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

November 26, 2003

38th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2003-Nov-26 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Wednesday 26 November 2003 Mercredi 26 novembre 2003

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

LIBERAL CAMPAIGN PROMISES

INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS

LIBERAL CAMPAIGN PROMISES

FESTIVAL OF TREES

GOVERNMENT'S RECORD

EID-UL-FITR

FIREFIGHTERS

LIBERAL CAMPAIGN PROMISES

VISITORS

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE RATE

STABILIZATION ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 SUR LA STABILISATION

DES TAUX D'ASSURANCE-AUTOMOBILE

LABOUR RELATIONS

AMENDMENT ACT

(REPLACEMENT WORKERS), 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LES RELATIONS DE TRAVAIL

(TRAVAILLEURS SUPPLÉANTS)

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE

AIDS AWARENESS WEEK

ORAL QUESTIONS

GASOLINE TAX

PROVINCIAL DEFICIT

SARS

HOSPITALS

SPENDING REDUCTIONS

HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT

PROVINCIAL DEFICIT

AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE

LAND USE PLANNING

TAXATION

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

OAK RIDGES MORAINE

HOSPITALS

SMALL BUSINESS

TRANSIT SERVICES

PETITIONS

TOBACCO TAX

COMMUNITY CARE ACCESS CENTRES

ONTARIO BUDGET

TOBACCO TAX

CENTRES D'ACCÈS AUX SOINS COMMUNAUTAIRES

ORDERS OF THE DAY

FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 SUR LA GESTION

RESPONSABLE DES FINANCES

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

LIBERAL CAMPAIGN PROMISES

Mr Cameron Jackson (Burlington): I'd like to welcome five members of my riding from Burlington, members of the Burlington Professional

Firefighters Association, in the House with me today. They are here to bear witness to the fact that the Liberals' blame-game deficit does not hold water with Ontario taxpayers, any more than it

holds water with the citizens of Burlington. Based on our government's balanced budget plan and what the Premier has promised as part of his fiscal agenda, this Liberal government could run as much

as a $3.5-billion surplus in this fiscal year. All the Premier and the Minister of Finance have to do is start showing up for work and accepting the responsibility entrusted to them by the voters

of Ontario.

Someone needs to inform the Premier that he needs to stop acting like an opposition member. He needs to stop whining and stop making excuses about why he is

breaking all of his election promises to the people of Ontario. He and his finance minister need to get to work and to get on the job. They were put here to do that work. Of course, it's always

easier for a Liberal to break his word to Ontarians than to show up for work and make tough decisions. Perhaps he shouldn't be surprised that the mantra of his new government is excuses, broken

promises and tax hikes. Come clean, Mr McGuinty. You could balance the budget for the province of Ontario if you had the political will. It can be done.

INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS

Ms Laurel C. Broten (Etobicoke-Lakeshore): I'm very pleased to rise today and share with the members of the Legislature something that's been

happening in the riding of Etobicoke-Lakeshore, the wonderful community which I now have the pleasure and privilege of representing. In Etobicoke-Lakeshore, a community which by its very name is

obviously on the shores of Lake Ontario, the fall winds off the lake have blown in as winds of change and have brought with them a new era of co-operation between all levels of government.

I am pleased to report to this House, but most importantly to the community of Etobicoke-Lakeshore, that the desire which you have expressed over the past number

of years, and in particular during the most recent election campaign, that all levels of government should work together in co-operation and common purpose on issues that matter to our community --

whether that is strengthening our city, developing a more and better integrated transit system, tackling gridlock, protecting our waterfront, ensuring safety in our community, or working toward

enhanced economic prosperity and development -- have been heeded. The Honourable Jean Augustine, your federal representative, and our city councillors, Mark Grimes in Ward 6 and Peter Milczyn in

Ward 5, and I are already working together to tackle these challenges and to better serve our community so that living, working and learning in Etobicoke-Lakeshore will truly be the best that it

can be.

LIBERAL CAMPAIGN PROMISES

Mr Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): I was shocked this past week when I heard comments from the Minister of Municipal Affairs. When asked why

this government was breaking yet another one of their campaign promises, he responded, "Perhaps we were too naïve." For the Liberal government to simply plead ignorance as an excuse for not

living up to lofty promises is simply unacceptable.

Let's look for a minute at the Liberal promise to balance the provincial budget. One of Mr McGuinty's first actions after being elected was to hire a private

consultant with limited terms of reference at a cost of $1,500 a day in order to try to convince Ontarians that balancing the 2003-04 budget could not be done. One has to ask if that money could

have been better spent elsewhere.

Mr McGuinty's blame-game deficit does not hold water with Ontario taxpayers. Based on our government's balanced budget plan and what the Premier has promised as

part of his fiscal agenda, the Liberal government could balance the budget. All the Premier and Minister of Finance have to do is start to show up for work and start to accept the responsibility

entrusted to them by the voters of Ontario.

Come clean, Mr McGuinty. You could balance the budget if you had the political will to do so. It can be done.

FESTIVAL OF TREES

Mr Jeff Leal (Peterborough): To illustrate the kind of community I represent, I'd like to share with you an annual event that gets Peterborough

residents in the Christmas spirit. The Festival of Trees, now in its 13th year, is a major fundraiser for local health care. Beginning last night with the opening gala, this event runs until

Sunday. With the input of thousands of volunteer hours, the festival transforms the Peterborough Memorial Centre Arena, the home of the Peterborough Petes, into a winter wonderland that is

accessible to people of all incomes and ages. Local individuals, agencies and businesses decorate trees that are later raffled or auctioned off. The festival also includes music and performing

arts.

Other fundraisers within the festival include a hockey game, fashion show, and the sale of limited edition teddy bears, cookbooks and calendars.

Last year alone, the festival raised $228,000 for the Peterborough Regional Health Care Centre Foundation, St Joseph's Care Foundation and Hospice

Peterborough.

I wish this festival the best of luck in their fundraising efforts in the riding of Peterborough.

GOVERNMENT'S RECORD

Mr Ernie Hardeman (Oxford): I rise today in order to address this government's unwillingness to face the facts and its blatant refusal to do any

work on behalf of Ontarians.

I want to quote to you an excerpt from the Toronto Star. "We have until Christmas to demonize the Tories. After that, we can't do it any more." That was a

statement made by a Liberal insider to the press. I would like to submit to you, Mr Speaker, that since this government has taken office, that has been its primary goal: to demonize the former

government.

We know the budget can be balanced, but the Liberal government won't admit that. Their blame-game deficit provides a convenient excuse to break their promises

and hike taxes. Balancing the budget takes commitment and the political will to make tough decisions, two traits this government appears to be lacking.

I submit to you that the actions of this government have been nothing more than a cynical ploy to attempt to demonize the past administration. Someone needs to

inform the Premier that he needs to stop acting like an opposition member. He needs to stop whining and making excuses for why he is breaking all his promises. He and his finance minister need to

get to work to do the job that they were put here to do and to get to work for the people of Ontario.

Balance the budget, Mr Premier. It can be done.

EID-UL-FITR

Mr Shafiq Qaadri (Etobicoke North): Speaker, and my honourable fellow parliamentarians, I think it's a mark of a civilized society and the

ever-expanding spectrum of inclusivity that I am able to say the following. Islam enjoys its major celebration, the festival of Eid, which is the celebration commemorating the end of the month of

fasting, the month of Ramadan.

I am honoured to share with the House my thoughts on Eid, particularly in light of the fact that this is the first time in the history of this Legislature that

Muslims have been elected in the province of Ontario.

My fellow parliamentarians, Speaker, it is my privilege to celebrate this glorious occasion because it continues the Canadian tradition of multiculturalism and

demonstrates the attitude of openness. This allows representatives of all religions and creeds to contribute to a community that leads the way for the rest of the world to follow in our tradition

of tolerance, mutual harmony, respect and understanding. That is the ideal of the Canadian and the Liberal mosaic.

FIREFIGHTERS

Mr Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): On behalf of the Progressive Conservative caucus, I rise today to welcome the Ontario Professional Fire

Fighters Association to the Legislature of Ontario. I know that you've been very busy today meeting with MPPs across Queen's Park to make them aware of your issues. As the opposition critic for the

community safety and correctional services, I was particularly pleased to participate in this process.

Firefighting is a noble profession that needs no introduction. Ontarians know and appreciate what firefighters do each and every day in the name of community

safety. That's why I was shocked and appalled by the fact that the word "firefighter" was not even mentioned in the Liberal government's recent throne speech. The fact that firefighters, and police

officers, were totally ignored in the throne speech sends a clear message to the people of Ontario that law and order is not a priority for the Liberals.

In a letter to Fred LeBlanc, president of the Ontario Professional Fire Fighters Association, Dalton McGuinty personally makes four key promises to this

organization. I should point out that this letter was dated May 23, 2003 -- before the election -- and is not included in the 230 or 240 promises he made during the writ.

As critic, it is my job to make sure the Premier keeps his promises to firefighters. Based on his performance to date, I'm really not holding my breath. Surely

Dalton McGuinty, captain and CEO of the Liberal promise-breakers club, will keep his promise to the Ontario Professional Fire Fighters Association and be spared the embarrassment of yet another

series of shameful broken promises.

Mr Tim Peterson (Mississauga South): I would like to join the member from Simcoe North in welcoming to Queen's Park the Ontario Professional

Fire Fighters Association.

Today, as many of you know, is lobby day for the association, and many of the members in my caucus have had the privilege of meeting and speaking with their

representatives today. Those of us who have not had the opportunity look forward to speaking with them and listening to their concerns. We value their input and insight into some of the issues

concerning all of our safety in the province of Ontario.

I would like to say on behalf of all the members in the Legislature that we sincerely appreciate the work these men and women do to keep our communities safe.

Our firefighters are often the first to come to our aid in the event of tragedy, often at the risk of their own lives, and they deserve our recognition and respect. Now more than ever, their

efforts and sacrifice are vital to our safety and well-being.

As many of you know, several firefighters have fallen in the line of duty in Ontario. We are eternally grateful for their sacrifice.

LIBERAL CAMPAIGN PROMISES

Mr Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln): I want to take a moment today to congratulate the Minister of Energy, Dwight Duncan, on being inducted as the

first, the inaugural, member of the Dalton McGuinty promise-breakers club, for zapping the Liberal campaign promise to keep the cap on Hydro prices. Congratulations to the Minister of Energy.

Never fear, others members of the Liberal benches: Nominations are now open for the next inductee into the Dalton McGuinty promise-breakers club. No doubt

competition is fierce, with a flood of flip-flops from the government benches, and the number of worthy promise-breakers is very high. Obviously, the campaign is well under way. Fast out of the

gates is the municipal affairs minister, Mr Gerretsen, with his Oak Ridges moraine flip-flop; Mr Smitherman, with his P3 hospitals promise-breaking, number 114, is a worthy candidate; and Mr

Sorbara, with his double gainer of increasing taxes and running a deficit, could be a very worthy inductee into the promise-breakers club.

Whether it's one of the above or any other nominees, I'm going to ask the members to fill out the nomination papers, which I'll ask a page to distribute. Members

of the Legislature can nominate somebody, members watching at home can nominate somebody, the audience at home, or members of the press gallery. Very soon we'll nominate our second inductee to the

Dalton McGuinty promise-breakers club. I'd like to seek unanimous consent to give Dwight Duncan 30 seconds for an acceptance speech for being the inaugural member into the Dalton McGuinty

promise-breakers club.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Member for Niagara Centre.

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): I rise today to herald a historic new beginning in the province of Ontario, the birth of a new political

party, the Fiberals. Ontario, meet your Fiberals. Led by broken-promise Premier Dalton McGuinty, the Fiberals are a gang of power-hungry MPPs who make big promises before an election and then break

them all afterwards. The Fiberals are masters of their craft. Already, the Fiberals have broken promises to protect the Oak Ridges moraine, scrap private hospitals, hold a meat scandal public

inquiry and cap Hydro rates until 2006.

But the Fiberals ain't done yet. Today, the Fiberals are going to renege on another one of their so-called ironclad commitments: lowering auto insurance rates.

Before the election, Fiberal McGuinty promised to lower auto insurance rates by 10% to 20%. Try telling this to Brian Holland, a good driver from Ottawa. His rates have gone up by 13% since the

Fiberal rate freeze. He says, "I feel like I was ... to by the Premier." That's what he said. "I feel like I was ... to by the Premier."

Fiberals, when are you going to learn what Premier after Premier has learned the hard way: that private auto insurance is highway robbery? If you want to tame

auto insurance rates, there's only one solution: public auto insurance that delivers the lowest and fairest rates. I say to you, we should be grateful that our professional firefighters are here,

because the Fiberals' pants could catch on fire as we sit.

The Speaker: Order. I know it's sort of challenging for everyone here at this early time, when we start our session, to refer to members by

their ridings more than by their names. I myself have that challenge, but you have much more time to consult, for your speeches, about the members and their ridings. I would ask you to adhere to

that and call members by their ridings.

VISITORS

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): I also ask your indulgence today, although it's not a practice that I want to do as the Speaker, for the

members to recognize and welcome the civic classes of Henry Kelsey Senior Public School, sitting in both the east and west galleries, and their teacher, Lawrence Dawkins.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE RATE

STABILIZATION ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 SUR LA STABILISATION

DES TAUX D'ASSURANCE-AUTOMOBILE

Mr Sorbara moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 5,

An Act to temporarily freeze automobile insurance rates for private passenger vehicles and to provide for the review and regulation of risk

classification systems and automobile insurance rates for private passenger vehicles / Projet de loi 5, Loi visant à geler temporairement les taux d'assurance-automobile dans les cas des

voitures de tourisme et à prévoir l'examen et la réglementation des systèmes de classement des risques et des taux d'assurance-automobile les concernant.

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

All those in favour, say "aye."

Those against?

I think the ayes have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1351 to 1356.

The Speaker: All those in favour, please rise one at a time.

Ayes

Agostino, Dominic

Bartolucci, Rick

Berardinetti, Lorenzo

Bountrogianni, Marie

Bradley, James J.

Broten, Laurel C.

Brown, Michael A.

Brownell, Jim

Bryant, Michael

Cansfield, Donna H.

Caplan, David

Chambers, Mary Anne V.

Colle, Mike

Cordiano, Joseph

Delaney, Bob

Dhillon, Vic

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duguid, Brad

Duncan, Dwight

Flynn, Kevin Daniel

Fonseca, Peter

Gravelle, Michael

Hoy, Pat

Jeffrey, Linda

Kennedy, Gerard

Kular, Kuldip

Kwinter, Monte

Leal, Jeff

Levac, Dave

Marsales, Judy

Matthews, Deborah

Mauro, Bill

Meilleur, Madeleine

Milloy, John

Mitchell, Carol

Mossop, Jennifer F.

Orazietti, David

Peters, Steve

Peterson, Tim

Phillips, Gerry

Qaadri, Shafiq

Ramal, Khalil

Ramsay, David

Rinaldi, Lou

Sandals, Liz

Sergio, Mario

Smith, Monique

Smitherman, George

Sorbara, Gregory S.

Takhar, Harinder S.

Van Bommel, Maria

Watson, Jim

Wilkinson, John

Wong, Tony C.

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Zimmer, David

The Speaker: All those against, please rise one at a time so your names can be recorded.

Nays

Arnott, Ted

Baird, John R.

Bisson, Gilles

Churley, Marilyn

Dunlop, Garfield

Eves, Ernie

Flaherty, Jim

Hampton, Howard

Hardeman, Ernie

Hudak, Tim

Jackson, Cameron

Klees, Frank

Kormos, Peter

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

Martiniuk, Gerry

Miller, Norm

Munro, Julia

O'Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Prue, Michael

Runciman, Robert W.

Scott, Laurie

Wilson, Jim

Witmer, Elizabeth

Yakabuski, John

Clerk of the House (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 57; the nays are 26.

The Speaker: The motion has been carried.

Hon Gregory S. Sorbara (Minister of Finance): I'll make a statement during ministers' statements.

LABOUR RELATIONS

AMENDMENT ACT

(REPLACEMENT WORKERS), 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LES RELATIONS DE TRAVAIL

(TRAVAILLEURS SUPPLÉANTS)

Mr Kormos moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 6,

An Act to amend the Labour Relations Act, 1995 / Projet de loi 6, Loi modifiant la Loi de 1995

sur les relations de travail.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Is it the favour of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): I'm proud to introduce this bill once again. The purpose of the bill is to restore the provisions that were

incorporated into the Labour Relations Act by the Labour Relations and Employment Statute Law Amendment Act, 1992, and subsequently repealed by the Conservatives and Liberals by the Labour

Relations Act, 1995.

The purpose of the provisions -- and they're especially significant today, when our sisters and brothers and friends from labour visited us here at Queen's

Park this afternoon -- being restored is to prevent an employer from replacing striking or locked-out employees with vile scabs, scum of the earth, otherwise known as replacement workers. The bill,

however, does allow scabs to be used in rare and exceptional emergencies.

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

Hon Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): I move government notice of motion number 4: That pursuant to standing order

9(c)(ii), the House shall meet from 6:45 pm till midnight on the weeks of December 1, 8 and 15, 2003, for the purpose of considering government business.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Is it the wish of the House that the motion carry?

All those in favour, say "aye."

Those against, say "nay."

I think the ayes have got it.

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

The division bells rang from 1404 to 1409.

The Speaker: All those in favour of the motion, please rise so you can be counted by the Clerk.

Ayes

Agostino, Dominic

Arnott, Ted

Baird, John R.

Bartolucci, Rick

Berardinetti, Lorenzo

Bountrogianni, Marie

Bradley, James J.

Broten, Laurel C.

Brown, Michael A.

Brownell, Jim

Bryant, Michael

Cansfield, Donna H.

Caplan, David

Chambers, Mary Anne V.

Colle, Mike

Cordiano, Joseph

Delaney, Bob

Dhillon, Vic

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duguid, Brad

Duncan, Dwight

Dunlop, Garfield

Eves, Ernie

Flaherty, Jim

Flynn, Kevin Daniel

Fonseca, Peter

Gravelle, Michael

Hardeman, Ernie

Hoy, Pat

Hudak, Tim

Jackson, Cameron

Jeffrey, Linda

Kennedy, Gerard

Klees, Frank

Kular, Kuldip

Kwinter, Monte

Leal, Jeff

Levac, Dave

Marsales, Judy

Martiniuk, Gerry

Matthews, Deborah

Mauro, Bill

McMeekin, Ted

Meilleur, Madeleine

Milloy, John

Mitchell, Carol

Mossop, Jennifer F.

Munro, Julia

O'Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Peters, Steve

Phillips, Gerry

Qaadri, Shafiq

Ramsay, David

Rinaldi, Lou

Runciman, Robert W.

Sandals, Liz

Scott, Laurie

Sergio, Mario

Smith, Monique

Smitherman, George

Sorbara, Gregory S.

Takhar, Harinder S.

Van Bommel, Maria

Watson, Jim

Wilkinson, John

Wilson, Jim

Witmer, Elizabeth

Wong, Tony C.

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Yakabuski, John

Zimmer, David

The Speaker: All those against, please rise.

Nays

Bisson, Gilles

Churley, Marilyn

Hampton, Howard

Kormos, Peter

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

Prue, Michael

Clerk of the House (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 73; the nays are 7.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE

Hon Gregory S. Sorbara (Minister of Finance): With the introduction of the Automobile Insurance Rate Stabilization Act, 2003, the McGuinty

government is keeping yet another one of its commitments; that is, to lower automobile insurance rates.

Applause.

Interjection: Well done, Gregory.

Hon Mr Sorbara: Thank you.

We are doing what we promised Ontarians we would do: acting responsibly, protecting consumers while ensuring the long-term viability of the system.

Automobile insurance rates have been skyrocketing, more than 20% in the last year alone. For a product that people have no choice about buying, that simply

isn't fair.

This past summer, our caucus members, including the now Premier, Dalton McGuinty, visited 17 communities on our Lower Rates for a Change consultation tour. We

heard a common theme: Automobile insurance rates are too high, and drivers desperately need rate relief. We acted almost immediately. As the first order of business, on the day of our swearing-in,

the Premier directed me to take all necessary steps to stop insurance companies from filing for automobile insurance rate increases. We acted swiftly to address rising auto insurance rates by

making sure the automobile insurance companies did not continue filing for rate increases. Now we are determined to move forward and deal with escalating costs in the industry in a fair and

responsible way.

Today's bill, if passed, would freeze auto insurance rates for private passenger vehicles until January 23, 2004, at the rates that were approved on or before

October 23, the day we were sworn in. As I will explain, after January 23 it is our intention that new filings will be for rates that are lower, not higher.

In the meantime, to protect consumers we have introduced serious deterrents for insurers that fail to comply with the bill. For example, if the bill is passed

and an insurer charges a higher premium than allowed, it could face stiff penalties, including prosecution or having its licence suspended or cancelled under the Insurance Act.

I'd like to clear up a little bit of confusion that has surrounded this freeze. At our request, insurance companies haven't raised their rates since October

23, and yet some drivers are still facing increases. Consumers should be aware that the rate increases approved prior to October 23 have not yet been fully reflected by insurance companies in

policy renewals. So, depending on when drivers renew their policies, they may be experiencing increases due to rate hikes approved before October 23, prior to this government's swearing-in.

This legislation is an important first step in our commitment to do what Ontario consumers have asked us to do: lower auto insurance rates. The trend of higher

rates is the legacy of the previous government. My friends opposite failed to act as insurance rates skyrocketed, and consumers have suffered the results over a number of years.

We're not going to make the same mistake. We are committed to protecting consumers and to bringing real, positive change to Ontario's auto insurance rate

system. We are committed to reducing out-of-control costs and making sure that the cost savings are passed on to consumers in the form of lower premiums. We are committed, in other words, to doing

the job we were elected to do and to doing it responsibly, fairly and well.

Our reforms must look to the long term as well as the short term. Insurance premiums have been rising out of control for years and bringing them completely

under control is going to take a little time. While protecting consumers, we must also ensure that Ontario continues to have a competitive and healthy auto insurance marketplace.

In the next stage of our reforms, we will introduce measures to lower rates even further. We will allow consumers to save more by allowing them to customize

their insurance coverage to best meet their individual needs.

I think it's safe to say that few topics engage the public's interest more than automobile insurance. Consumers, members of the insurance industry, the legal

profession and health care providers all have views on auto insurance that are often compelling, and just as often conflicting. The challenge for us is to listen carefully to these views and then

to implement policies that we believe are in the best interests of Ontario drivers.

That's why I have asked my parliamentary assistant, MPP for Eglinton-Lawrence, Mike Colle, to meet with a cross-section of groups that represents consumers,

health professionals, lawyers, the auto industry, brokers and others during the period that rates are frozen. We're working with all these groups to find the best way to achieve savings that will

bring --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Order.

Hon Mr Sorbara: Thank you, sir. I don't think they want to listen, but I appreciate your attempts.

We're working with all these groups to find the best way to achieve savings that will bring auto insurance rates down by an average of 10%. Drivers have been

paying too much for far too long.

We're going to implement system-wide changes that will lower costs for insurance companies and allow them to lower rates after January 23. Again, our target is

an average reduction of 10%.

We will succeed if we work together. We are doing what needs to be done. We are acting. We will continue to act quickly and decisively.

More than eight million motorists in Ontario are counting on their government to keep its commitments and deliver lower rates. We're going to do just that.

We will ensure that Ontario drivers have access to competitive, affordable and available automobile insurance. We are taking a responsible approach to

protecting Ontario motorists.

Mr John R. Baird (Nepean-Carleton): Another day, another broken Liberal promise. This bill is nothing more than a reannouncement of a press

conference that Dalton McGuinty had last month. The Liberal Party said one thing before the election when they were looking for votes and they are doing quite another now that they've been elected.

They were very, very clear when they were on this side of the House. It was simple, they had all the answers and they would move quickly to implement those changes.

In their policy paper Lower Rates, for a Change, the key word was "change," and the policy has changed. On page 1 it's very clear. It talks about a 20%

reduction for Ontario motorists. That is the really outrageous part of today's announcement. With the bill brought forward by this minister and this government, rates will go down by nothing. Auto

insurance rates around Ontario have gone up by an average of 20%, and this minister and this government think that's acceptable. This minister and this government are going to legislate a freeze.

We think these auto rates should go down. In this province they should go down. Ontario motorists deserve better than a nothing response from a nothing government.

Interjection.

The Speaker: Minister of Finance, could you just come to order, please.

Mr Baird: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.

Not only did the Liberal Party have all the answers when they sat on this side of the House, but the minister in his statement bragged about the fact that

Dalton McGuinty had visited 17 communities and canvassed widely, and had all the answers. Now we see that the Minister of Finance comes here with a no-rate-reduction policy, with vague promises of

more consultation and more listening tours.

Even with this dog-and-pony show that the member for Eglinton-Lawrence will be going on, they're only looking to consider a rate reduction of 10%. After rates

have jumped 20%, they want to freeze them and now reduce them by 20%.

Let's look at the facts. On July 22 -- followed up the next month -- this former government came forward with some clear policies to reduce $1.4 billion in

costs, with a clear set of regulations to force insurance companies to forward those savings on to the taxpayer. The sad reality of the debate today is, had this government not been so partisan and

petty, they could have adopted the policies and regulations brought in by the former government, and rate relief would be the law of the land today in Ontario. That is the really outrageous part of

it.

The Liberal document talks about a $650-million rate reduction. We came forward with more than $1.4 billion in strategies on an $8-billion or $9-billion

industry to see rate relief a reality today.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Do come to order, please.

Mr Baird: Mr Speaker, I'm obviously getting under their skin because they've broken yet another promise.

Let's be clear, Minister. Today Dalton McGuinty is committing highway robbery and you, sir, are driving the getaway car. Ontarians won't buy this Orwellian

double-speak. They see this exactly as it is. They see this as another broken promise from another Liberal government and they won't be fooled.

insurance.

Interjections.

The Speaker: One of the things I very much expect from the ministers who are giving statements -- I want to hear the response. I think the

common decency is to let us hear the response and stop shouting across. It's making life difficult for me and, furthermore, I can't hear.

The member for Whitby-Ajax, I think there's a minute and three seconds on the clock, so put it back.

Mr Flaherty: Thank you, Speaker.

The Minister of Finance acknowledges in his statement to the House that the commitment is to lower auto insurance rates, for a change. This bill not only fails

to lower auto insurance rates, it purports to freeze auto insurance rates, but the people of Ontario will clearly understand the difference between lowering and freezing.

More than that, it fails to allow the superintendent of insurance -- in fact, it prohibits the superintendent of insurance from approving the applications for

rate reductions that were filed September 30. Those rate reductions were filed pursuant to the reforms led by the Ernie Eves government. They would have provided at least a 10% rate reduction for

motorists across Ontario. So not only is the promise being broken, the net effect of what is being done here is to deny motorists in Ontario an immediate 10% rate reduction.

More than that, the commitment was to reduce rates across the province. This bill only applies to private automobiles. It excludes school buses, it excludes

small business, it excludes commercial carriers in Ontario, all of whom want --

The Speaker: Thank you. Order.

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): I'm seeking unanimous consent to respond for up to five minutes on behalf of the seven New Democratic Party

members of this Legislature.

The Speaker: Is there unanimous consent from the House? Agreed.

Mr Kormos: Thank you kindly, Speaker. I suppose the only thing that's surprising about this is that a veteran like the minister would present

it, because I recall him as having been here in the period from 1987 through 1990, and the embarrassment of him and his colleagues, in fact the pratfall they suffered after one David Peterson,

during a political campaign, said that he had a very specific plan to lower automobile insurance premiums.

I happen to have been here as well, and that very specific plan to lower automobile insurance generated the fiasco of no-fault here in Ontario, which has

punished innocent accident victims ever since and in fact resulted in higher premium rates, resulted in an incredible, magnificent, huge, perverse population of the Facility Association to the

point where Facility Association became profitable and profit-making for the auto insurance industry here in Ontario.

I suppose if I were to ask a question, the question to the minister would be, was he actually sitting on George Cooke's lap while he took the dictation to

write this legislation on behalf of the insurance industry? Or indeed was it Mark Yakabuski, of the Insurance Bureau of Canada, who played Edgar Bergen to your Charlie McCarthy?

This doesn't reduce premiums. It doesn't freeze premiums. This is like your freeze of tuition rates when they're already sky-high and well beyond the

affordability of any student. You froze tuition rates after they'd become unaffordable for working-class children and young people with modest incomes, or even middle incomes. Now you freeze

insurance premiums after they've skyrocketed through the roof.

Take a look at

section 6. This is the Mack truck loophole; this is the Caterpillar tractor loophole; this is the Boeing 707 loophole; this the black hole

loophole. We need nuclear physicists to tell us the magnitude and size of the

section 6 loophole, you guys. That's the one that lets the insurance industry apply for extraordinary increases on the

basis of the exceptional financial circumstances of that industry. They've had exceptional financial circumstances, according to them, for all of my 51 years. I can't remember a time in my life

where the auto insurance industry hasn't cried and declared that it was but a hair away from bankruptcy and devastation.

It talks about the public interest in the approval of a rate. Friends, let me tell you what's going to happen, because I've seen it before. For 15 years I've

watched governments of all political stripes try to wrestle the private for-profit auto insurance industry to the ground. I tell you, no government, neither Liberal nor NDP nor Conservative, has

ever been able to regulate this industry. The private auto insurance industry is an insatiable beast whose appetite cannot be satisfied. It is a monster that can't be caged. It's a mad dog that

cannot be leashed. It will make profits on the backs of drivers; it will make profits on the backs of innocent accident victims, regardless of this government's rather feckless declarations about

its intention to freeze rates. What you're going to create is a huge vacuum, because the industry simply won't write policies when you freeze rates at a level that they consider inappropriate to be

sufficiently profitable. You're going to generate a crisis in insurance availability, just like your counterparts in eastern Canada are experiencing now.

Two major insurance companies in eastern Canada have simply announced that they're no longer going to write policies, because they are not happy with the

premium levels that those respective governments have established. You're going to create a crisis in insurance availability. You've already sustained, you've reinforced the crisis of

affordability, because you froze rates at a sky-high level, as well as creating the Boeing 707 loophole enabling those companies, even at sky-high levels -- do you understand what I'm saying,

firefighters? -- enabling those profit-making, for-profit auto insurance companies -- look, the industry has short arms and deep pockets. That industry has never been a friend of consumers, it's

never been a friend of drivers, it's never been a friend of innocent accident victims. Highway robbery? Darned right. The problem is, the getaway car isn't insured, because what we're going to

witness is an increase beyond the 10% to 20% of motor vehicles on our highways who aren't insured.

The solution: Get with it. Liberals in other parts of Canada understand; the Consumer Association of Canada understands; western provinces know it: public auto

insurance. Fair and affordable rates guarantee that every car is insured.

The Speaker: Let me just warn the members that you direct your comments to the Speaker or to the Chair. I don't want gallery participation in

this. Mr Kormos specifically, the member for Niagara Centre, I want you to direct your comments here so that we can have some sort of control.

Mr Kormos: I apologize, Speaker, and I thank you for your direction.

AIDS AWARENESS WEEK

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): Mr Speaker, I gather that there may be unanimous consent to allow all parties

present in the House to make a statement with respect to National AIDS Awareness Week for five minutes.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Do I have unanimous consent for AIDS week? Agreed.

Hon Mr Smitherman: I stand here before the House to draw your attention to National AIDS Awareness Week, which concludes on December 1 with

World AIDS Day. This Canada-wide week of awareness and the concluding international day of recognition have become annual events. Their continuing existence highlights the tragic reality that AIDS

is all too much a presence in the lives of so many people, here at our Legislature, across our province, across our country and around the world.

Worldwide, five people lose their lives to AIDS every minute of every day. In the next half-hour, the same number of people who hold seats in this Legislature

will die from AIDS, and by the end of today three more people in Ontario will be diagnosed with HIV and five more people will become infected.

HIV has hit every part of the globe, infecting 34 million to 46 million women, children and men, five million of them last year alone. Right now in Ontario,

there are more than 21,000 people living with HIV.

I want to pay tribute to all who have struggled with the challenges of HIV, both those who are living with HIV or AIDS and those countless people -- men, women

and children -- who have lost their lives to this devastating disease, and that includes the more than 7,000 people in Ontario who have died from AIDS-related causes.

AIDS Awareness Week and World AIDS Day give us the opportunity to affirm our support for people living with HIV and AIDS, their families and their communities.

These events also give us an opportunity to thank service providers who have responded to HIV and AIDS with such skill and compassion. The AIDS community in Ontario has worked tirelessly to develop

treatments that put the patient at the centre of his or her care.

I commend those who are living with HIV and AIDS for their courage in battling this devastating disease, I commend their caregivers, I commend those who

volunteer their time in the cause of AIDS and I commend our front-line health care workers and researchers. I commend all of those who work so hard to improve the quality of life for people living

with AIDS, who work so hard to find new treatments and who also work so hard to find new responses to prevention challenges.

People need to know the facts. People need to get the message about AIDS. We can't allow a false sense of security to lull people into thinking that AIDS has

been overcome.

In Ontario, HIV continues to be an illness that affects most, if not all, communities. We will work to prevent the spread of HIV and AIDS and to preserve the

lives of those living with HIV and AIDS.

All of us know that while medications have extended the lives of people living with HIV and AIDS, we must confront the reality that the side-effects are

debilitating and that the drugs are far from a cure. The only cure we can depend on is prevention.

In the fight against HIV, we are facing new battles, rising rates of infection and ongoing discrimination and judgments. That's why we need to develop

long-term strategies that acknowledge the broad social context of HIV.

The Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care will spend almost $50 million in 2003-04 for HIV/AIDS-related programs across our province. As health minister, I'm

committed to making sure these programs build on Ontario's leadership established in the 1980s and continued ever since.

The numbers in the world demonstrate that AIDS is a growing pandemic, and Ontario is part of that struggle. As legislators, we can take pride in the work we've

done over the years, but we need to recommit; we need to support the kind of education that makes society understand that while treatment has improved, AIDS is still a tremendous risk.

HIV transmission is a reminder of society's failures. We can measure ourselves by how we choose to respond. One hundred years from now, I want the history

books to show that Ontario responded to the needs of its citizens and communities with the vigour necessary to stop the world's worst pandemic.

I'm proud of the strong and effective continuing response to HIV and AIDS in Ontario, as well as the many partnerships between government and a diverse range

of communities and stakeholders.

We will continue to work with the more than 60 community-based AIDS services and the 37 boards of health to help people with this disease and to make sure that

people are aware of how to keep themselves safe from HIV and AIDS.

I'm working with the Ontario Advisory Committee on HIV/AIDS and receiving its advice. The community has been tireless in its efforts to ensure effective

responses to the challenges posed by HIV and AIDS here in Ontario. I'd like to thank the two co-chairs, Dr Don Kilby and Mr John Plater, for their leadership and commitment.

I'm proud of the outstanding achievements of the Ontario HIV community. Many of these people are my friends. They are people living with HIV and AIDS. They are

health providers, researchers, clinicians and community workers throughout this province.

By continuing to work together, we can put people living with HIV at the centre of their own care and treatment and further improve the quality of their lives.

By working together, we can eliminate the stigma and discrimination that is still part of this global pandemic. By continuing to work together, we can look forward to a future where AIDS Awareness

Week and World AIDS Day are no longer necessary.

The Speaker: The minister had requested a five-minute response to these, but he also said all parties, and I hope he included everyone within

the House.

Mrs Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener-Waterloo): I rise today to recognize on behalf of our party HIV/AIDS Awareness Week, which the minister has

said concludes with World AIDS Day. This year the week is entitled Stigma and Discrimination.

More than 40 million people are living with AIDS/HIV worldwide. As we know, this number unfortunately continues to escalate. The disease knows no boundaries.

In fact, there are approximately 50,000 Canadians currently who are living with HIV/AIDS and there are 15,000 Canadians who are totally unaware that they are infected. This is going to increase,

with about 4,200 new infections each year. That's why it is so very important that we recognize World AIDS Day and HIV/AIDS Awareness Week. It is our opportunity to express our affirmation and our

support for people who live with HIV. It is also an important opportunity for us to demonstrate our support for the doctors, nurses and all the other health care providers throughout Ontario who

respond to HIV/AIDS with skill, compassion and dedication. It is also an opportunity to enhance tolerance and understanding, while communicating prevention information about this epidemic.

Throughout past years, governments have demonstrated and tried to do what they could to focus on health promotion and disease prevention. This needs to

continue to be at the top of any government's health care plan. There needs to be collaboration with the 37 boards of health, as there has been. There needs to be collaboration with school boards

throughout Ontario in order to provide students information and education about HIV/AIDS. We've seen that happening. We've seen that Ontario HIV diagnostic testing ensures that a very high standard

of testing is maintained.

However, if we take a look at all that has happened thus far, I think we also recognize there's so much more that still needs to be done. We must be

unrelenting in our fight to stop this disease from spreading. We must continue to encourage people to join the battle, taking responsibility not only for their own health but the health of their

relatives, the health of their family and the health of their friends.

I want to at this time express my appreciation, and the appreciation of those of us on this side of the House, for all those people throughout Ontario who work

tirelessly every day to educate, to treat and to support those people who are living with HIV/AIDS. Certainly, on behalf of all Ontarians we do owe them a great deal. I want to particularly

acknowledge the work of the individuals who are involved with the Ontario Advisory Committee on HIV/AIDS. As a former Minister of Health, I know how I relied on their advice to move us forward.

Again, I also want to thank Dr Don Kilby and Mr John Plater. I want to thank all the individuals, all the volunteers throughout the province of Ontario who are working so hard in their individual

communities to try to educate and try to support those with HIV/AIDS. We really do appreciate the many hours of hard work and dedication that they put into this cause.

As a society we must be ever vigilant in our efforts as we continue to work to eliminate the AIDS epidemic. We must continue to fight prejudice whether we see

it in our workplace or in the schoolyard. We must continue to educate our families and our neighbours about the devastating effect this disease can have. We must continue to offer our personal

assistance and our support to our fellow Ontarians who are suffering. I believe that if we continue to work together, whether we are young or old, we can hope someday to eliminate the barriers that

stand between us and a cure for AIDS.

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I rise today to speak on behalf of the NDP caucus, not with any pleasure but out of grim reality, because on

this day in particular -- and frankly, every day in general -- we need to be sure that we are responding effectively, appropriately and in a timely fashion to HIV/AIDS. UN AIDS, the United Nations

agency that is charged with combating the spread of AIDS, reports that there are 42 million HIV-positive people worldwide. There will be five million new infections around the world this year, and

800,000 of them will be children. Some 3.1 million people will die.

Here in Canada, every day another six people under the age of 25 are infected, and despite increased public awareness, HIV/AIDS infection rates have remained

steady.

Today there are about 50,000 Canadians who are living with HIV or AIDS. HIV/AIDS has touched all of us in all our communities, and for many of us it has

touched our families and our friends. Communities across the province have rallied, they've marched, they've campaigned to increase awareness and build support for government funding around

HIV/AIDS prevention programs.

On an international level, people like Stephen Lewis are very publicly raising the plight of AIDS sufferers in developing countries and they are bringing

pressure to bear on developed countries to provide the necessary medication without the exorbitant costs involved.

I do want to speak today about two barriers that people living with HIV/AIDS are facing here in Ontario, and I encourage the current government to respond to

these specific challenges. The first has to do with medication, because there have been and continue to be very unacceptable delays in reimbursements for those who are trying to get those costs

covered through government programs. Second, there has been a refusal to add new medications to the Ontario drug formulary, and that has worked against HIV/AIDS sufferers.

Last year, there was an action alert that was released by the Canadian Treatment Action Council. It was called "Ontario Formulary Coverage at Risk." It said

the following: "Many Ontarians with HIV/AIDS depend on public reimbursement to cover the cost of their medications through programs like Trillium and the ... (ODSP). Only medications that have been

approved for the Ontario formulary are reimbursed for these programs. There are increasingly unacceptable delays and a refusal to add ... new medications, formulations and vaccines for children to

the provincial formulary. Also,

section 8 requests for exemptions to the formulary rules are either being denied or languishing in the system without reply." The alert went on to focus on one of

those in particular on the

section 8 list.

I say to this government, and I am sure the government is aware, these are serious medication issues and they have to be addressed. HIV/AIDS sufferers can't

afford to pay for some of these medications out of their pocket. Many are living on a fixed income. Secondly, they shouldn't have to wait forever in terms of being reimbursed, especially through

the government's own Trillium drug program.

The second barrier goes back many years. I remember when Frances Lankin was the NDP health critic in 1999 and raised the issue regarding nutritional

supplements because, regrettably, the former government made a decision to refuse funding for nutritional supplements unless they were a person's sole source of nutrition. This policy was never

intended to apply to people who have a medical need for nutritional supplements. Regrettably, because of that decision many people who are affected by HIV/AIDS have not been able to purchase the

supplements. They just can't afford it and they can't get coverage for it.

I say to the current government, this is a policy that must be reversed. This is a barrier to those who are living with HIV/AIDS. It is not acceptable that

many people who are already paying for high drug costs also can't afford to purchase nutritional supplements that assist in their healthy living. We need to do something about that as well.

We must be very vigilant in dealing with AIDS and HIV; that has been said by all speakers. But also today I encourage the government to look very seriously at

those two particular barriers -- I am sure there are many others -- which can be responded to. I say they must be dealt with now. They are very serious questions of justice and financial equality

that remain with these two problems. I encourage the minister to do those things, to make those changes now.

ORAL QUESTIONS

GASOLINE TAX

Mrs Julia Munro (York North): My question is for the Minister of Finance. In your platform document, Growing Strong Communities, part of your

election platform states, "We will help communities become more self-sustaining by giving them the means to invest in their own infrastructure and growth. We will give two cents per litre of the

existing provincial gasoline tax to municipalities for public transit."

This two cents seems destined to go a long way, because this morning I was visited by firefighters in my riding who left me a copy of a letter written by the

now Premier to Mr Fred LeBlanc, the president of the Ontario firefighters. I quote in the letter. It says, "This," referring to the two cents per litre, "will free up funds and allow our municipal

partners to refocus their attention on the needs of their communities, including their fire services."

In your throne speech, there was no mention made of this promise. Minister, when are the municipalities going to get this break they were promised? After you

have raised the provincial gasoline tax by two cents per litre?

Hon Gregory S. Sorbara (Minister of Finance): I want to welcome my colleague who represents the riding to the north of me and congratulate her

on her re-election.

Going back over the previous eight years of Conservative administration, one of the most serious things that happened was when Mike Harris and Ernie Eves

announced that provincial governments would no longer fund public transit. Since that time we've seen the deterioration of the public transit systems, not just in the greater Toronto area, but

right across the province of Ontario.

At this point, I think it's safe to say that every single public transit agency in the province has said the same thing, that we are in very serious trouble.

That's why we made the commitment on the two cents per litre and that's why, by the way, we're going to create a Greater Toronto Transportation Authority, so that we can start to rebuild the system

that they left in very bad disrepair.

Mrs Munro: I appreciate the fact that the minister has been able to give us a rationale. However, he has not answered the question.

Even when fully implemented, this will only amount to $312 million, according to your own calculations, for the entire province. This is a sum that I think we,

Ontario taxpayers, need to know. How, Minister, do you plan to divide this amount among the many needs of Ontario municipalities?

Hon Mr Sorbara: There is no doubt at all that this initiative is not going to repair all the damage, but we are going to start operating in a

new environment of co-operation. Do you remember when the previous mayor of the city of Toronto tried to get something going with the previous government? His language became very, very strong

indeed. Yesterday, the Premier of the province met with the new mayor of the city of Toronto, and a new era of co-operation is emerging. So whether it's transit, or all the other aspects in

building strong communities, we are going to create a new environment of transportation. We are going to keep our commitments.

On the question of public transit, it's one of the most urgent and pressing necessities because of the damage that they did during the period of eight

years.

Mrs Munro: I would just like to point out to the minister that this previous government gave the TTC $1.2 billion. It also gave $331 million

per year for transit. How much is this government going to provide for transit for the needs of all Ontarians?

Hon Mr Sorbara: The previous government provided some funding for the Sheppard subway in the city of Toronto. Some of us questioned whether

that was the best use of public taxpayers' money. That's not the question for debate.

The cuts that were made in 1996 by the then finance minister, now the Leader of the Opposition, were the single most important event in the deterioration of

public transit in this province. It used to be that American jurisdictions all over the United States used to come to Ontario to study our public transit system. Now, given what they're doing down

there, they don't even bother to come up and have a look. We're going to turn that around.

PROVINCIAL DEFICIT

Mr Ernie Eves (Dufferin-Peel-Wellington-Grey): To the Minister of Finance, your Premier has been quoted several times in a press conference on

October 3, after the election, and in a scrum at Loyola on September 30 of this year: "We are going to move as aggressively as we possibly can on all of our commitments. We've got a fully costed

plan, independently verified and certified, and we've accounted for a $2-billion deficit. We've got another $1 billion in reserve." That's $3 billion.

Do I take it that your proposed $5.6-billion deficit is instantaneously $2.6 billion? Are you at least working on the $2.6 billion now?

Hon Gregory S. Sorbara (Minister of Finance): I say with all due respect to my friend the Leader of the Opposition that it takes some nerve to

come before this House --

Interjections.

Hon Mr Sorbara: During a 28-day election campaign, when every reasonable authority in this province, including the now Premier, said there

were serious financial problems in the province of Ontario, one person said the budget was balanced. That man is now the Leader of the Opposition. He shouldn't have been saying it then, and he

should acknowledge now in his place that he is the author of those problems.

Mr Eves: He can wiggle all he wants. The reality is that your plan, fully and independently costed, said you could remove $2 billion in an

instant, and another $1 billion in an instant in reserve. That's $3 billion gone. So now we're working on the $2.6 billion.

Just a few days ago, your own economist, Dave Hall, the independent economist who crunched your revenue and cost projections for your platform, was quoted as

saying on November 15, "What I did was enough to turn a $2-billion deficit into a zero.... Arguably, it could turn a five (billion-dollar deficit) into a three." Do you disagree with your own

economist?

Hon Mr Sorbara: The deficit this government inherited was identified not by us but by the most respected Provincial Auditor in the entire

country. I want to say to you that the Leader of the Opposition simply has no credibility on this matter. I suggest to him that Conrad Black has more credibility when he talks about underlings than

Ernie Eves has when he talks about the finances of this province.

Mr Eves: I can understand the Minister of Finance's frustration. Instead of coming here and wringing his hands every day, he might want to

actually roll up his sleeves in more than rhetoric -- in reality -- and get to work at the Ministry of Finance over there on the seventh floor of the Frost Building. I'm quite proud of my fiscal

record in this province. We inherited a deficit of $11.3 billion in a year and eliminated $2 billion in spending in the first three weeks. You would do well to do the same.

There are lots of words that you could use to describe what you are saying here in the House today. The Speaker won't allow me to say them. But in the

thesaurus there are other words that make up for the word I can't say here today, and these certainly would underscore the actions you and your government have taken today: beguile, break promises,

bull, con, concoct, deceive, delude, dissemble, disseminate, distort, dupe, equivocate, exaggerate, fabricate --

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Minister.

Mr Eves: -- falsify, fib, fudge, invent, make believe --

The Speaker: Minister.

Mr Eves: -- misguide, misinform, mislead, misrepresent, prevaricate --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. There are some words that the leader of the official opposition has used -- and he knows which ones. I'd ask you to

withdraw them.

Mr Eves: Mr Speaker, I'd be happy to withdraw any word that has offended you.

The Speaker: The Minister of Finance.

Hon Mr Sorbara: My friend the Leader of the Opposition talks about rolling up his sleeves. His party put out the way in which they could

balance the budget. You've really got to take a look at this. This is the very politics that the people decided against on October 2: sell assets, use accounting tricks, cut social programs.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order.

Hon Mr Sorbara: The economic policies of the previous government were simple: reckless tax cuts without any adjustments to programs, leaving

this province with structural financial problems that we now inherit. I want to tell you that we are up to this job and we --

The Speaker: New question.

SARS

Mr John R. Baird (Nepean-Carleton): My question is again to the Minister of Finance. Over the years, Ontario taxpayers have paid the freight

when there were wildfires in British Columbia, when cattle farmers in Alberta were in trouble, when prairie farmers in Saskatchewan and Manitoba had a problem with grains and oilseeds, or in the

fishery on the east coast. But we had our own disaster in Ontario this past year with SARS. The people of the province of Ontario and their government have every right to expect to receive the full

90% that taxpayers and health care workers in this province are entitled to. Our government rejected as inadequate and insufficient and an insult the lousy $150 million offered by the federal

government. Would you stand in your place and tell us how you could sell out the taxpayers and health care workers of this province by accepting less than a third of the billion dollars that the

people of the province are entitled to? How could you sell us out?

Hon Gregory S. Sorbara (Minister of Finance): My friend talks about sell-out. Look at their economic policies. Their economic policies are

about sell-offs and --

Hon Joseph Cordiano (Minister of Economic Development and Trade): And rip-offs.

Hon Mr Sorbara: My friend adds the other word, "rip-offs."

We negotiated a deal with the national government that was fair and reasonable. I tell my friend that what is more important is that we have established a new

era of co-operation with the government in Ottawa. Federal-provincial relations for eight years, under that previous administration, were characterized mostly by political grandstanding and

puffery, and that's going to come to an end.

Mr Baird: This government certainly has established a new era of federal-provincial relations. Ontario is now the lapdog in the federation.

How you could go to Ottawa and accept 30 cents on the dollar for our health care workers, for our hospitals, for our doctors and for those who suffered because of the tragedy of SARS is

despicable.

My question is to the minister. Would you stand in your place and admit that you've made a mistake and would you go back to the table and deliver for Ontario

taxpayers? If you're not prepared to do that, would you step aside and let someone else go forward who will fight for Ontario taxpayers?

Hon Mr Sorbara: I tell my friend from Nepean-Carleton that I'll consider his recommendation.

I see my friend from Toronto-Danforth is inviting me over there. I don't think I'm going to take that offer.

The crisis of SARS really shook this province very badly. I'm not for a minute going to take political advantage of it. The management of that crisis by the

previous government I think was reasonable and I think those in charge did a relatively good job, under the circumstances, of dealing with that crisis.

After the fact, my friend from Nepean-Carleton wants to grandstand on federal-provincial relations, when he knows, because I know now, that the figures that

that government was giving to the federal government were grossly inflated.

HOSPITALS

Mrs Linda Jeffrey (Brampton Centre): My question is for the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care.

Minister, on November 21, you made a welcome announcement in Brampton to the people in my riding who are concerned about the future of their hospital. They

want the William Osler Health Centre to be built in a timely way.

There is no support for two-tier health care in Brampton.

I've spoken to you about the urgent need to build the William Osler Health Centre. Our community is growing quickly and our existing hospital simply can't keep

up with the demand.

I know you've announced changes in the way the hospital will be constructed, but can I get your assurance today that the William Osler Health Centre will be

built according to the original schedule?

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I'd like to thank the member from Brampton Centre and the other members from

Brampton who are doing such an effective job of representing their communities. Last Friday I had the opportunity to be in Brampton at Peel Memorial Hospital, where I announced that the agreement

we've made ensures that Brampton will have a new hospital. It will be a public hospital that is publicly owned. It will be a public hospital, unlike your deal, that is publicly controlled and it

will be a hospital that is publicly accountable. I'm very pleased to say --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Order. The Minister of Health.

Hon Mr Smitherman: I'm also pleased to say that the people of Brampton will have a public hospital of which they can be proud and which will

open as planned in 2006.

Mrs Jeffrey: The people of my riding will be happy to hear that. But as I said, they are not supporters of two-tier health care.

There have been suggestions that the hospital will be private and the thin edge of the wedge before private health care.

The principles of medical health care are important to me and my constituents. My understanding --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order.

Mrs Jeffrey: Minister, my understanding was that the previous government would allow the private sector to own these hospitals and that the

government would lease them back. The title would indeed belong to the private sector. That sounds like a private hospital to me.

Under your new deal, will these hospitals belong to the private sector or will they belong to the people of Ontario? Will they be public hospitals or private

hospitals?

Hon Mr Smitherman: I'd like to thank the member fpr Brampton Centre for the question. Incredibly --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Member for Whitby-Ajax, come to order, please.

Hon Mr Smitherman: Incredibly, under the deal that that party signed when they were in government, title and deed was to be transferred to the

private sector; under our deal, it will not. Incredibly, under the deal that that party signed, control of that hospital would have been transferred to a private corporation; under our deal, it

will not. Incredibly, under that government's deal, the deal was never to be made public, but under our arrangements, it will.

Mrs Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener-Waterloo): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I would like a copy of the deal that the Minister of Health

referred to.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. That's not a point of order. The minister may make it available to you or not; that's his option.

SPENDING REDUCTIONS

Mr Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln): My question is to the Minister of Finance. I'd like the minister to let us know what specific spending reduction

targets he has set for this year, what he has communicated to his cabinet colleagues and the civil service in that respect, and will he immediately table those letters in the Legislature?

Hon Gregory S. Sorbara (Minister of Finance): I'll simply tell my friend for Erie-Lincoln that I will be making a full economic statement in

this House sometime early in the month of December. At that time the questions that he asks will be answered in full.

Mr Hudak: I think this is very telling. The minister has been several months in the job and has not done any work in finding a dollar of

savings.

Interjections.

Mr Hudak: I'll tell you where the minister has been busy. The minister has been very busy raising taxes on our seniors.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Order. It seems to me that we have some rather healthy lungs today. Not only healthy lungs, but they seem to

be energetic.

Would you mind sitting down? Thank you.

Will you now put your question?

Mr Hudak: In the first two bills in the Legislature you have increased taxes on our seniors and you have increased taxes on our small

businesses. You are taking money away from working families in the province of Ontario. You are driving the getaway car of the biggest tax hike in the history in the province. You have not found

one dime of savings in your own provincial spending.

I have a great respect for your tremendous political skills. You are the mastermind of the Liberal campaign. Why won't you put that political acumen to work,

roll up your sleeves, get off the dinner circuit and find some savings in government spending, beginning at least today?

Hon Mr Sorbara: I now know absolutely certainly that they've always had a problem with mathematics. Apparently I've been on the job several

months now. By my calculation, it's been one month and two days. He talks about the dinner circuit. Any time that he wants to provide me with dinner -- I haven't had dinner for three nights -- I'll

take him up on the invitation.

Let me tell you some of the things we're not going to do: We are not going to cut water inspectors. We are not going to do what the Leader of the Opposition

did in 1996. I want to tell my friend that you left us with a very bad mess, and $5.6 billion, in one sense, is only part of the iceberg. We'll be reporting to this House on our strategies in part

during an economic statement early in December, and I invite the member's comment on it after we make that statement.

HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT

Mr Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North): My question is to the Minister of Transportation. Minister, like many others on this side of

the House, I was very pleased that you were able to sign a federal-provincial cost sharing agreement last week that allows us to finally move forward on some vital highway improvement projects in

the province.

I can certainly tell you that in northwestern Ontario, the confirmed funding for the new Shabaqua Expressway extension was very well received. But as you would

know, there are many other vital projects in northwestern Ontario that I've been working on for several years. Certainly, Highway 584 between Geraldton and Nakina comes to mind as a provincial

highway in desperate need of improvement. Also, our campaign to four-lane the highway between Thunder Bay and Nipigon continues to be a project that I believe must go forward.

Minister, can we expect more cost sharing agreements between the senior levels of government to be signed, agreements which hopefully will enable our

government to move forward on these important projects in the not-too-distant future?

Hon Harinder S. Takhar (Minister of Transportation): I thank the member for Thunder Bay-Superior North for his question. I know how tireless

he has been in raising northern transportation issues.

The highway funding agreement we signed with our federal partners last week marks a new era of co-operation between our governments. We will continue to work

with the federal government and northern communities to develop and implement a northern Ontario highway strategy to improve highways across the north.

In response to the specific question of the honourable member, the preliminary planning of Highway 11/17 is now complete, and approvals have been obtained for

the eventual four-laning of the highway between Thunder Bay and Nipigon. The planned reconstruction of Highway 584 is on our priority list.

This government is committed to moving ahead with improving highways across northern Ontario.

Mr Gravelle: Minister, I very much appreciate your positive response. That's very good news. Certainly, the need for major highway

improvements in northwestern Ontario is a high priority for me, as I know it is for our government and indeed for my constituents and for all people in northwestern Ontario.

That being said, I would be grateful if you would agree to formally meet with me to discuss our vital needs in a perhaps more detailed fashion. Could I get

your commitment today that we can sit down in the near future to discuss these priorities which, I should say, should also include the need for more advanced warning lights on the Thunder Bay

Expressway, another high priority for us in the northwest?

Hon Mr Takhar: I would be very pleased to meet with the member for Thunder Bay-Superior North and my colleague the Minister of Northern

Development and Mines to discuss the priorities of your area, including the need for advanced warning lights.

Our government recognizes that good highways are vital to northern communities. Together we will protect the infrastructure of the north, investing in our

highways to build a safe and efficient transportation system that will benefit the north and all the people of Ontario.

PROVINCIAL DEFICIT

Mrs Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener-Waterloo): My question is for the Minister of Finance. You continue to speak about a bogus $5.6-billion

deficit. This morning our leader and our critic demonstrated that if you really had the will, and you were willing to roll up your sleeves, that deficit could actually translate into a surplus of

$3 billion.

On November 3, John Manley, the Deputy Prime Minister and the federal Minister of Finance, announced $771 million in federal health supplement dollars for

Ontario. That money, that $771 million, was intended for this year. Are you going to add this to this year?

Hon Gregory S. Sorbara (Minister of Finance): I'd like to refer this question to my colleague the Chair of Management Board.

Hon Gerry Phillips (Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet): I appreciate the question. I'd say to the people of Ontario, this group said

they had $800 million of savings planned. We arrived. You had none of it -- none, zero. Believe it or not, we found over $1 billion of spending approved, announced by the Premier, never put in the

budget. So what did we do? We rolled up our sleeves -- I don't have the big cufflinks, but I just rolled up my normal sleeves -- and got on with the job.

We're not going to allow that partisan advertising that you used hundreds of millions of dollars on to try and bribe the public with. We're going to outlaw it.

We're going to prevent that from happening. And we're not going to allow these high-priced consultants, friends of the government, to do the work that should have been done by the public

service.

I will say to the people of Ontario, I find it incredible that they go on the offence when we haven't determined clearly -- at least a $5.6-billion deficit, $1

billion never accounted for, $400 million of hospital debts never handled.

Mrs Witmer: I am shocked that the member opposite is not answering the question. He used to have such credibility when it came to finance. I

asked a simple question: Are you going to add the $771 million to the fiscal issues this year? Even John Manley said, "I believe that with our method of accounting in Ontario and in Canada, even if

they get it next year, it will count this year." Why are you not going to add it this year? Why aren't you going to roll up your sleeves and make sure you get the job done on behalf of the people

who elected you and thought they could trust you?

Hon Mr Phillips: I'm shocked you don't understand the rules of accounting. The Provincial Auditor has said, "Listen, you can't take that money

in one year. You have to book it over three years." The auditor blew the whistle on you. So I'm shocked that you don't understand.

It's a bit like the 407 sale: hocus-pocus accounting. My Premier has said those days are over. We are going to get Ontario on a sustainable fiscal basis so we

can properly manage the finances without these accounting tricks. I'm shocked that the member didn't realize that the auditor says we must book these things over a three-year period. I'm shocked

you didn't know that.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): New question.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. I asked for a new question. If Mr Hampton is going to ask a question today -- I thought I made myself pretty clear

yesterday.

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): Speaker, I believe we have unanimous consent on behalf of all New Democrats to ask a question of the

government.

The Speaker: Again, as you know, you must get the unanimous consent of all members here.

Agreed? Agreed.

AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Minister of Finance. You've set promise-breaking records since you've come to

office, and today you're breaking yet another promise.

On October 23, with much fanfare, the Premier announced an immediate freeze in auto insurance rates, but imagine the surprise when people from Capreol to St

Catharines to Ottawa all received insurance rate increases after the Premier's overplayed announcement. To quote one Ottawa resident, "I feel like I've been lied to."

Minister, you also said, and your candidates said, that you were going to reduce rates by up to 20%. Can you explain why your government's much-ballyhooed

announcement of a rate freeze failed to freeze anyone's insurance rates?

Hon Gregory S. Sorbara (Minister of Finance): I would have expected that kind of analysis from my friend from Niagara Centre. But the leader

of the New Democratic Party, who is very well schooled in these matters, simply should perhaps acknowledge in his question that a new government coming into power does not have the power to freeze

rates before it is in power.

What we said we would do the day we got into government would be to freeze rates that very day. The legislation that I have proposed today, if passed, prevents

any new rate applications from being submitted. The fact of the matter is -- and I said this in my statement; you've heard it and you should acknowledge it -- that the rate approvals that were in

effect when we came into power had not actually touched the renewal applications of some drivers. So we're upfront about it: For those people, their premiums will be higher than they paid a year

and a half ago. We acknowledge that. We can't do anything about that.

Mr Hampton: Here's the reality, Minister. For Virgilio Medeiros of Toronto, whose rates just increased from $920 last year to $1,425 this

year, I don't think your rate freeze announcement is going to do a thing. Your rate freeze isn't working for Kimberley Benoit of St Catharines, who has received a 62% insurance rate increase,

despite a clean driving record.

Monte Kwinter knows this field well. He was here once before. We could even accuse him of trying to drive the getaway car once before. He knows what the

insurance industry is going to do. They've already said that if they're forced to cut rates by 10%, they'll raise them by 20% first.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Question?

Mr Hampton: Or they'll refuse to write insurance policies -- exactly what the industry's doing in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick.

Minister, have you gone out to British Columbia to talk to -- oh, what's his name? -- Mr Campbell, the Liberal Premier there who now endorses public auto

insurance? I'll still pay for --

The Speaker: Minister.

Hon Mr Sorbara: The leader of the New Democratic Party has a very serious credibility problem when it comes to automobile insurance rates. I

remember when Bob Rae campaigned on public automobile insurance in 1990. He got elected. Some of those members were in that government. Bob Rae -- no less a personage than former Premier Bob Rae --

came to this Legislature and said, to paraphrase, "I'm sorry. We were wrong. It was a bad idea. It would amount to the loss of some 5,000 or 6,000 jobs. It would ultimately cost drivers in Ontario

more."

The fact that that leader, notwithstanding that history, would go to the people and propose once again public auto insurance -- I think that's the reason why

they sit there now with but seven members.

LAND USE PLANNING

Mr Lorenzo Berardinetti (Scarborough Southwest): My question is to the Minister of the Environment. First, Mr Speaker, congratulations on your

election; and also congratulations to you, Minister of the Environment.

Minister, in the area of Clonmore and Gerrard in Scarborough there is a proposed residential development on land that is, for the most part, vacant. Residents

there are concerned that the land may be contaminated and could be an environmental hazard. Will the minister look into this matter, in consultation with the city of Toronto planning department, as

soon as possible?

Hon Leona Dombrowsky (Minister of the Environment): I would like to thank my colleague, the member from Scarborough Southwest, for the

question.

The Ministry of the Environment is aware of this site, the Clonmore-Gerrard site in Scarborough. I think, for folks in that community, it is locally known as

"the quarry." Part of the quarry is sited on a former landfill used in the 1940s. It predates any requirements of this Ministry of the Environment.

During the 1980s, part of the former landfill was developed as a mall. I understand that there is a developer who wants to build condominiums near this

particular site. At this time, the ministry has not been approached to review a formal proposal or plans for a condominium.

I understand that the former landfill site does have an active leachate collection system, as well as methane ventilation. At the time the mall was built,

barrels and other wastes were uncovered at the site, and cleanup was handled appropriately.

I encourage any stakeholders who have concerns to contact the Ministry of the Environment. If we were presented with a proposal, the ministry will certainly

ensure that strict environmental standards are followed with any proposal.

Mr Berardinetti: The residents in my community will be very happy to hear that.

We would also like to know what action your ministry will be taking to address the problems of soil contamination. What can your ministry do to ensure that

places like Clonmore-Gerrard in Scarborough are safe?

Hon Mrs Dombrowsky: I'm very happy to commit today that this ministry will work very closely with the city of Toronto on issues of this sort.

I can assure the member that ministry staff will review any proposal of this nature when it is brought to our attention.

Also, the ministry deals with cleanups of this nature on a case-by-case basis, because it really does require an assessment of the particular history of the

site, the kind of activity that occurred there. Depending on what the history is, it will be from that information that we will move forward with the requirements from the ministry.

I will say that in all cases, the ministry applies strict cleanup standards and guidelines to ensure that the environment in our communities is protected,

particularly communities where there are nearby neighbourhoods and residential locations.

TAXATION

Mr Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): Congratulations on your appointment, Mr Speaker. My question is for the Minister of Finance.

Congratulations as well, Minister.

I'd like you to know that smokers, corner store owners, tobacco farmers and the tobacco economy are reeling after being hit by this Liberal government twice in

as many days.

First you introduce legislation that will see the price of cigarettes skyrocket, while store owners, farmers and their communities watch their market dwindle

past the point of sustainability. This money grab was announced the day after the phony deficit announcement as an orchestrated tax to supposedly balance the books -- no mention of tobacco tax

dollars for health care.

Then your government introduced an electricity bill lifting the rate cap, a bill that will see small business and families hit again.

Your leader's television promise, "I won't cut your taxes, but I won't raise them either": Is this increase, this tobacco tax hike, a broken promise?

Hon Gregory S. Sorbara (Minister of Finance): I had an opportunity last night to listen to some of the debate on Bill 2, which is the bill we

introduced in this Legislature to put into effect the commitments that we made in respect of taxation during the campaign. For the life of me, the approach by the official opposition, accusing us

of misrepresentation, accusing us of taking measures that we never referred to in the campaign -- it was all there in black and white, including our commitment to raise tobacco taxes in a measured

way over a certain period of time, up to the national average, which, if we did it in one fell swoop, would need an increase of $10 per carton.

Mr Barrett: People in my riding are under the impression that your leader would not raise taxes. In addition, Minister, there is anxiety in

tobacco country -- in Brant, Oxford, Norfolk, as our Minister of Agriculture would know, and Elgin and Middlesex as well. Your leader promised that tobacco farmers would receive compensation in the

wake of these increases. We've seen no mention of reparations, no mention of a buyout, no mention of a buy-in to assist other commodities threatened by the tens of thousands of acres coming on to

the open market, no mention of a buy-in to foster other agribusiness and economic activity -- nothing mentioned.

As finance minister, when will compensation, when will reparations, for these communities be announced?

Hon Mr Sorbara: Perhaps, given the nature of the question, I'll refer the supplementary to my colleague the Minister of Agriculture and

Food.

Hon Steve Peters (Minister of Agriculture and Food): It's very interesting to hear the member opposite speak right now. On June 18, 2002, the

previous government raised tobacco taxes by $5 a carton. Yet, did we hear anything from him at that time? No, we did not.

You claim that you're standing up for your tobacco farmers, Mr Member. I can assure the member that a portion of these dollars are going to be allocated to a

transition fund. We have met regularly with the tobacco board to make them aware that this transition fund exists, because we're prepared to help growers. We're going to work with the federal

roundtable to work with growers.

It's very interesting, right now, for the member to stand up and not recognize that this is one of the most serious health issues that this province faces. Our

government was straight-up. When we campaigned, we said "$10 a carton." Unlike the honourable member on the other side, who was out fear-mongering, talking about $15-a-carton tax increases, we're

taking a responsible approach. I just wish the member had spoken up against his own government when you implemented $5 in June 2002.

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

Mrs Maria Van Bommel (Lambton-Kent-Middlesex): My question is for the Attorney General. Domestic violence is a growing problem in our

province. Every day we see more horrific stories related to domestic violence. In one such case, in the city of London, we have a 17-year-old young mother who was shot and killed in her own home.

What is your ministry prepared to do about this growing problem?

Hon Michael Bryant (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs, minister responsible for democratic renewal): I thank the

member for Lambton-Kent-Middlesex for the question. I know all members of this House wish to send our condolences, thoughts and support to the victim's family and to all the members of the

community.

As the member knows, earlier this week I was part of a very positive meeting with OAITH, a group that is working on the front lines, dealing with domestic

violence against women. I did a lot of listening and a lot of learning. Fighting domestic violence is a profound priority for this government. We will take action to implement all of the

recommendations of the Hadley and May-Isles inquests. We will work constructively with the federal government to make changes to the Criminal Code that are necessary to permit us to better prevent

and prosecute on this matter. I understand that the criminal and civil justice system is but one component of providing justice to those who are abused in domestic violence situations, those women

and children. We get that in this government.

Mrs Van Bommel: As the minister just said, domestic violence is more than just an issue of justice. I want to draw your attention to the 2001

Provincial Auditor's report, which clearly refers to an incident where one women's shelter had to turn back over 1,000 battered women and children in one year. The previous government neglected the

problem of domestic violence, to the detriment of many families, and, through its neglect, allowed the problem to persist.

What steps is the government going to take to prevent domestic violence before it becomes an issue before the courts?

Hon Mr Bryant: Yes, the member is right. Domestic violence is a crime and it has a devastating effect on women and children.

I want -- we all want -- our justice system, civil and criminal, to be the best that it can be for these victims. One out of four violent crimes involves

domestic violence, but we know that the vast majority of women and children who are abused in domestic situations do not go to the police and do not go to our criminal justice system. Justice for

domestic violence victims and their children must involve more than just criminal and civil remedies. That's why the solution must come not only from the Ministry of the Attorney General, but a

number of ministries in this government and also from their community at large.

There is justice in a past and potential future victim starting a new life, free from violence and free from economic dependence by the abused upon the abuser.

That is the justice that this government will deliver upon.

OAK RIDGES MORAINE

Mr Jim Wilson (Simcoe-Grey): My question is for the Minister of Finance. Minister, it's my understanding that in the past you used to act as a

consultant to companies that build homes or other developments on the Oak Ridges moraine. Is that true, and, as a result of the advice you gave those companies, how many homes and how many

developments were built on the moraine?

Hon Gregory S. Sorbara (Minister of Finance): It is not true. I have never acted as a consultant to any homebuilder.

Mr Wilson: During your time away from this House, it is my understanding that you did consult or gave advice, or perhaps your own family

companies built homes on the moraine. You're saying today that that's not true and that you had no relationship at all with development that was going on in the Oak Ridges moraine?

Hon Mr Sorbara: It may well be that a company in the Sorbara Group at some time in the past, over the course of 20 years, acted as a

consultant to a homebuilder. I have no knowledge of that, and I'm not sure why the member would raise it in this House.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): The question did not relate to the member's ministry at all. I would caution members, when you are asking

questions, to make sure your questions --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. I would hope that the questions are related to the minister's ministry.

HOSPITALS

Mr Jim Brownell (Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh): My question is to the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. As you are aware, my community

has been struggling with the Harris-Eves government's careless mismanagement of health care institutions. The Winchester District Memorial Hospital faces critical requirements. The building is

dated and inhibits efficiency, we are losing much-needed doctors and nurses, and extensive changes and reinvestment in the hospital are required.

The previous government ignored our concerns. Minister, will you hear our needs by meeting with community representatives and myself to discuss our hospital

situation?

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I'd like to thank the member for Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh for his

question. I know that he works hard on behalf of his constituents on matters related to health care.

I'm very happy to tell him that I'd be very pleased to meet, even while the House is in session, if it could take place here in Toronto, or certainly to get to

his community no later than the month of January to have the opportunity to hear first-hand about the health needs of the people of his constituency.

Mr Brownell: Thank you for your assurances and attention to this matter. The people of Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh are happy to hear that

this government has brought health care to the forefront of our governance.

Minister, since Winchester District Memorial Hospital is in such close proximity to Ottawa, and in fact serves as an affiliate hospital to this area, can you

please tell me more about the new hospital being built in Ottawa, which will also benefit the people in my riding and in eastern Ontario?

Hon Mr Smitherman: I also heard from members opposite strong support for the project at Winchester, so I'm looking forward to learning more

about it.

I'm also pleased to be able to report that we've delivered a public hospital to the people of Ottawa as well, a hospital that the people of Ottawa will be

proud of because it's a hospital that will be publicly owned, it's a hospital that will be publicly controlled, and it will be a hospital that has public accountability, unlike the deal that this

government recommended to the people of the province of Ontario.

SMALL BUSINESS

Mr Cameron Jackson (Burlington): My question is for the Minister of Energy. Minister, two days ago your government brought in one of the

largest tax increases for Ontarians in its history. It increased property taxes; the seniors' tax credit was removed; we had a 14% increase in corporate income taxes; income tax relief for small

business was removed.

You wilfully and deliberately broke your election promise and lifted the electricity cap, driving electricity costs up by approximately 18% for small

businesses in our province. The Toronto Star has indicated that a neighbourhood pizza parlour can expect to pay $250 more per month to operate their business. Judith Andrew of the Canadian

Federation of Independent Business has said that small business, which has already struggled, will be in a more difficult situation.

Minister, why is it that last week in your throne speech you said that you were going to try to operate businesses with a stable environment, and yet on Monday

you increased corporate taxes 14% and on Tuesday your energy cost was going up 18%? That's a 32% increase for small business in this province in two days.

Hon Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): Unlike the previous government, the commitments to not lower taxes further

were in our platform, campaigned on, and vigorously supported by the people of Ontario. That's why you're over there and that's why we're over here.

With respect to the energy question, last November this government did a home invasion in Mississauga to announce the cap, and even in that home the people

realized it was bad public policy. They realize that we're doing the responsible thing to get rid of the deficit you created.

You said last year that that plan would be revenue-neutral. It's not revenue-neutral. It has cost every taxpayer $800 million. Small business and farmers

understand that you have to live within your means. That's what we're doing.

Mr Jackson: You're over there and we're over here because before October 2 you said one thing to the taxpayers of Ontario and after October 2

you said another thing to the taxpayers.

It is very clear that under your government Ontarians are going to pay more and get less. There's no question that you were incorrect when you suggested

yesterday to this public that their monthly hydro bills were only going to go up, on average, about 6%. You are talking about the 50% of their hydro bill that deals with energy that is produced and

consumed. The other half of that hydro bill in this province includes uplift charges, transmission charges, distribution charges, debt charges, higher taxes.

You, Minister, have indicated and provided protection in yesterday's statement and legislation. "Beginning March 1, 2004, local distribution companies would be

allowed to recoup some of the costs that the previous government had put on hold." That's 800 million more dollars that you are going to gouge from businesses and consumers in this province.

Hon Mr Duncan: The fact is that your plan gouged them on the tax side. They're paying for it one way or the other.

Number two, the member hasn't had much time to come up to speed on his file. That price increase is all in, including transmission and distribution.

This government is keeping its commitments. We've stopped approving your auto rate insurance increases. We've announced that we're going to freeze tuition. We

removed supervisors from Hamilton, Ottawa and Toronto. We've appointed a Minister of Northern Development from the north. We've announced legislation to eliminate the private school tax credit.

We are proud that we stopped your irresponsible tax cuts. We're proud of our record on that. We're proud of the commitments we've kept. And we're going to do

something you didn't do: We're going to provide reliable, stable, affordable hydro in the province of Ontario for many --

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): New question.

TRANSIT SERVICES

Ms Laurel C. Broten (Etobicoke-Lakeshore): My question is for the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal. My riding is suffering from

gridlock, in part because we do not have a coordinated transit system in the GTA. Transit users have to negotiate a maze of highways, subways, streetcars and buses as they travel from Toronto,

Peel, Durham, York and my own community of Etobicoke. The result: more people in cars, more cars on the highway and more gridlock. Transit users are expecting government action. In the throne

speech, the government announced its intention to create a Greater Toronto Transportation Authority. How will this result in real, positive change for the people of my community?

Hon David Caplan (Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal): I want to thank the member for her question. I also want to congratulate her on

her election to this Legislative Assembly.

Our government is committed to easing gridlock. We're committed to investing in the future of public transit through the creation of a Greater Toronto

Transportation Authority. Too much time is wasted in traffic. Each morning, 370,000 cars come into Toronto and 240,000 cars head out. The cost to our economy, to our environment and to our quality

of life is unacceptable. The Greater Toronto Transportation Authority is an important first step in tackling these issues. The transportation authority will have leadership responsibility for

much-improved planning and coordination of transit initiatives in the coming months and years.

In addition, the transportation authority will be asked to implement a one-pass fare system, which will greatly improve the service for transit riders

throughout the GTA. I want to add --

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Thank you.

PETITIONS

TOBACCO TAX

Mr Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): This petition is signed by people very concerned about Liberal tobacco policies, people from La

Salette, Langton, Tillsonburg, Simcoe, Mississauga, Waterford and Windham Centre.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas Dalton McGuinty has stated that he will increase tobacco taxes by $10 a carton, force store owners to hide cigarette and tobacco displays behind a

curtain, and support a smoke-free Ontario; and

"Whereas history has proven that increases in tobacco taxes cause increases in the smuggling trade for illegal black-market tobacco whose contents are neither

regulated nor inspected; and

"Whereas forcing store owners to hide their tobacco displays unduly punishes both store owners and consumers for the purchase and marketing of what remains a

legal product;

"We, the undersigned, respectfully petition the Parliament of Ontario as follows:

"That the government of Ontario reject the increase in tobacco taxes and the ban on the display of tobacco products, and protect the rights of consumers to

purchase a legal, regulated product -- tobacco."

I hereby affix my signature to this position.

Mr Ernie Hardeman (Oxford): Similar to my colleague from Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant, I want to say the tobacco policy of the government across

the aisle is a big issue, so I have a petition.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas Dalton McGuinty has stated that he will increase tobacco taxes by $10 a carton, force store owners to hide cigarette and tobacco displays behind a

curtain, and support a smoke-free Ontario; and

"Whereas history has proven that increases in tobacco taxes cause increases in the smuggling trade for illegal black-market tobacco whose contents are neither

regulated nor inspected; and

"Whereas forcing store owners to hide their tobacco displays unduly punishes both store owners and consumers for the purchase and marketing of what remains a

legal product;

"We, the undersigned, respectfully petition the Parliament of Ontario as follows:

"That the government of Ontario reject the increase in tobacco taxes and the ban on the display of tobacco products, and protect the rights of consumers to

purchase a legal, regulated product -- tobacco."

COMMUNITY CARE ACCESS CENTRES

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I have a petition that's been sent to me by Madame Bruneau of Gogama. It's signed by 180 individuals. It

reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Manitoulin-Sudbury Community Care Access Centre delivers vital home care services to local seniors, the disabled, and those discharged from

hospital, so they can remain in their own homes; and

"Whereas the Manitoulin-Sudbury Community Care Access Centre needs additional $1.8 million from the Minister of Health this fiscal year just to deliver its

current level of health care services; and

"Whereas the Ministry of Health has refused to fund this necessary increase and has further failed to provide the CCAC with equity funding promised last year

and this year, despite a 1998 promise made by the former minister responsible for seniors, Cam Jackson, to do so; and

"Whereas this deliberate underfunding by the government of the Manitoulin-Sudbury CCAC has forced the CCAC board to adopt a deficit reduction plan which

severely reduces the home care services it provides; and

"Whereas this reduction has a drastic impact on clients who cannot afford to pay for these services and will be forced to go without necessary health care or

be forced into long-term-care facilities;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that the government immediately fund the additional $1.8 million requested by the Manitoulin-Sudbury CCAC this year, and further,

provide the equity funding which was promised in 1998."

I agree with the petitioners. I've signed my signature to this.

ONTARIO BUDGET

Mrs Julia Munro (York North): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas John Manley has said that the $771 million promised from the federal health supplement can be applied to this year's budget;

"Whereas this year's budget should include the full-value sale of Teranet;

"Whereas this year's budget should include the $300 million in savings from an OPS hiring freeze announced by David Tsubouchi on October 8;

"Whereas this year's budget should include the full amount, 90% of the costs from the SARS emergency;

"Whereas this year's budget should include the $2 billion announced in the government's financial plan earmarked for a deficit;

"Whereas this year's budget should include the $1-billion contingency fund announced in the government's financial plan;

"Whereas this year's budget should include the in-year benefits arising from the planned January tax hikes;

"We, the undersigned, call upon the provincial government to take the responsible approach and immediately apply in full the money available to them which will

allow them to balance the budget and ease the fear that they have created among taxpayers of this province."

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

Mr Ernie Hardeman (Oxford): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas John Manley has said that the $771 million promised from the federal health supplement can be applied to this year's budget;

"Whereas this year's budget should include the full-value sale of Teranet;

"Whereas this year's budget should include the $300 million in savings from an OPS hiring freeze announced by David Tsubouchi on October 8;

"Whereas this year's budget should include the full amount, 90% of the costs from the SARS emergency;

"Whereas this year's budget should include the $2 billion announced in the government's financial plan earmarked for a deficit;

"Whereas this year's budget should include the $1-billion contingency fund announced in the government's financial plan;

"Whereas this year's budget should include the in-year benefits arising from the planned January tax hikes;

"We, the undersigned, call upon the provincial government to take the responsible approach and immediately apply in full the money available to them which will

allow them to balance the budget and ease the fear that they have created among taxpayers of this province."

I support the people who signed the petition and the content thereof.

TOBACCO TAX

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

"Whereas Dalton McGuinty has stated that he will increase tobacco taxes by $10 a carton, force store owners to hide cigarette and tobacco displays behind a

curtain, and support a smoke-free Ontario; and

"Whereas history has proven that increases in tobacco taxes cause increases in the smuggling trade for illegal black-market tobacco whose contents are neither

regulated nor inspected; and

"Whereas forcing store owners to hide their tobacco displays unduly punishes both store owners and consumers for the purchase and marketing of what remains a

legal product;

"We, the undersigned, respectfully petition the Parliament of Ontario as follows:

"That the government of Ontario reject the increase in tobacco taxes and the ban on the display of tobacco products, and protect the rights of consumers to

purchase a legal, regulated product -- tobacco."

I'll be happy to sign that, and I'd like to give it to Vaibhav.

CENTRES D'ACCÈS AUX SOINS COMMUNAUTAIRES

M me Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): J'ai une pétition qui dit :

« Attendu que le centre d'accès aux soins communautaires de Manitoulin-Sudbury fournit des services de soins à domicile essentiels aux

personnes âgées, aux handicapés et à ceux qui reçoivent leur congé de l'hôpital de la région, afin qu'ils puissent demeurer chez eux; et

« Attendu que le centre d'accès aux soins communautaires de Manitoulin-Sudbury a besoin d'une somme additionnelle de 1,8 million de dollars du

ministère de la Santé pour cette année financière seulement pour dispenser les services de soins de santé à son niveau actuel; et

« Attendu que le ministère de la Santé refuse de financer cette hausse nécessaire et a été incapable d'offrir au CASC un

financement par capitaux propres l'an dernier et cette année, malgré une promesse faite en ce sens en 1998 par l'ancien ministre des soins de longue durée, Cam Jackson; et

« Attendu que le sous-financement délibéré du CASC de Manitoulin-Sudbury par le gouvernement a obligé le conseil d'administration

du centre d'accès d'adopter un plan de réduction du déficit qui se traduit par une diminution importante des services de soins à domicile qu'il dépense; et

« Attendu que cette réduction a des conséquences néfastes sur les clients qui n'ont pas les moyens de payer pour ces services et qui

devront se priver des soins de santé nécessaires;

« Nous, soussignés, demandons donc au gouvernement de financer immédiatement la somme additionnelle de 1,8 million de dollars requise par

le CASC de Manitoulin-Sudbury cette année, ainsi que de verser le financement par capitaux propres promis en 1998. »

Monsieur le Président, j'y ai mis ma signature aussi. Je suis d'accord avec tout le monde.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 SUR LA GESTION

RESPONSABLE DES FINANCES

Mr Sorbara moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 2,

An Act respecting fiscal responsibility / Projet de loi 2, Loi concernant la gestion responsable des finances.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Yesterday, I think the member from Northumberland had completed his statements and comments. But now we're

into comments and questions.

Mr Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): I'd like to take a moment just to make a few comments.

First of all, I've had a few statements, but I haven't had the opportunity to congratulate you on your win as Speaker. I wish you all the best in the next four

years, because I'm just waiting on the exact time when we'll have an election date.

I'd like to congratulate Mr Rinaldi on his victory in Northumberland. You obviously beat one of our members, and I congratulate you for that.

I'd like to make a few comments on this historic tax-hike bill. It is an honour to speak from the opposition on the Fiscal Responsibility Act, 2003. We call it

the Largest Tax Hike in Ontario History bill.

As you probably know, this ranks, in terms of the analysis that we've done on the particular piece of legislation, as the largest tax hike in history. Starting

in 1993, Bob Rae had the original record of $2.2 billion. David Peterson followed that up in 1989 with a $2.8-billion tax increase bill. Our new Premier, the Honourable Dalton McGuinty, set the new

record and the new bar at $4.13 billion. We're very interested in the fact that that's what has happened with this particular piece of legislation.

I've got to tell you -- and I know we'll hear lots of comments on this before this bill is actually enacted -- I have a real concern as a former small

businessperson. Certainly, our family still has assets in a number of different businesses, and I can tell you that the corporation tax increase is going to have a substantial effect on the

businesses of our province. I hope it doesn't. I hope that we can sail through this session and this Parliament and keep a strong economy. But I think, when you look at how it will impact the

corporations of our province, it will have a dramatic effect on job growth in the province of Ontario. For that reason, I certainly won't be supporting this bill in any way whatsoever, and look

forward to the other comments and questions and further debate on this particular piece of legislation.

Mr Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): I will have the opportunity in this round of debate to have a 20-minute opportunity to speak and so I

wanted to simply say on two parts of this particular bill that, as New Democrats, we supported this government when they said they would get rid of the tax credit for private schools; no

disagreement with that. Let it be clear to those folks watching that we New Democrats -- and I will have another opportunity when I'll have the 20 minutes to tell you why we disagree so much on so

much else.

But on the tax credit, it's a good thing that they have done this. New Democrats were unanimous in their opposition to the Conservative initiative on giving

tax credits for private schools -- unanimous. You would not find one New Democrat in this caucus who supported the tax credit for private schools, unlike the Liberal Party that had many dissenting

members, but I am happy that they have ended this. Clearly, they do need the money and they need it right away.

Philosophically, New Democrats support this. For good economic reasons it's good to get back the $100 million and put it back, hopefully, into public

education. But, Ms Cansfield, I'm not quite clear and I'm not sure that the savings of that $100 million that you might get are going to go back to our education system. In fact, I am highly

concerned, worried, that public education will see little of that $100 million, and we are expecting you to keep that promise.

I will speak to that in my 20 minutes. We'll have an opportunity. I will have more time, I hope, because we need to be able to chat and the public needs the

opportunity to see New Democratic points of view, and you will get it.

Mrs Donna H. Cansfield (Etobicoke Centre): On behalf of Etobicoke Centre's constituents collectively, Mr Speaker, we'd like to express our

sincere congratulations on your election as Speaker of the House. I know you will do an outstanding job.

I'd like to say again on behalf of Etobicoke Centre that it is extremely important that what we maintain and sustain is a very responsible government that

looks forward to, first of all, setting a foundation on which to build. It is incredibly important that we're going to put back the money into education and health care, but first and foremost, we

need to be able to get our own house in order. We do that first and then we put the money where it belongs, into maintaining and sustaining a very viable public education system, ensuring that

public health remains in public hands and that again it is accessible and affordable to all.

What I'd like to say -- and I make that commitment as I have to others -- is that I don't spend money I don't have. First of all, I will be responsible in

terms of how I spend the money that I do have. I make that commitment on behalf of the constituents in Etobicoke Centre and I make that commitment to my colleagues in having responsible,

predictable, good, basic government. I thank you very much for this opportunity.

Mr John Yakabuski (Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke): Mr Speaker, I too want to congratulate you on your election to the chair of this wonderful

chamber. I also want to congratulate the member from Northumberland, who had his maiden speech last night. I will have an opportunity at some further date, I'm sure.

Hon James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism and Recreation): Tell me when; I'll be here.

Mr Yakabuski: OK. I do want to speak to the tax hike bill, the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2003.

I had the opportunity to speak to the Upper Ottawa Valley Chamber of Commerce last night in Pembroke. This is a bill that concerns them very much, as well as

it does myself. As a former small business owner as well, I can tell you that there's nothing that saps the life out of small business than a further tax hike. What creates jobs is when businesses

have more money at their disposal to reinvest into their businesses and to create jobs for other people in that community, thereby growing the economy and helping every single service that exists,

including the social services that are so important, particularly in rural Ontario, where they need more funding in those hospitals.

But when we see tax increases being implemented against a business in this province, it is not going to help our hospitals, it is not going to help our

schools; it is in fact going to hurt all of those essential social services because those businesses pay the bills. They employ the people who pay the bills. When we place an additional burden on

them, it cannot help anything in the province of Ontario. The short term might see some revenue for this government, but the long term is going to see their revenue significantly cut. Because when

jobs are lost in this province, it does not increase revenue, it decreases revenue.

So when small businesses are hit with that kind of additional burden, it hurts not only the small businessman and not just his bottom line, but it hurts the

people working for him, it hurts the people in his community and it will hurt the fiscal standing of this government in the end.

The Speaker: The member from Northumberland has two minutes to respond.

Mr Lou Rinaldi (Northumberland): Thank you, Mr Speaker. This is my first opportunity to congratulate you -- in the past, you weren't in the

chair -- but I think this House made a great choice.

First of all, I'd like to thank the members from Simcoe North, Trinity-Spadina, Etobicoke and Renfrew-Nipissing for commenting on the words I said last night.

As I reflect, as I said last night for those people who were here, I base my decisions on what the people out there tell me. I referred to a number of occasions when I had the opportunity to meet

the people of Northumberland, who reflect most of the rest of the people of Ontario. They clearly told me that they didn't believe in tax cuts any more. The former government tried -- and I give

them credit. They tried, tried and tried and they failed, failed and failed on every front. Everybody told me that they didn't want any more tax cuts, with the exception of one person. One person

told me they were not going to support the Liberal Party because we don't believe in tax cuts.

They did tell me that seniors were prepared to pay their fair share to keep a good, healthy Ontario. The people did tell me that they don't oppose minimum wage

-- they were complimenting the Liberal Party for taking a stand that hadn't been taken for eight-some-odd years.

I believe the platform we have put forward in the last three days truly reflects the voice of Ontario. The people of Ontario listened in the past and they gave

the members of the opposition a good opportunity to fix Ontario, but they destroyed it. So I have a lot of faith in what we're doing and I support our platform 100%.

The Speaker: Further debate?

Mr Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): I wish also to address government Bill 2, affectionately known on this side of the House as the

Largest Tax Hike in Ontario History bill. Over the past eight and a half years, people and businesses in Ontario have learned what it means to have more money in their pockets to spend, more money

to save, and certainly more money to invest. Usually, this money is invested in their home communities. Over the past eight and a half years, the Conservative government introduced over 220 tax

cuts across the province of Ontario. The result: Ontario became the leader in economic growth among all G8 countries; over one million net new jobs were created; well over 600,000 people were taken

off the welfare rolls; and record investments were made in health, education and in our environment. The evidence clearly shows that cutting taxes creates a strong economy. Tax cuts, very simply,

create jobs.

The formula is basically very simple. It's basic stuff. Cutting taxes gives our people and businesses more dollars to spend and invest, increasing the bottom

line, luring more business to the province of Ontario, creating jobs, with the culmination being, very clearly, strengthening the economy, as we have seen over the last eight and a half years. Tax

increases, on the other hand, take money out of people's pockets, leaving them less money to spend, decreasing the bottom line for business, resulting