms of what we can do and what we can't.

When you're looking at significant funding to buy the property and take the businesses off the property to build a museum, I think we have to take into context a price tag that's been quoted as

more than $30 million or $40 million. That's a lot of taxpayers' money. We have to make sure we invest that taxpayers' money where it's going to make the biggest difference.

ACCESS TO PROFESSIONS

AND TRADES

Mr Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): I have a question for the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities, but since she's not present today, I

have to ask the Premier this question.

Mr Premier, as you know, we're trying to attract skilled workers all over the world. In fact, Ontario is scouring the world to try to bring them to Ontario so

that they can be part and parcel of our economy. Now, as you know, once they get here to Toronto or in fact to any city of Ontario, they're being denied access to their trades and professions. The

door, in short, is shut. As you also know, many of them, when they arrive, are turning out to be taxi drivers, restaurant cleaners and also pizza delivery persons.

My question to you is simply this: your minister made an announcement that she's spending $12 million to address these issues, but do you know where she made

the announcement? At the Yee Hong seniors centre and not in this House.

What we want to know today from you is, what is your policy to your ministers? Should they make --

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

Hon Michael D. Harris (Premier): I appreciate the question and I appreciate the member's interest in a very important area, something we have

been talking about with a number of people in the ethnic community. On a number of occasions, I have discussed with a number of leaders and those in the ethnic press a very strong concern they

brought forward. It's something the minister and our government have been working on. We have to work with the professional bodies that license, whether it be doctors, nurses or accountants, in

reciprocal recognition of training and experience in these countries.

So it's something we are pushing. The minister has made an announcement. I'm sorry if you think that making the announcement directly to Ontarians,

particularly those in the ethnic community, and telling them exactly what we're doing is wrong. We happen to think that talking directly to Ontarians and listening to them is exactly the way we

should govern. But I appreciate the member's interest. It's something he and I have talked about in the past. Perhaps other members of his party should have more interest in this as well.

Mr Ruprecht: Now that I know you have an interest in this as well, I'm delighted to hear it. Let me ask you this question: you are aware, of

course, that in some instances we were unable to open hospital beds because of a lack of professional nurses. Now, as you know, we're trying to get them back. We're saying to them, "We'll pay you

extra money, we'll offer you incentives and bonuses and we'll offer you bridging programs. Please come back because we made a mistake." You know that when you came to office one of the first things

you did was to cut the legs from under the nurses. You cut them off and you really fired -- do you know how many? You fired hundreds of them. So we're asking you today: are you ready to say that

your Common Sense Revolution has made a mistake by firing these nurses, because today we need them back? Please stand in your place and tell us that you've made a mistake because we need these

nurses back in Ontario. We can't open our hospital beds.

Hon Mr Harris: I know the member would want to know the facts. If you take a five-year Liberal period, a five-year NDP period and a five-year

period of our government, there were more nurses let go by hospitals under the Liberals and the NDP than there were by our government. I know that you didn't let them go directly, that it was the

hospitals under your watch. Quite frankly, some were actually let go under our watch.

I think we made it very clear in a statement by the former Minister of Health and by the current Minister of Health that this was not the right thing for our

hospitals to be doing, under your watch, under the NDP watch and under our watch. That's why we brought forward a significant new nurses' program, working with the RNAO, the Registered Nurses

Association of Ontario. I can tell you that we have met our goal of 12,000 new nurses; I think we exceeded that goal. We continue to recruit. Nurses around the world continue to find Ontario a

great place to live and work. They continue to be attracted to this jurisdiction.

CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY

LABOUR RELATIONS

Mrs Tina R. Molinari (Thornhill): My question is for the Minister of Labour. Since 1995 the government has worked hard to improve Ontario's

competitiveness through several initiatives, including reforming labour legislation. Some of the businesses in my riding have commented specifically on the one in relation to residential

construction. Can you inform the House of the present state of the labour relations climate in Ontario?

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of Labour): Thank you so much. That was an excellent question. The state of residential construction,

specifically in your area of Thornhill, is absolutely fantastic. It's at a state now where I think the superlatives are -- you couldn't use any higher words to determine exactly how well it's

working. They've got contractual agreements. Their unions are running over years and years and years. The housing starts are up. The unions that have signed contracts are satisfied. The builders

are satisfied.

Actually, by asking that very question, you've given me an opportunity to thank the members of this caucus for bringing in legislation that changed the act,

that provided this kind of stability in residential construction. So I would like to thank you and the members of this caucus, because this is the kind of leadership the province of Ontario

needs.

PETITIONS

AUDIOLOGY SERVICES

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): This petition, entitled Listen: Our Hearing is Important, is to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas services delisted by the Harris government now exceed $100 million in total; and

"Whereas Ontarians depend on audiologists for the provision of qualified hearing assessments and hearing aid prescriptions; and

"Whereas the new Harris government policy will virtually eliminate access to publicly funded audiology assessments across vast regions of Ontario; and

"Whereas this new Harris government policy is virtually impossible to implement in underserviced areas like northern Ontario; and

"Whereas this policy will lengthen waiting lists for patients and therefore have a detrimental effect on the health of these Ontarians;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned" -- from Sudbury, Coniston, Valley East, Timmins and Cochrane -- "petition the Ontario Legislature to

demand the Mike Harris government move immediately to permanently fund audiologists directly for the provision of audiology services."

I give this to Jonathan, and I affix my signature, as I am in complete agreement with it.

MUNICIPAL TAXATION

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): I have a petition from thousands of residents of the Cambridge area. It reads:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Legislative Assembly of Ontario has enacted legislation requiring municipal governments to equalize tax rates for industry and commerce to that of

residential rates; and

"Whereas residential property owners will thus be burdened with an inappropriate and an inordinately substantial tax increase for the sake of business

interests; and

"Whereas industry and commerce, by virtue of their volume of activities and use of services place considerable demand on all municipal services and should thus

pay accordingly; and

"Whereas industrial and commercial ratepayers are able to raise the price of goods and services to offset cost increases;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to provide relief to taxpayers who have been disproportionately affected by this transfer of

tax burden from industry to homeowners."

Thousands of signatures from the Cambridge area; I attach my signature as well, sir.

CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

Ms Marilyn Mushinski (Scarborough Centre): I have a petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario that reads as follows:

"Whereas the Criminal Code of Canada considers animal cruelty to be a property offence; and

"Whereas those who commit crimes against animals currently face light sentences upon conviction; and

"Whereas those who operate puppy mills should, upon conviction, face sentences that are appropriate for the torture and inhumane treatment they have inflicted

on puppies under their so-called care;

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

"That the Ontario provincial government petition the federal government to move forward with amendments to the cruelty of animal provisions in the Criminal

Code as soon as possible."

I'm pleased to affix my signature to this petition.

COMMUNITY CARE ACCESS CENTRES

Mrs Sandra Pupatello (Windsor West): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Mike Harris government promised to institute patient-based budgeting for health care services in the 1995 Common Sense Revolution; and

"Whereas community care access centres now face a collective shortfall of over $175 million due to a funding rollback by the provincial government; and

"Whereas due to this funding rollback, community care access centres have cut back on home care services affecting many sick and elderly Ontarians; and

"Whereas these cuts in services are forcing Ontarians into more expensive long-term-care facilities or back into hospital;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to immediately lift the funding freeze for home care services, so as to ensure that

community care access centres can provide the services that Ontario's working families need."

I submit this on behalf of the many people of Scarborough.

CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

Mr Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Criminal Code of Canada considers animal cruelty to be a property offence; and

"Whereas those who commit crimes against animals currently face light sentences upon conviction; and

"Whereas those who operate puppy mills should, upon conviction, face sentences that are appropriate for the torture and inhumane treatment they inflicted on

puppies under their so-called care,

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

"That the Ontario provincial government petition the federal government to move forward with amendments to the cruelty of animal provisions in the Criminal

Code as soon as possible."

I would like to sign my name to that as well.

COMMUNITY CARE ACCESS CENTRES

Mrs Leona Dombrowsky (Hastings-Frontenac-Lennox and Addington): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Mike Harris government promised to institute patient-based budgeting for health care services in the 1995 Common Sense Revolution; and

"Whereas community care access centres now face a collective shortfall of $175 million due to a funding rollback by the provincial government; and

"Whereas due to this funding rollback, CCACs have cut back on home care services, affecting many sick and elderly Ontarians; and

"Whereas these cuts in services are forcing Ontarians to more expensive long-term care facilities or back into the hospital,

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to immediately lift the funding freeze for home care services so as to ensure that community

care access centres can provide the services that Ontario's working families need."

I will affix my signature to this petition.

CENTRES D'ACCÈS

AUX SOINS COMMUNAUTAIRES /

COMMUNITY CARE ACCESS CENTRES

M me Claudette Boyer (Ottawa-Vanier) : « Attendu que dans la Révolution du bon sens de 1995, Mike Harris a

promis d'instituer des pratiques budgétaires axées sur les patients dans le secteur des soins de santé ; and

"Whereas community care access centres now face a collective shortfall of $175 million due to a funding freeze by the provincial government;

« Attendu qu'en raison de ce manque à gagner de leur financement, les CASC ont dû réduire les services de soins à domicile, ce qui a

des répercussions sur bon nombre d'Ontariens et d'Ontariennes malades et âgés ; and

"Whereas these cuts in services are mostly in homemaking services, forcing Ontarians into more expensive long-term-care facilities or back into hospital,

« Nous, soussignés, demandons à l'Assemblée législative de l'Ontario d'instituer immédiatement des pratiques budgétaires

réellement axées sur les patients dans le domaine des soins de santé, et cela inclut les soins à domicile, de telle sorte que les familles des travailleurs et travailleuses en

Ontario puissent avoir accès aux services de soins de santé dont ils ont besoin. »

It is my pleasure to sign this petition, along with my people from Ottawa-Vanier.

ONTARIO PUBLIC SERVICE

Mr Pat Hoy (Chatham-Kent Essex): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the November 2000 announcement of massive privatization of the Ministry of Transportation services will have a significant detrimental effect on

citizen road safety, confidentiality of citizens' information and on the economy of Ontario; and

"Whereas the employees of the Ministry of Transportation are recognized in writing by the provincial government to have provided excellent service on the

government's behalf; and

"Whereas the government of Ontario is taking away the livelihood and decreasing the standard of living of thousands of employees and families by its actions

both directly and indirectly through spinoff effects; and

"Whereas citizens of Ontario are entitled to safe roads, consistency of driver testing and competent inspection of trucks, school buses and vehicles carrying

dangerous goods; and

"Whereas communities continue to need to retain decent-paying jobs if they are to maintain viability and vibrancy; and

"Whereas we taxpayers have entrusted the provincial government with the maintenance of public safety with an apolitical and efficient public service, a service

free of profiteering and protected from conflicts of interests; and

"Whereas privatization is an abdication of such policy,

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to place a moratorium on all further privatization and to restore and promote public service

as being of significant value in our society."

I have signed this petition.

CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

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

"Whereas the Criminal Code of Canada considers animal cruelty to be a property offence; and

"Whereas those who commit crimes against animals currently face light sentences upon conviction; and

"Whereas those who operate puppy mills should, upon conviction, face sentences that are appropriate for the torture and inhumane treatment they have inflicted

on puppies under their so-called care,

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

"That the Ontario provincial government petition the federal government to move forward with amendments to the cruelty of animal provisions in the Criminal

Code as soon as possible."

COMMUNITY CARE ACCESS CENTRES

Mr Ernie Parsons (Prince Edward-Hastings): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Mike Harris government promised to institute patient-based budgeting for health care services in the 1995 Common Sense Revolution; and

"Whereas community care access centres (CCACs) now face a collective shortfall of up to $175 million due to a funding freeze by the provincial government;

and

"Whereas due to this funding shortfall, CCACs have cut back on home care services affecting many sick and elderly Ontarians; and

"Whereas these cuts in services are mostly in homemaking services, forcing Ontarians into more expensive long-term-care facilities or back into hospital;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to immediately institute real patient-based budgeting for health care services, including

home care, so as to ensure that working families in Ontario can access the health care services they need."

I'm pleased to add my signature to this.

AUDIOLOGY SERVICES

Mr Ted McMeekin (Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Aldershot): Today I present petitions from the following communities: Paris, St George, Brant

county, Brantford, Grimsby, Toronto, Vineland, Burlington, Orillia, Washago, Dundas, Arthur, Waterdown, Freelton, Elmira, Clifford and St Thomas -- 1,000 signatures received in the last two

days.

"Whereas services delisted by the Harris government now exceed $100 million in total;

"Whereas Ontarians depend on audiologists for the provision of qualified hearing assessments and hearing aid prescriptions;

"Whereas the new Harris government policy will virtually eliminate access to publicly funded audiology assessments across vast regions of Ontario; and

"Whereas this new Harris government policy is virtually impossible to implement in underserviced areas across Ontario;

"Whereas this policy will lengthen waiting lists for patients and therefore have a detrimental effect on the health of these Ontarians;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, petition the Ontario Legislature to demand the Mike Harris government move immediately to permanently fund

audiologists directly for the provision of audiology services."

We're getting about 1,000 signatures a day on this petition.

PODIATRIC SERVICES

Mr David Caplan (Don Valley East): I have a petition entitled "Foot Care is Not a Luxury." It is to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas services delisted by the Harris government now exceed $100 million in total;

"Whereas Ontarians depend on podiatrists for relief from painful foot conditions;

"Whereas new Harris government policy will virtually eliminate access to publicly funded podiatry across vast regions of Ontario;

"Whereas this new Harris government policy is virtually impossible to implement in underserviced areas across" this great province of "Ontario;

"Whereas this policy will lengthen waiting lists for patients and therefore have a detrimental effect on the health of these Ontarians;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, petition the Ontario Legislature to demand the Mike Harris government move immediately to cancel the

delisting of podiatric services."

I agree with this petition.

AUDIOLOGY SERVICES

Mr Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): I have a petition here, if I can find it. Can you believe I grabbed the wrong folder, Mr Speaker? There

it is; got it. I knew it was here.

I have a petition here signed by a great number of people from the communities of the Timmins, Cochrane and Iroquois Falls area. It is written as follows:

"Whereas services delisted by the Harris government now exceed $100 million in total;

"Whereas Ontarians depend on audiologists for the provision of qualified hearing assessments and hearing aid prescriptions;

"Whereas the new Harris government policy will virtually eliminate access to publicly funded audiology assessments across vast regions of Ontario;

"Whereas this new Harris government policy is virtually impossible to implement in underserviced areas across Ontario;

"Whereas this policy will lengthen waiting lists for patients and therefore have a detrimental effect on the health of these Ontarians;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, petition the Ontario Legislature to demand the Mike Harris government" -- we're going to have to change

that from the Mike Harris government to the new one -- "move immediately to permanently fund audiologists directly for the provision of audiology services."

I affix my signature to that petition.

SOCIAL AUDIT

Mr Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North): I have a petition sent to me by the Lakehead Social Planning Council calling on the province

to conduct a social audit.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Mike Harris government has undertaken a massive reform of the way social service programs are managed and delivered in this province; and

"Whereas the government's language, actions and policies over the last six years have reinforced the worst kind of stereotypes about people on social

assistance without offering Ontarians any proof that the policies they've put in place are meeting the needs of those whose circumstances have forced them to seek temporary assistance from

Ontario's social safety net; and

"Whereas this government when challenged on how well their Ontario Works programs are working, points to welfare caseload numbers as their one and only

measurement of success or failure; and

"Whereas a social audit would determine how this government's policies are impacting on low-income children and families and allow for enhancements to improve

the well-being, employability and economic security of individuals and families in need;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to demand that the government of Ontario conduct a social audit of its Ontario

Works program."

I'll be doing a private member's resolution tomorrow morning calling for this in the House, and I'm very pleased to sign this petition as well.

OHIP SERVICES

Mr Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): So many petitions. Same subject but a different petition, this time from this community in around

Kapuskasing, and it reads as follows:

"Whereas the Harris government's decision to delist hearing aid evaluation and re-evaluation from OHIP coverage will lead to untreated hearing losses; and

"Whereas these restriction will cut off access to diagnostic hearing tests, especially in geographic regions of the province already experiencing difficulties

due to shortages of specialty physicians; and

"Whereas OHIP will no longer cover the cost of miscellaneous therapeutic procedures, including physical therapy and therapeutic exercises; and

"Whereas services no longer covered by OHIP may include thermal therapy, ultrasound therapy, hydrotherapy, massage therapy, electrotherapy, magnetotherapy,

nerve therapy stimulation and biofeedback; and

"Whereas one of the few publicly covered alternatives includes hospital outpatient clinics where waiting lists for such services are up to six months long;

and

"Whereas delisting these services will have detrimental effects on the health of all Ontarians, especially seniors, children, hearing-impaired people and

industrial workers; and

"Whereas the government has already delisted $100 million worth of OHIP services,

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to immediately restore OHIP coverage for these delisted services."

I affix my signature to that petition.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

FOOD SAFETY

AND QUALITY ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LA QUALITÉ

ET LA SALUBRITÉ DES ALIMENTS

Resuming the debate adjourned on October 9, 2001, on the motion for second reading of Bill 87,

An Act to regulate food quality and safety and to make

complementary amendments and repeals to other Acts / Projet de loi 87, Loi visant à réglementer la qualité et la salubrité des aliments, à apporter des modifications

complémentaires à d'autres lois et à en abroger d'autres.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Pursuant to the order of the House dated October 15, 2001, I'm now required to put the question.

Mr Coburn has moved second reading of Bill 87,

An Act to regulate food quality and safety and to make complementary amendments and repeals to other Acts. 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 1508 to 1513.

The Speaker: Will members kindly take their seats, please.

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

Ayes

Arnott, Ted

Baird, John R.

Barrett, Toby

Beaubien, Marcel

Clark, Brad

Clement, Tony

Coburn, Brian

Dunlop, Garfield

Ecker, Janet

Elliott, Brenda

Galt, Doug

Gill, Raminder

Hardeman, Ernie

Harris, Michael D.

Hodgson, Chris

Hudak, Tim

Jackson, Cameron

Johns, Helen

Johnson, Bert

Kells, Morley

Klees, Frank

Martiniuk, Gerry

Maves, Bart

Mazzilli, Frank

Miller, Norm

Molinari, Tina R.

Munro, Julia

Mushinski, Marilyn

Newman, Dan

O'Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Runciman, Robert W.

Sampson, Rob

Snobelen, John

Spina, Joseph

Sterling, Norman W.

Stewart, R. Gary

Stockwell, Chris

Tascona, Joseph N.

Tilson, David

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

Agostino, Dominic

Bartolucci, Rick

Bisson, Gilles

Boyer, Claudette

Bradley, James J.

Brown, Michael A.

Bryant, Michael

Caplan, David

Churley, Marilyn

Colle, Mike

Crozier, Bruce

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duncan, Dwight

Gerretsen, John

Gravelle, Michael

Hampton, Howard

Hoy, Pat

Kennedy, Gerard

Kormos, Peter

Kwinter, Monte

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

Martin, Tony

McGuinty, Dalton

McLeod, Lyn

McMeekin, Ted

Parsons, Ernie

Patten, Richard

Peters, Steve

Phillips, Gerry

Prue, Michael

Pupatello, Sandra

Ramsay, David

Ruprecht, Tony

Smitherman, George

Clerk of the House (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 47; the nays are 37.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried. Pursuant to the order of the House dated October 15, 2001, the bill is ordered referred to the

standing committee on justice and social policy.

IMPROVING CUSTOMER SERVICE

FOR ROAD USERS ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR L'AMÉLIORATION

DES SERVICES À LA CLIENTÈLE

OFFERTS AUX USAGERS DE LA ROUTE

Resuming the debate adjourned on October 3, 2001, on the motion for second reading of Bill 65,

An Act to permit the Minister of Transportation to delegate to

persons in the private sector powers and duties and responsibilities to deliver services relating to road user programs / Projet de loi 65, Loi permettant au ministre des Transports de

déléguer à des personnes du secteur privé des pouvoirs, des fonctions et des responsabilités pour fournir des services liés aux programmes à l'intention des

usagers de la route.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Pursuant to the order of the House dated October 16, 2001, I'm now required to put the question.

Mr Turnbull has moved second reading of Bill 65,

An Act to permit the Minister of Transportation to delegate to persons in the private sector powers and duties

and responsibilities to deliver services relating to road user programs.

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 1518 to 1523.

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

Ayes

Arnott, Ted

Baird, John R.

Barrett, Toby

Beaubien, Marcel

Clark, Brad

Clement, Tony

Coburn, Brian

Dunlop, Garfield

Ecker, Janet

Elliott, Brenda

Galt, Doug

Gill, Raminder

Hardeman, Ernie

Harris, Michael D.

Hodgson, Chris

Hudak, Tim

Jackson, Cameron

Johns, Helen

Johnson, Bert

Kells, Morley

Klees, Frank

Martiniuk, Gerry

Maves, Bart

Mazzilli, Frank

Miller, Norm

Molinari, Tina R.

Munro, Julia

Mushinski, Marilyn

Newman, Dan

O'Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Runciman, Robert W.

Sampson, Rob

Snobelen, John

Spina, Joseph

Sterling, Norman W.

Stewart, R. Gary

Stockwell, Chris

Tascona, Joseph N.

Tilson, David

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

Agostino, Dominic

Bartolucci, Rick

Bisson, Gilles

Boyer, Claudette

Bradley, James J.

Brown, Michael A.

Bryant, Michael

Caplan, David

Churley, Marilyn

Colle, Mike

Crozier, Bruce

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duncan, Dwight

Gerretsen, John

Gravelle, Michael

Hoy, Pat

Kennedy, Gerard

Kormos, Peter

Kwinter, Monte

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

Martin, Tony

McGuinty, Dalton

McLeod, Lyn

McMeekin, Ted

Parsons, Ernie

Patten, Richard

Peters, Steve

Phillips, Gerry

Prue, Michael

Pupatello, Sandra

Ramsay, David

Ruprecht, Tony

Smitherman, George

Clerk of the House (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 47; the nays are 36.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried. Pursuant to the order of the House, the bill is ordered for third reading.

ORDER OF BUSINESS

Hon Janet Ecker (Minister of Education, Government House Leader): I would like to ask for unanimous consent to move a motion regarding the

terms of this afternoon's debate.

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

Hon Mrs Ecker: I move that when G69 is called at orders of the day this afternoon:

That the remainder of the sessional day shall be spent debating the bill, at which time the Speaker shall put the question without further debate or amendment;

and

That the vote may be deferred;

That, at the conclusion of the second reading stage of the bill, the bill shall be referred to the standing committee on justice and social policy;

That the standing committee on justice and social policy shall be authorized to meet in Toronto for one day for clause-by-clause consideration of the bill;

That the standing committee on justice and social policy shall report the bill back to the House not later than November 22, 2001.

The Speaker: Mrs Ecker moves that when G69 is called at orders of the day this afternoon --

Interjection: Dispense.

The Speaker: Dispensed.

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

PROHIBITING PROFITING

FROM RECOUNTING CRIMES ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 INTERDISANT

LES GAINS TIRÉS

DU RÉCIT D'ACTES CRIMINELS

Resuming the debate adjourned on October 11, 2001 on the motion for second reading of Bill 69,

An Act to protect victims by prohibiting profiting from

recounting of crime / Projet de loi 69, Loi visant à protéger les victimes en interdisant les gains tirés du récit d'actes criminels.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Further debate?

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I stand to be corrected, but if I recall, I had just completed the leadoff

and it would seem that the opportunity should now be put to members for their opportunity to pose questions and put comments.

The Speaker: The member is absolutely correct. It's questions and comments on the debate of the member for Niagara Centre.

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): I listened with a good deal of interest to the member's discussion of the proceeds of crime legislation,

and recognize that once again we need financial resources on the part of this government to be able to implement the provisions of this bill. The member sees a lot of flaws in it. I listened to his

dissertation the other day, which was highly legalistic in certain parts, as it should be, and he discussed it in many aspects. But one of the things we find with all of this legislation is that it

may look good on paper, but the government does not have the financial resources to be able to implement the provisions of the bill because the government is busy giving a $2.2-billion tax cut to

the corporations in this province, thereby depriving Ontario's representatives from having the necessary financial resources to implement this legislation.

It's similar to questions in the House today, if I can draw an analogy that I know the member would want me to. Here we have the Ministry of Health firing five

of its top scientists today in order to save money. What is it saving that money for? It's saving that money so it can give money to corporations, a $2.2-billion tax cut -- a tax gift to the

corporations of this province. Therefore, we're firing -- at least the Minister of Health, the Honourable Tony Clement, is -- five of the top scientists who could help us deal with the bioterrorism

threat in Ontario.

I know if the member from Niagara Centre had been aware of that at that time, he would have incorporated that as part of his personal remarks on this piece of

legislation.

Mr Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): That proves that the member for St Catharines is never stuck for words.

With regard to the speech made by my good friend Peter Kormos, our justice critic on this particular bill, I just wanted to bring back one of the points he

made, and I think it's a very important one. If you remember, there was a gentleman of this assembly by the name of Cam Jackson who introduced a bill in this House in the time of Bob Rae's

government that basically dealt with this issue. It basically said that if someone is out there trying to make money by writing a book about their criminal activities, the money should at least go

to the victims and the family of the victims directly, in order to make sure that nobody really profits out of this, so that the person who writes the book makes no money. If any money is made, it

shouldn't go to the government but it should go directly to the victim or the victim's family.

I just want to read into the record what Cam Jackson said at the time about the then Premier: "I cannot tell you how very pleased I am that the Premier has

assisted in allowing Ontario to be the very first province in Canada to take this initiative and to show that leadership." Who was he talking about? He was talking about Bob Rae. I know my good

friend Peter Kormos would want me to mention that. Then he goes on to say, "I want to thank my leader, Mike Harris, who has consistently supported me," concerning my advocacy for victims' rights in

the province of Ontario on this particular issue.

I think it's rather interesting that we now find ourselves in the situation where Mr Jackson's Premier has introduced a bill that effectively guts his bill,

because the bill we now have before us basically does away with the Cam Jackson bill and says that if any profits are made by the writing of a book, the money may go to the victim or anyone that

the government chooses should get the money. In other words, they can direct it to general revenue or wherever they want.

My point would be that it's a sorry day for Mr Jackson now that the Premier has decided to override his bill by introducing a government bill that basically

guts his.

Hon David Young (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs): I appreciate having an opportunity to respond to what the member

opposite had to say, both today and on the earlier day that this important bill was debated in this assembly. Let's be clear: Mr Jackson's bill represented a very innovative and, frankly,

unprecedented step forward on behalf of victims across this province. He is to be applauded, as he was at the time, for what he did.

My friends on the other side of this Legislature appear to have the impression that regardless of what bill is tabled by the government, they must be against

it, even if it's an improvement and another step down the road that helps victims. Let me explain to the members opposite, if they'd care to listen for just a moment about a bill that really

shouldn't be the subject matter of partisan party politics, that this bill provides for enhanced enforcement, and it has a broader group of individuals who are obliged to report this activity. The

activity we're talking about -- let's be really clear -- is people -- publishers, media, television, radio -- assisting criminals in the revictimization of victims, the recanting, the retelling of

horrific stories and making money off it. This bill will stop that.

It will include a larger group of people who are obliged to report. It will include mechanisms that will allow for enforcement. It will preclude and remove the

necessity of victims and their families having to fund court cases, which is the case now if this bill doesn't pass, and live through the experience of the court case, again being revictimized.

Surely the members opposite can put aside their petty parochial partisan politics long enough to help a larger group of victims. That's what this is about, and they should stand and say they're in

favour of that or they're against it.

The Speaker: Further questions and comments?

Mr Dominic Agostino (Hamilton East): First of all, I listened with interest to Mr Bisson's comments. I'm just not quite sure if Mr Kormos

probably felt the same warm and fuzzy feeling about Cam Jackson's endorsement of Bob Rae as many of us have here in the House, but I'll let them debate that.

When it comes to the bill, basically what you've done here is modify the existing legislation that is in place. Really it doesn't add a great deal to what was

already there. We talked about Cam Jackson's bill; we've talked about the work that the NDP has done. Basically this legislation was introduced already. They finally decided to bring it back in

this session.

It's part of the government's ongoing attempt to pretend that they're tough on crime and tough on criminals in this province, when the real record shows the

total opposite of that when you look at their dismal failure when it comes to dealing with domestic violence, when you look at their record on gun control. This is a government that believes a gun

registry is a bad thing. This is a government that believes that it's not in the best interests of Ontarians to have some control and a registry, an idea of who has weapons where in the province of

Ontario. This is a government that allowed 12-year-old kids to go hunting and have hunting guns. So when you look at their track record when it comes to violence and crime, it really is all

talk.

Let me say to you, Speaker, the real effort on crime control has been coming from this side of the House. It's been bills introduced by Michael Bryant on

replica guns. It's been bills introduced by Rick Bartolucci on prostitution that the government has finally seen the light to adopt. So we're certainly not going to take any lectures from that side

of the House on being tough on crime.

Frankly, this government likes to talk the talk when it comes to being tough on crime. They don't put the resources into it. We have fewer police officers on

the streets today than we did when this government took office in 1995. That is the reality. That is the record of this government that pounds its chest and says, "We're tough on crime." If you

look at their record, it's a dismal record. They're not tough on crime. They're great at spinning a line but they're certainly not walking the walk when it comes to resources, money and support

that's out there to fight crime.

Mr Kormos: The Attorney General, with incredible petulance, stands up and tries laying this line on the Legislature that if you're not with

them, somehow you're for the forces of evil and you're there with the criminals and the bad guys and the rapists and the murderers. I say, look, Attorney General, understand that in this Parliament

there's got to be debate. Your members may not want to participate in the debate. We are, in the New Democratic Party, feeling compelled to participate in this debate.

The reality is that the Jackson bill encompasses a broader range of crimes in terms of the people whose recounting of those crimes would result in the proceeds

being seized. The reality is that the purpose of this type of legislation, first of all, is to create a disincentive for the criminal from recounting that crime. Two, we understand that the Jackson

bill, 1994, has not been utilized once in any recorded or observed or noted occasion. Three, it should be designed, as the Jackson bill is, to ensure that any proceeds obtained by the criminal in

the recounting of his crime flow directly to that criminal's victims. This bill does the very specific opposite.

I've indicated to you from the very beginning that of course we agree with the concept that criminals shouldn't profit from the recounting of crime. I've told

you from the very beginning that we believe very much that victims should be the beneficiaries of any profits that should be paid to a criminal for the recounting of his or her crime. That's why we

supported and believed in the Jackson bill in 1994 and that's why, when I indicated to you last week our position on this bill, I indicated that we support the philosophy very much that victims

should get those proceeds. That's why we insist that the bill that should be before this Legislature is the Jackson bill for amendments, if you indeed feel it has shortcomings. We're not going to

collaborate with you in any fraud upon the public about this government's commitment to victims, because this government has been betrayed as having no commitment to victims in this province;

witness Judge Day's ruling on this government's Victims' Bill of Rights. This government's position is a fraud.

The Speaker: Further debate?

Mr Steve Peters (Elgin-Middlesex-London): The opening comment that I would like to make is that the Attorney General just alluded to the fact

of partisanship being played with this bill. I want to go on the record in the beginning to say that the Liberal Party is not playing partisan politics with this piece of legislation that's in

front of us today, that we are supporting this bill. Unfortunately, it's something we don't see often enough in this Legislature: legislation being introduced that does have support from the

opposition.

First and foremost, I think we need to say that crime does not pay and should not pay, and that it's incumbent on every one of us in this Legislature to do

everything we possibly can to ensure that in no way, shape or form can anybody who commits a criminal act in some way profit from that. We need too to do everything in our power to ensure that we

are there supporting the victims of crime and do everything we can so that we don't put roadblocks in front of them, that we do work toward assisting them.

We've seen instances in this province where individuals have wanted to profit from crimes, and we need to ensure that doesn't happen. What is troubling about

the piece of legislation we have in front of us this evening is that we don't recognize the efforts of the Honourable Mr Jackson in 1994 with a private member's piece of legislation that received

unanimous support of this Legislature. The legislation that Mr Jackson put forward was a law that would prohibit criminals from profiting from recounting their crimes. It's interesting, though,

that that is, and was, a prohibition that already existed in common law.

Why would we rework a piece of legislation that is already on the books and have in front of us this Bill 69 when something was already on the books? We could

have had the opportunity as legislators, if the government felt there was a need to improve on the legislation that had been unanimously agreed to in this Legislature in 1994 -- if there were

improvements to be made, why wouldn't the government come forth with amendments? That's the responsible thing to do for any one of us in this Legislature; that if there is something wrong with a

piece of legislation, amendments come forward. Given the demonstration of the support for that legislation in 1994, had there been amendments come forward to help strengthen that legislation, they

would have received support in this Legislature.

We need to recognize some of the issues that victims face in this province. Prior to my arrival in the Legislature, we saw the introduction and the passage of

the Victims' Bill of Rights that was introduced by this government. But what we saw is that unfortunately it was a piece of legislation that was put forward but was toothless. It didn't serve the

purpose that it was intended to. It was pointed out very clearly in 1999 by Mr Justice Day of the Ontario Court, who described the Victims' Bill of Rights as follows: "The act is a statement of

principle and social policy, beguilingly clothed in the language of legislation. It does not establish any statutory rights for the victims of crime."

So how can an initiative that is put forward in 1996 -- and the intent is that this legislation is going to help support the Victims' Bill of Rights, when the

Victims' Bill of Rights doesn't stand up in the eyes of the court.

I think it's a government we see that over and over again likes to profess their support for law and order and their support for the security of the public.

But I want it to be known that Dalton McGuinty and the Liberal Party feel the same way, that we need to do everything we can to ensure the security of the people of this province and do everything

we can to support individuals who are victims of crime.

I can relate to a couple of situations in my own constituency where families who are victims of crime have not received the support of this government. I can

cite a case that I've raised in this Legislature on previous occasions, the situation of a constituent of mine named Brian Crocker, who was shot in the chest. The individual who perpetrated that

crime was found not criminally responsible and was placed in a forensic institution.

But the issue, how this government failed the Crocker family, is just mind-boggling. First, the government supports bringing this individual back to an

institution that's located less than two kilometres from their home, the Crocker family being given very little input -- actually no input -- into the decision-making process. But fortunately, in

raising the issue in the Legislature, the Crockers didn't have to endure the fact that the individual responsible would be back in their own backyard.

But now again, the Crockers are having to fight. The Crockers, as victims, are having to fight a bureaucracy where a decision is made to move the perpetrator

of the crime from one institution to another. Do the Crockers receive notice? Do the victims receive notice of this transfer of the individual? No, they don't. So I cite one case where victims of

crime have been let down by this government.

There's another situation in my own riding. I spoke as recently as last week with a lady by the name of Helen Jacklin. Helen is the daughter of the former

Premier of this province, Mitch Hepburn. Helen's family faced a terrible tragedy well over 25 years ago. What has been extremely disappointing, from my perspective, and sad for this family, is that

for 25 years they have tried to stay on top of the issue and make sure that they would have the opportunity to have some input into what was going to happen to the individual who committed those

crimes, where that individual was going to go. It has been a constant struggle for the Jacklin family. It's a struggle that still continues to this day, the Jacklins trying to fight this situation.

I believe it's either today or tomorrow that Mrs Jacklin is going to be appearing before a committee to express the frustration that her family has faced for the past 25 years in dealing with this

criminal and the lack of input that they have had as a family.

But I think it's important to recognize too that the Liberal Party and Dalton McGuinty have made it clear that we will stand up for victims in this province.

Dalton demonstrated that almost a year ago, on October 11, 2000, when, through his persistent lobbying efforts, he forced the government to give four families who were victims of the Ottawa

transport shooting $100,000. The government had initially refused to make these payments, but through the tenacity and persistence of Dalton McGuinty, who is prepared to stand up for people, the

government reversed its decision.

I think too you look at the efforts of Rick Bartolucci. Rick, our member from Sudbury, with the full support of Dalton McGuinty and the Liberal caucus, has

done everything in his power to introduce legislation to protect children from sexual predators. Bartolucci's efforts are to be commended.

I think what I'm trying to demonstrate here is that as much as we hear a government stand up and say how tough they are on crime and law and order, in the

majority of cases it's fluff. We are prepared to stand up for real people and look out for the interests of real people.

When you look at some of the issues that are going on in this province right now -- and there are many issues of individuals who are facing extreme hardship as

a result of the decision-making of this government -- the Liberals have been there to stand up for them.

I want to cite a case that has come up in my own backyard right now, where there are a number of victims, young children and adults, as a result of a decision

made by the board of governors of the London Health Sciences Centre. As a result of the funding cuts and the stress this government has put on the hospital, the hospital board has made a decision

to cancel 18 programs. And what is this government doing? They're taking away programs in their own backyard and are going to force families and children to travel to Hamilton or Toronto. Yet we

see as recently as today a young family who tried to go to Toronto and to Hamilton for pediatric services and couldn't do it. Do you know where they had to get those services? They went to London.

I draw the parallels that these families and children are victims of mismanagement by this government.

I think there are other victims of initiatives that have been put forth by this government and forced on to the London Health Sciences Centre, where you have a

heart replacement program that is state-of-the-art -- we witnessed ground-breaking efforts in London -- and this program is being cut, a program that actually makes the hospital money. We see

another program, the endovascular surgical aneurysm program, that is being cut, and, again, more victims as a result of the actions of this government. This is a program that has saved countless

lives, yet this government chooses to cut it; a program, unfortunately, that was misrepresented in the presentation to the board of governors.

We see another decision dealing with the burn unit. We're seeing the burn unit closed at the hospital. We saw the tragedy of a young lady this past summer from

the Kincardine area who was burned in a fire, yet there was no room, no bed for her in London, no bed for her in Toronto, no bed for her in Hamilton, and we had to send her to Rochester, New York,

yet we want to cut out this program in London. I think that is extremely short-sighted. I urge the Minister of Health and my colleagues on the opposite side who represent London -- I urge all those

members who represent at least 10 counties in southwestern Ontario -- to start to speak up for these victims and ask why these programs are being cut. These programs are being cut because of this

government.

I want it known that Dalton McGuinty is extremely concerned about what's going on. That's why Dalton is going to London tomorrow, first, to meet with the

hospital officials, but then to sit down and talk to the real victims, the people who have to deal with these things on a day-to-day basis, and that's the families and the children. Then he's going

to meet with the doctors. Obviously, when this decision is made at a hospital in London, they don't listen to the doctors. They actually have gag orders placed on them, but what we've witnessed is

doctors speaking up, doctors speaking out because they know this is an irresponsible decision that has been made, a decision made without all the facts being placed in front of the board members. I

want it known that McGuinty and the Liberal Party are going to stand up for these people in London.

One of the things we've seen lacking in this province is the resources being put into the Victims' Bill of Rights and the resources put forth for the police

services, to ensure that individuals don't profit from a crime they've committed. The initiatives on this are good, and had they amended Mr Jackson's legislation, we could have seen many more

positive things. All we're seeing in this legislation is streamlining a process to get money back to the victims. A victim will no longer have to launch a civil proceeding to get access to money

paid to a convicted offender for recounting his crime. What is positive here is that the government will be responsible for acting on the victim's behalf. That's a good step. I urge the government

to ensure the resources are put there for families. It's of extreme importance to have those resources there.

As we see with so many pieces of legislation in this place, we don't have the regulations in front of us. I understand that process, but I would hope that the

government would consult with victims when this legisl