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

September 13, 2010

39th Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2010-Sep-13 (PDF)

L041 - Mon 13 Sep 2010 / Lun 13 sep 2010

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Monday 13 September 2010 Lundi 13 septembre 2010

EVENTS IN ELGIN–MIDDLESEX–LONDON

SERVICES FOR THE HEARING-IMPAIRED

INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS

ORAL QUESTIONS

GOVERNMENT’S RECORD

GOVERNMENT’S RECORD

GOVERNMENT’S RECORD

HYDRO RATES

HEALTH CARE

AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE

FULL-DAY KINDERGARTEN

TAXATION

EDUCATION FUNDING

STUDENT ASSISTANCE

NORTHERN ONTARIO DEVELOPMENT

NORTHERN ONTARIO DEVELOPMENT

CANADIAN CENSUS /

RECENSEMENT CANADIEN

COMMUNITY SAFETY

INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS

MEMBERS’ STATEMENTS

HIGHWAY SAFETY

ROSH HASHANAH

DAVID JOHNSTON

CAPITAL PRIDE

PEACE RANCH

CLIMATE CHANGE

EDUCATION /

ÉDUCATION

GOVERNMENT INVESTMENTS

EDUCATION

TABLING OF SESSIONAL PAPERS

ROYAL ASSENT /

SANCTION ROYALE

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

COMITÉ PERMANENT

DE LA POLITIQUE SOCIALE /

STANDING COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL POLICY

STANDING COMMITTEE ON FINANCE AND ECONOMIC AFFAIRS

SELECT COMMITTEE ON MENTAL HEALTH AND ADDICTIONS

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

CHILDREN’S ACTIVITY

TAX CREDIT ACT, 2010 /

LOI DE 2010 SUR LE CRÉDIT D’IMPÔT

POUR LES ACTIVITÉS DES ENFANTS

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION

AND HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT

AMENDMENT ACT, 2010 /

LOI DE 2010 MODIFIANT

LA

LOI SUR L’AMÉNAGEMENT

DES VOIES PUBLIQUES

ET DES TRANSPORTS EN COMMUN

MOTIONS

PRIVATE MEMBERS’

PUBLIC BUSINESS

HOUSE SITTINGS

HOUSE SITTINGS

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

CHILDREN’S ACTIVITY TAX CREDIT

PETITIONS

ONTARIO SOCIETY

FOR THE PREVENTION

OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

DEVELOPMENT IN

VILLAGES OF HEART LAKE

NORTHERN ONTARIO DEVELOPMENT

SERVICES FOR THE DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

ONTARIO SOCIETY

FOR THE PREVENTION

OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

NORTHERN ONTARIO DEVELOPMENT

HOSPITAL FUNDING

NORTHERN ONTARIO DEVELOPMENT

TAXATION

DIAGNOSTIC SERVICES

ORDERS OF THE DAY

WATER OPPORTUNITIES AND WATER

CONSERVATION ACT, 2010 /

LOI DE 2010 SUR LE DÉVELOPPEMENT

DES TECHNOLOGIES DE L’EAU

ET LA CONSERVATION DE L’EAU

The House met at 1030.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Good morning. Please remain standing for the Lord’s Prayer, followed by the non-denominational prayer.

Prayers.

EVENTS IN ELGIN–MIDDLESEX–LONDON

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): I’d like to take this opportunity to welcome everyone back. I think you may have noticed that instead of bringing the teacher an apple on the first day, I brought you a delicious Honeycrisp apple from Rokeby’s farm in the riding of Elgin–Middlesex–London. The Honeycrisp, in my opinion, is the best apple grown in Ontario today.

On the same topic of my riding, you’ll notice that you also have a flyer for the International Plowing Match, which will be held in Elgin the week of September 21 to 25. I hope to see you all there. I can tell you that my community is very excited to welcome you all.

You will also notice, at the request of members, that you each have received Ontario road maps on your desk for when you and your colleagues are talking about communities from across Ontario; you can easily reference them from your seats. As well, it will help to guide you to the lovely riding of Elgin–Middlesex–London.

SERVICES FOR THE HEARING-IMPAIRED

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): I would just like to note, in moving forward and in trying to be compliant with the disabilities act, we now have closed captioning available in the Speaker’s gallery for members’ guests and visitors who will be here requiring those services.

INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS

Hon. Madeleine Meilleur: It’s my pleasure today to introduce in the House an employee of my office: Christine Charette.

Mr. John O’Toole: I’d like to introduce Jacob Mantle. He’s a Queen’s University graduate who is starting at my constituency office as well as here at Queen’s Park. Welcome, Jacob.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: I’d like to introduce, in the members’ west gallery, a number of guests. I’m not going to guess all the names because I’m going to get one wrong and I’m probably going to forget two. I want to say, first of all, welcome, on behalf of NAN communities. They’re here today in regards to Bill 191. We have with us, in no particular order, Grand Chief Stan Beardy of Nishnawbe Aski Nation; Grand Chief Stan Louttit, from Mushkegowuk Tribal Council; and Arthur Moore, who represents the Matawa folk. I’m going to skip all the other names because I know I’m going to get them wrong, but you’re all welcome.

Ms. Helena Jaczek: In the west members’ gallery, we have three guests from York University: Stan Shapson, the vice-president of research; Barb Burrows; and Karen Kraft Sloan, who, members may remember, was a long-time member of Parliament for York North.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: It’s my pleasure to welcome Marnie Niemi Hood, who is the newly appointed OPSEU legislative liaison. Welcome to the chamber.

Mr. Khalil Ramal: I’d like to welcome a delegation from China, representing the Minister of Finance. This delegation was organized by the Bond Centre for Leadership and Management. They’ve come to study finance in the province of Ontario. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

ORAL QUESTIONS

GOVERNMENT’S RECORD

Mr. Tim Hudak: My question is for the Premier. Last week, Premier, you said, “It’s not too soon for us to consider the choice we’re going to have next October.” I could not agree more. But where Dalton and I disagree is on what choice Ontario families will face in the next provincial election. Dalton McGuinty believes that families have an endless ability to pay for every idea he dreams up and passes down the bill.

The Ontario PCs will stand on the side of hard-working Ontario families who have to deal with the $1,000 HST tax grab alone. Premier, you hit them with the HST, the eco tax, higher auto insurance and hydro rate hikes. How did you become so dramatically out of touch with the needs of Ontario families?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: It’s good to be back, Speaker, it’s good to be back. It’s good to hear from my honourable colleague, and I welcome all members back to the Legislature.

I want to remind my honourable colleague of just a little bit of his record in this Legislature. When we moved ahead with the personal income tax cut for Ontario families, which means that on average every mother and father will get a $200 permanent annual tax cut, he voted against that. When we moved ahead with our new sales tax credit that could benefit a four-person family $1,040 every year on a permanent basis, they voted against that. The northern Ontario energy credit, for example—$200 for a family—again my honourable colleague voted against that. He says he’s in favour of helping out families when it comes to dollars, but apparently he’s not.

Mr. Tim Hudak: Well, quite frankly, I think that shows how dramatically out of touch—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The members will please come to order. Order, Minister of Economic Development and the member from Nepean–Carleton and the member from Simcoe North and the member from Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke.

Supplementary?

Mr. Tim Hudak: Thank you, Speaker.

Frankly, Premier, that kind of answer just shows how dramatically out of touch you and the Ontario Liberal caucus have become with Ontario families.

Let’s look at what happened to Ontario families this summer. Dalton McGuinty nailed them on the HST, and then he brought in an eco tax on 9,000 items that families use each and every day. Hydro bills are going through the roof, tuition is up, auto insurance is up. And then Dalton McGuinty throws out this $50 tax credit on things that became more expensive because of his HST. Sir, that is no tax credit; that is an insult to hard-working Ontario families who got stuck with the bill.

Let me ask the Premier again: What kind of world do you live in where you believe it’s okay for Ontario families to pay more and more and get less and less in return?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: Again my honourable colleague’s words would have us conclude one thing, but his actions speak volumes and lead us in another direction entirely. He says that he’s in favour of helping out families. Shortly we’ll be introducing in this Legislature a provision to provide families with a children’s activity tax credit.

My honourable colleague says he wants to help out families, but I’d have to make the—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The member from Renfrew and the member from Nepean–Carleton will please come to order, and the member from Simcoe–Grey as well, and the member from Halton and the member from Timmins–James Bay. Thank you for allowing me to refresh my memory with the riding names.

Premier?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: Again, it’s a modest provision. It will provide some modest help to families, but we believe that families in fact welcome this additional support. I think that shortly we’re going to learn where the official opposition stands on this particular matter. Are they going to support this government’s continuing efforts to help Ontario families or not? Will they support the new children’s tax credit or not? Shortly we’ll learn a bit more about that.

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

Mr. Tim Hudak: Premier, let’s get this straight: You slapped down the HST on things like arenas that are driving up the cost of hockey registration, on baseball fields, on gas for parents to get to the games. You increased taxes like that to the tune of up to $1,000 for your HST and then you have the nerve to throw back some cheap $50 tax credit. It’s an insult to Ontario families, Premier, and you know it.

After seven years it has become very clear: Premier McGuinty believes in his heart that Ontario families have an infinite capacity to pay for every idea that your team dreams up. They can’t keep up with your hydro bills; they can’t keep up with your HST increase; they can’t keep up with your eco taxes. Families need a break today, and, Premier, why don’t you get it?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: I’ve provided a brief list—there’s much more—with respect to new initiatives that support families when it comes to their taxes, but here’s another measure that we’ve moved ahead with, which the official opposition continues to oppose: We cut the price of generic drugs in Ontario in half. That’s a very important measure for Ontario families. This was a very good opportunity to learn whether they’re on the side of big business or Ontario families. They’ve decided to stand up with big pharmacies against the interests of Ontario families.

If Ontario families want to know whose side they’re on, I’d ask them to cast their minds to the issue of drug costs in Ontario. We lowered them. They want to keep them up.

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

GOVERNMENT’S RECORD

Mr. Tim Hudak: Back to the Premier: Let’s look at Dalton McGuinty’s so-called priorities for Ontario families. You began this spring with a sex ed curriculum that would start sex classes with six-year-olds at a time they would begin learning their ABCs and how to tie their shoes. Then you brought in the HST tax grab. By the way, since Dalton McGuinty nailed families with his HST tax grab, we have lost some 60,000 full-time private sector jobs in the last two months alone.

You brought in an eco tax that put a tax on 9,000 items that families use each and every day like bath soap and bath toys for their kids, and a green energy experiment that has enormously increased the size of the bureaucracy and increased bills up and up and up. Premier, why don’t you just call it off on all these tax grabs and give families a chance to catch a breath?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: My honourable colleague has a particularly distorted view of families. He sees them as nothing more and nothing less than an economic enterprise concerned exclusively with revenues and expenditures. We understand that costs and family budgeting are very important to our families, and that’s why we’ve moved ahead with a number of tax cuts.

But I would argue, as well, that our families are very concerned about the education of their children. We’re moving ahead with a brand new initiative, the first of its kind in North America: full-day kindergarten for our four- and five-year-olds. They oppose that. They call it a frill. They say it is big, shiny, unnecessary and too expensive.

We’re going to continue to invest in the future of this province by investing in our children. That’s something Ontario families should know: When it comes to their children and their schools, we’re on their side.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Interjections.

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

Start the clock. Supplementary.

Mr. Tim Hudak: Let me try to bring the Premier back to the real world, because Dalton McGuinty simply does not understand the world that Ontario families live in any longer.

While Ontario families are working hard and playing by the rules, this summer saw Dalton McGuinty’s hand-picked friends at the LHINs hold illegal meetings, collect bloated salaries, hand out sweetheart consulting deals and try to close down health services across this province. And instead of taking this on, the Premier defends his bloated LHIN bureaucracy. He won’t stand up for patients who are now waiting 17 hours for ER care in places like London, Ontario. We’d close down those LHINs and put that money into front-line health care instead.

Premier, why don’t you give up on all this waste out there, help invest in front-line services first, and give Ontario families the break and the high quality of services they work so hard for and need?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: What my honourable colleague is proposing is that he will shut down 14 LHINs. He wants to revive the extensive government bureaucracy that was there in the past: all the regional health offices, all the district health councils.

Let’s understand what their record is when it comes to health care—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Order. Premier?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: My honourable colleague, of late, has not been so front-and-centre with his plan, which remains very solid, which is to eliminate the Ontario health premium. That’s $3 billion.

I need people to understand that when they were in government they closed 28 hospitals. We’re building 14 new hospitals; they closed 28 hospitals. They fired 6,200 nurses; we’ve hired over 10,000 nurses and over 2,300 doctors. So when this gentleman gets up and talks about health care, Ontario families better ask themselves what their secret agenda is when it comes to their health care and what’s going to happen to their hospitals, their nurses and their doctors.

Interjections.

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

Final supplementary.

Mr. Tim Hudak: Ontario families know that this is an election year, and they’ve seen Dalton McGuinty’s act before. This is a man who will promise anything, say anything, to try to maintain his power in the province of Ontario. But what Dalton McGuinty forgets is that Ontario families are the ones who have to pay for each and every one of the ideas he dreams up. He wants to talk about his pie-in-the-sky ideas, his out-of-touch priorities like the sex ed curriculum, while there is an immediate and pressing need for Ontario families today to get a break so they can catch up; so they can spend money in the local economy; so they can help create jobs again.

Premier, this summer we saw what you’re all about: the HST, an eco tax grab on 9,000 items that families use every day, hydro rates going through the roof, and paying more and getting less in auto insurance. Premier, you’re out of touch. You’ve lost touch with families in our province. We need change in the province of Ontario because we can’t afford—

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

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Member from Durham. Member from Lanark. Minister of Economic Development and Trade.

Premier?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: There’s nothing quite as invigorating as a spontaneous standing ovation, Speaker.

I read this summer—and I’ll give my colleague an opportunity to speak to this at some point in time—that their plan ultimately is to cut taxes in Ontario by $8 billion. I would ask Ontarians to understand the consequences of that kind of tax cut.

I want to revisit their record again. In order to do what they did before, they closed 28 hospitals. They closed 7,100 beds. They fired 6,200 nurses. Funding went down for our schools by $1 billion in the first two years. We lost 26 million learning days. If my honourable colleague wants to talk about movies we’ve seen before, we have seen that one. Ontarians gave it a thumbs-down. There’s no desire to revisit—

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

GOVERNMENT’S RECORD

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My question is to the Premier. During the Premier’s summer of discontent, flip-flops were in abundance. He backed way from the eco fees that he had created. He embraced an online gambling scheme that he had earlier rejected.

In the meantime, I went out and listened to the people the Premier has been ignoring. You know what, Speaker? They told me that they’re worried about jobs. They’re worried about hospital cuts. But most of all, they’re worried about being able to make ends meet. When will the Premier start looking after their needs and make their lives a little bit more affordable?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: I extend a welcome to my honourable colleague the leader of the NDP as well.

She now has an apparent interest in the economics of our families. So why did she stand up against all of those measures that we’ve put in place that would support our families? The NDP claim to have a real interest in lower-income Ontarians. Why did she vote against our Ontario child benefit? That’s $1,100 on an annual basis for every child in a lower-income family. That’s real; it’s meaningful. It’s the first of its kind in Canada. We’re very proud of that but, most importantly, families who receive that are very appreciative. Why would my honourable colleague not stand up today and say that she supports the Ontario child benefit for Ontario families?

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: The Premier promised that his new 8% tax on everything from gas to home heating to haircuts was actually going to make life better for families. Instead, job growth has stagnated and incomes have flat-lined as the harmonized sales tax and skyrocketing energy costs put the squeeze on already stretched family budgets. Why does this Premier seem so intent on making life more expensive for Ontario families?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: I would ask that my honourable colleague be a bit more fulsome in terms of the answer that she provides. That would be helpful. By that—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Premier, withdraw the comment, please.

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: I withdraw that, Speaker.

I would ask my honourable colleague to consider that the fact of the matter—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The member from Renfrew will withdraw the comment as well, please.

Mr. John Yakabuski: There’s a Johnny Cash concert coming up. I withdraw.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Premier.

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: I’d ask my honourable colleague to acknowledge that the Ontario recovery is in fact under way. It is not as strong as any of us would like to see. We have regained some 85% of the jobs we lost during the course of the recession, but there is more work to be done.

An important dimension of that recovery is to be found in our Open Ontario plan. An important part of that plan is the modernization of our tax system, and part of that is the HST. That’s just part of a plan which also sees personal income taxes going down, it sees transition benefits in place, it sees the creation of a new sales tax credit, it sees the creation of a new northern energy tax credit, and it sees the creation of new benefits for Ontario seniors.

If it’s seen in a holistic way, a comprehensive way, it’s actually an intelligent approach to helping get this economy moving and to ensuring that we’re creating more jobs every single day.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: The Premier often talks about what he can’t do for families. He says his government can’t afford to help families in uncertain times, but the Premier found billions of dollars for a sweetheart deal with Samsung, billions for a smart meter scheme that’s really not that very smart and billions more for a corporate tax giveaway.

With all this money at the Premier’s disposal, why does life keep getting more and more expensive for Ontario families?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: It’s the first time I hear it from the leader of the NDP, but I am surprised to hear that she’s standing against the Green Energy Act in Ontario. I’m surprised that she’s standing against an investment of some $16 billion so far which translates into about 16,000 new Ontario jobs. Our target is 50,000 new jobs in clean energy. We made a decision some time ago to shut down coal-fired generation; it would be nice to have my colleague’s support in that area.

What we’re doing is actually finding a way to move ahead with strengthening this economy at the same time as protecting our environment, which means protecting the health and well-being of our families and especially our children. We think that’s important; we think that’s a priority that Ontario families share. Again, I would say to my honourable colleague, it would be great to have her support when it comes to shutting down coal-fired generation and harnessing power from the wind and the sun in the province of Ontario.

HYDRO RATES

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is to the Premier. If the Premier just stepped outside of his bubble, he’d hear stories like this one from Jennifer Donais of Windsor. She wrote, “I am a single mom with two teens. I live from paycheque to paycheque. When I opened my utility bill, it … led to tears. I would have to remove money from each of the bills just so I could pay some ... and still have some money” left over “for groceries.”

The cost of living is reducing women like Jennifer to tears. Does the Premier think it’s acceptable that moms are forced to choose between putting food on the table for their kids and paying the hydro bill?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: I think Ontarians are coming to understand that what we inherited by way of an electricity system was old and unreliable, and that burning all that coal was just not helpful to our environment and to our health. So for seven years now we have been investing heavily in the rebuild of our electricity system. We’re building something that is modern, reliable and clean. There are costs associated with that, and I know that my colleague understands that.

That’s why we’ve gone ahead with a personal income tax cut: $200 for that woman. If she finds herself in a low income bracket as a family, there’s the Ontario child benefit, $1,100 every year; a transition benefit for the family, $1,000 this year; and the new sales tax credit, $260 per person for everybody in the family—that is permanent, every single year. Our new children’s activity tax credit on top of that is $50 per child, permanent every year and growing with the cost of living.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: The Premier often muses about what he can’t do, but what’s happening to families in this province is not inevitable; it’s the result of the Premier’s out-of-touch policies. Pam Carr from Kingston tells us how “our Hydro One bill doubled from June to July.” Sergio Zholudev says that his hydro bill jumped more than $100 to $395 in August.

Families are increasingly overburdened. Does the Premier understand their plight at all, or does he just not care?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: I want to come back to our determined effort to modernize the tax system in Ontario. I want to take the opportunity again to thank all of the Conservative members of Parliament, Ontario senators and the Stephen Harper government for their unrelenting support in that regard.

I also want to remind my honourable colleague what the Centre for Policy Alternatives said. With respect to our package of reforms, they wrote, “The tax credits and tax cuts have the effect of offsetting the impact of the increased HST revenue for low-income and moderate-income families and of moderating the impact for other families.” They called the report Not a Tax Grab After All. I think that says it all.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: People see big, mind-boggling money spent on hydro—billions in sweetheart deals for companies like Samsung, millions in salaries for hydro bureaucrats, billions to start up a smart-meter system—yet real people are shocked by what they see when they open their bill. Ms. Sikora from Hamilton says this: “My hydro bill jumped from $118.72 from the previous billing to $216.36. That is almost $100.” When will the Premier come up with some relief for people like her?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: Again, I want to speak to my honourable colleague about the work that we continue to have under way with respect to hydro. I know she’s not arguing that we don’t need to rebuild our hydro system; I know that she’s not arguing that there are no costs associated with that rebuild. We’ve already brought 8,000 megawatts of new generation online; 80% of that is new, clean electricity. That cost $8 billion. We also rebuilt some 5,000 kilometres of transmission upgrades. That cost some $4 billion. There are real costs associated with that.

We’ve worked really hard to offset those new costs, again, by reducing taxes for our families—the personal income tax cut, the transition benefit, the new sales tax credit, the children’s activity tax credit, the northern Ontario energy credit and so many more.

HEALTH CARE

Mrs. Christine Elliott: My question is for the Premier. Ontario families wonder how you can collect a health tax and still end up closing emergency rooms. People have waited for years to get their parents into long-term care and wonder why you boast about increasing health care spending by 45% while they get less service.

Dr. Jeff Turnbull, the new president of the Canadian Medical Association, appears to have answers. He is quoted as saying, “It’s not a lack of resources.... It’s a glaring failure of execution.”

Was Dr. Turnbull talking about eHealth, local health integration networks, you and your health minister, or the hospitals the auditor looked at and is going to be reporting on in the days to come?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: I think an important question, really, that we need to address and my honourable colleagues need to come to grips with, in terms of explaining to Ontarians what it is that they would like to do, is, when they remove that $3 billion annually from our health care budget, what will that translate into? Because last time it meant the closure of 28 hospitals. I juxtapose that against our building of 14 new hospitals in Ontario. They fired 6,200 nurses; we’ve hired over 10,000 nurses. We’ve also hired over 2,300 more doctors. When you take $3 billion out of health care, I think we need to know what exactly will that mean to our health care system.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Mrs. Christine Elliott: Ontario families certainly do have a choice: between Dalton McGuinty, who believes in his heart that they have an endless ability to pay, and Tim Hudak, who hears what the Canadian Medical Association says about waste.

Tim Hudak and the Ontario PCs warned you about eHealth, but you did nothing about rich contracts to your Liberal friends until it was too late. We warned you about waste and secrecy at the LHINs, but you ignored us until the Ombudsman exposed the illegal meetings you let them hold. We warned you about the spending spree on Courtyard, Accenture and other Liberal-friendly consultants that continued at the hospitals.

Will the Premier show he has changed and reveal how many of the contracts to his friends at Courtyard and Accenture were sole-sourced before the auditor releases his report?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: There’s one thing that I must say with respect to consultants: When we came into office, the use of consultants was a practice that was rampant in the government. We have a tremendous amount of faith in our public servants. They are capable, and we rely on them.

We have, in fact, reduced government-wide use of consultants by more than 54% since 2003. In just the last year alone, the use of consultants is down by 25%; travel expenses are down by 23%; government advertising spending is down 20%. Again, we’re comparing that to the previous Conservative government. Costs have gone up; notwithstanding that, consultants are down 25%, travel expenses are down 23%, government advertising is down 20%.

AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE

Mr. Peter Kormos: To the Premier: This government has once again caved in to the insurance lobby with deep cuts to benefits for auto accident victims. Rehab and medical benefits have been cut in half. The auto insurance industry is going to pocket millions of dollars in claim savings, while individuals are going to be left unprotected and vulnerable. Why does this government insist on favouring more profits for powerful financial interests at the expense of Canadians and Ontarians?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: To the Minister of Finance.

Hon. Dwight Duncan: This government wants to build on its record of bringing down premiums and keeping them lower for all Ontarians.

The member opposite conveniently ignores the facts. The facts are that for seven years auto insurance rates came down. We moved with 41 recommendations to end fraud and abuse in the system, to give consumers more choices, to build in security for consumers so that they could rest assured that they’d get better insurance at a reasonable cost.

Under the NDP government, premiums went up; under the Conservative government, they went up 53% in two years. Neither one of those parties gets it. This is about balance, it’s about finding the right answer, and most of all it’s about protecting consumers from fraud and abuse in the insurance system. We’ll put our record up against yours, sir, any day of the week.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Mr. Peter Kormos: Let’s see: Higher premiums, reduced benefits—that’s not much of a choice for insured automobile drivers.

The reality is that accident victims are going to end up looking for treatment in the public health care system and then they’re going to be amazed to find that services like chiropractic have been delisted by this same government. As a result, these victims are going to be forced to pay out of pocket, and all of this at a time of rising insurance premiums.

Why has this government once again caved in to the powerful auto insurance lobby and, in the course of doing so, betrayed innocent victims and Ontario’s drivers?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: Under that member’s government, auto insurance premiums went up 20%. Under their plan, we would have had 23,000 new bureaucrats working in the public auto insurance sector.

Quite frankly, I watched that member some 22 years ago do a 36-hour—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): I think you should stop that stuff.

Minister?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: I watched him do a 36-hour filibuster in favour of public auto insurance. He stood and he did it with great passion. And what did he do, when given the chance and that party came to office? They didn’t do it. What did they do? They raised auto insurance premiums.

We are fighting fraud in the system, giving consumers more choice and building on the success we’ve had in keeping auto insurance premiums down. This government is all about protecting consumers with a wise and well-thought-out package of insurance reforms that will give them enhanced protection and less fraud in their system.

FULL-DAY KINDERGARTEN

Mr. Khalil Ramal: My question is for the Minister of Education. Minister, full-day kindergarten has recently begun in schools across the province with 35,000 students in over 1,400 classes, and almost 600 schools across the province will offer full-day learning for four- and five-year-olds.

The full-day kindergarten program has seen widespread support, but the member from Nepean–Carleton and her caucus colleagues showed opposition to the plan. The member said, “When I asked the minister if it was still possible for children to go half-day, I was told by Minister Dombrowsky that, ‘no,’ there wouldn’t be choice....”

Can the minister tell this House about her plan, whether she is keeping the choice for families or has cancelled it?

Hon. Leona Dombrowsky: I’m delighted to have the opportunity to talk about our government’s initiative that has 35,000 four- and five-year-olds in the province of Ontario attending full-day kindergarten this year. This is a great program.

I can say that with respect to parents’ choice and the opportunities that they have, the law has not changed. It has always been the law in the province of Ontario that children are not required to be in school until they are the age of six. That has not changed. There continues to be a choice for parents and families.

When I was at the member’s riding last week, I met a parent who had a child in the classroom. I asked about her child: Was she going to be attending? The mother said that because the child is a little younger, she will be attending on Fridays only for the first little while, until the youngster gets used to it. So I commend schools that are working with families—

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

Mr. Khalil Ramal: Thank you, Minister. My second question is looking at extended care. This government led the people of Ontario to believe that extended care was going to be available at all the schools that were offering full-day kindergarten. However, reports say that the take-up of extended care is lower than expected across the province. Would the minister tell us why the number is lower and why the extended care is not being offered at all the schools that offer full-day learning?

Hon. Leona Dombrowsky: We know that there’s a great deal of excitement about the wraparound programs that have been available in some schools and are now coming onstream in others. What we have said with our legislation is that it is enabling legislation. So in those communities where we have full-day kindergarten parents have the opportunity, and where there are sufficient numbers boards will be required to provide that service.

This is the first program of its kind anywhere in the world. We know that as more and more families are availing themselves of this service it will spread to communities right across our province. It is a wonderful initiative where we have an early childhood educator and a teacher with children for an entire day, from 7 in the morning until 6 at night. We are just beginning and we’re very pleased with what parents have told us and how they—

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

TAXATION

Mr. Peter Shurman: Thank you, Speaker.

Applause.

Mr. Peter Shurman: I hope that wasn’t for the injury.

My question is for the Premier. Not only was this the hottest summer on record, Premier, but it was Dalton McGuinty’s sneakiest summer on record. You were the first leader to use one greedy tax grab as cover for another greedy tax grab when you tried to sneak in eco taxes on 9,000 new products on the same day as the HST came into effect. When you got caught in the eco tax fiasco you just shrugged and said you were still learning. Did you mean you’re learning that Ontario families don’t have an infinite ability to pay or learning how to sneak tax grabs past them?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: To the Minister of the Environment. It’s his first time up.

Hon. John Wilkinson: And I’m delighted to rise to answer the question as the Minister of the Environment.

I say to my colleague opposite that I’ve had an opportunity to talk to my constituents, and they tell me increasingly that they want to ensure that hazardous materials in their house never get into the landfill. That is our objective and I think we should all agree to that: that it is so important that we keep hazardous materials out of our landfills.

What the consumers have told us is that they want to have a program that’s easy to understand so they can do the right thing. I’m convinced, as the Minister of the Environment, that people do want to do the right thing. That’s why we’re in the midst of a review, and I can assure the member opposite that I’ll be sharing with the House the fruits of that review after I speak to my colleagues about it. But we will ensure that hazardous material stays out of our landfill, and I would hope that you would join us in agreeing that that is the most important consideration.

Mr. Peter Shurman: Déjà vu from that minister if ever there was one.

Cabinet documents and leaks reveal that Dalton McGuinty has been working at being sneaky for some time. One leak revealed that it was Dalton McGuinty, not the hapless Minister Gerretsen, who was pushing eco taxes over the objections of the cabinet. Cabinet records reveal that Dalton McGuinty tried to slip the secret G20 law through the same meeting where everyone was preoccupied with regulatory changes for the greedy HST tax grab. Soon Dalton McGuinty was on a roll, with the Ombudsman revealing that LHINs hold secret illegal meetings and the OPP revealing how busy they were raiding ministries and agencies.

Why is Dalton McGuinty so intent on tax grabs and experiments with tax dollars that he’d rather sneak them in than explain them to the hard-working Ontario families who have to pay for them?

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Stop the clock for a second, please. Order. On a number of occasions I allowed language that should be unparliamentary, and I would just ask our own member to withdraw the word that he used. I will not be allowing it to be used in the future. Please stand.

Mr. Peter Shurman: Withdraw.

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

Minister?

Hon. John Wilkinson: This government will never stop protecting our environment—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The member from Lanark. Thank you.

Hon. John Wilkinson: For greater emphasis, this government will never stop protecting our environment for our children and our grandchildren. I can’t think of anything that our parents are more concerned about than ensuring that we have a safe environment. We want to leave a safer environment.

At our ministry, we protect the air, the land and our water each and every day. We will continue to build on a strong legacy. We inherited a system where clean water wasn’t important, where clean air wasn’t important and where people were dumping things in the landfills that should never have been there. We’re going to continue to do our work and make sure that we are protecting the environment for our children and our grandchildren. Surely to God, all of us should be able to agree on that.

EDUCATION FUNDING

Mr. Rosario Marchese: My question is to the Minister of Education. Ontario parents are paying an indirect education tax of $600 million in the form of fundraising and user fees. This tax is being used for items that include classroom supplies, library books, renovations and capital projects, and you have allowed this to go on for years.

When will the government issue a clear directive to school boards, that fundraising is not to be used for items that should be provided by the Ministry of Education?

Hon. Leona Dombrowsky: I’ve made it very clear, and I’ve restated and reminded boards as recently as two weeks ago, when this item came into the media, that at no time should students in the province of Ontario be required to pay fees for any item, any

article that relates to their program.

I think it is important as well to put some context on the number that was put out with respect to fundraising. We know in our schools that there are many reasons why they raise funds, and I think that it’s inaccurate to suggest that the total aggregate number that the member cited in his question is driven back into the schools. In fact, much of it is charity; much of it is fundraising for school trips.

Mr. Paul Miller: Charity?

Hon. Leona Dombrowsky: And when I say charity, absolutely. I say that many children in our schools, for example, most recently—

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

Mr. Rosario Marchese: Minister, I just want you to know that People for Education did their study as we did. We came up with the same numbers. If you’re saying that People for Education doesn’t know what they’re saying or doing, that’s fine, but you might want to look at their study and you might want to ask us for ours.

You ought to know that individual schools are able to raise anything from zero dollars to $200,000. Our calculations show the school boards raise on average about $341 per student, with a range going from as low as $169 to a high of $744 per student. This dependence on fees and fundraising has created a system of haves and have-nots.

Minister, as you move towards an American-style education system and more and more schools become dependent on private money, what are you going to do for the have-not schools?

Hon. Leona Dombrowsky: I would say to the honourable member that we have raised spending in education by 40% and that every student in the province of Ontario is funded with the same number of dollars, with the exception of those students in rural and northern communities. Where there are exceptions that need to be supported, we drive dollars to those issues.

With respect to fees and fundraising, we have developed draft guidelines, working with our partners. The draft guidelines for fees are on our website. The ones for fundraising will be out in the new year.

I can say, as well, that there are many school initiatives where funds are raised to support local community events and endeavours, where students raise funds for school trips. We want to look at how dollars are raised in our school communities and, yes, we do want to work with parents and ask them how and what they think is appropriate to support in our schools.

What I can say is that there has been unprecedented investment—

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

STUDENT ASSISTANCE

Mr. Mario Sergio: My question is for the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities.

Minister, with the recession that has so badly affected many Ontarians, a number of people are returning to school to increase their level of education or train for a new skilled trade. More and more Ontarians recognize that it is imperative that they have the skills and education to compete for the best jobs. Many reports suggest that seven out of 10 new jobs in the next decade will require post-secondary education or training.

In order to return to school, many students will need to take out student loans to pay for their education. Minister, students navigating loan programs spend more time figuring out how they will pay for their education and less time actually studying. They are the next generation who will support and contribute to our economy, and we’ll be relying on them to keep Ontario strong and competitive.

Hon. John Milloy: I think it’s very timely, at the start of the school year, that we talk about some of the changes that have taken place in post-secondary education across the province. Indeed, I’ve had an opportunity to meet with students across the province over the last few weeks to talk about these changes, particularly in the area of student assistance.

Not only has this government made significant financial changes to OSAP, we’ve also made some administrative changes to eliminate much of the red tape associated with the OSAP process. For example, there is the student access guarantee, which mandates colleges and universities to provide additional funding to high-needs students in programs that have additional costs. In the past, in many cases, students had to fill out separate application forms. It’s now automatic under the OSAP system.

At the same time, two of our other programs, the Ontario access grant and distance grant, again, supplementary—

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

Mr. Mario Sergio: We need more than a streamlined OSAP application process to help these students with their studies. I had parents in my area contacting me and asking about the government’s plans for making post-secondary education more affordable for their children, parents who want to give their children the opportunity to pursue post-secondary education.

Parents realize how important it is for the future prosperity of their children’s lives to go on to college and university. York University, in my riding, is one of the largest universities in Ontario. I need to be able to say with pride, when students and parents come to speak to me, that, yes, this government does care about Ontarians and their families. I need to reassure parents that their children will have the same opportunities they have had with post-secondary education.

Minister, can you please tell us—tell me, so I can tell these families when they ask how this government—

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

Hon. John Milloy: We listened to the students of Ontario and made significant new investments in OSAP. In fact, the most recent budget contained $81 million in additional funding for the OSAP program.

Among the changes that we made to make the program more generous, we are providing more assistance for tuition, living costs, books, supplies and equipment; allowing students to keep more of the money they earn from part-time jobs; providing a no-interest, no-payment period on student loans for six months after graduation; providing additional support for married students and students with children; introducing a new grant for part-time students; and also, perhaps most importantly, offering students a more flexible and income-sensitive repayment program.

Under this new program, no borrower will be asked to pay more than 20% of their family income toward student loans, and after 15 years, or 10 years for borrowers with a permanent—

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

NORTHERN ONTARIO DEVELOPMENT

Mr. Randy Hillier: My question is to the Premier. This summer, the Premier said his government has been sloppy and messy, particularly with respect to his failed and greedy eco tax grab.

The Premier used to say, “‘Public hearings’; those two words go together nicely if you believe in true democracy.” But without listening to northern Ontario families, you are pushing ahead with Bill 191, which freezes development in all of northern Ontario.

Your apology for the eco tax fiasco made it appear that you had learned and that you were ready to make changes. Why, Premier, are you still pressing your own priorities rather than the priorities of northern Ontario families?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: To the Minister of Natural Resources.

Hon. Linda Jeffrey: I’m really pleased to answer this question.

I want to welcome all the chiefs who join us today. I’ve had an opportunity to visit many of their communities. This summer, I got to visit many communities, and I appreciate the hospitality and all the advice that they provided—particularly Grand Chief Stan Beardy, who provided a lot of recommendations that we will be looking at in clause-by-clause consideration today. His advice was invaluable in making sure that we provided guidance on how we would move forward with the Far North Act.

It’s a key commitment of our government, and it’s going to be part of our Open Ontario plan. It’s a particularly historic piece of legislation, and I look forward to having those discussions later on this afternoon. It’s about working with First Nations communities, allowing them to direct land use planning in the north and having respect for the land that they call their home.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Mr. Randy Hillier: Again to the Premier: You’ve failed to offer any solutions for this failed and abject leadership that led to the cancellation of public hearings on the Far North Act. Now you intend to ram a bill through this House that cuts off 50% of northern Ontario from development.

The Ontario PC caucus is standing up for northern Ontario, and today we will call for unanimous consent for public hearings on Bill 191. I know Bill 191 is making your back bench nervous; just turn around and ask. Ontario’s First Nations are here in the House today asking for their voices to be heard.

Premier, will your government vote to hold public hearings and let those most hurt by your failed leadership have a say in the Far North?

Hon. Linda Jeffrey: When it comes to developing the Far North, they just don’t get it. They don’t understand that this is about protecting the environment; this is about looking for a balance.

I have great confidence in this piece of legislation. I believe it is legislation that will provide the resources and the capacity for Far North communities to participate in land use planning. In fact, just last week, we announced $10 million of additional funding that will go to capacity- and skills-based training, allowing the communities to participate in land use planning.

It’s the right thing to do. It’s about giving authority to First Nations communities to land use plan. They will have the authority. They will have the final approval on land use planning that they direct.

There are lots of communities in the Far North that need this. They have told me—the elders, the youth, the chiefs—that they are in favour of development. This gives them the tools to—

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

NORTHERN ONTARIO DEVELOPMENT

Mr. Gilles Bisson: To the Minister of Natural Resources on the same issue: The Premier made a commitment last spring with NAN when they met at the Delta Chelsea hotel, and that was that this government would not go forward with amendments, or go forward in any way, shape or form, on Bill 191 without the consent of First Nations. It’s clear that there is not a First Nation in the Far North that wants your legislation. They’re here today, the grand chiefs and chiefs from various communities, to say, “No, put this on hold.”

Are you going to hold the commitment of the Premier and not go forward with this legislation, as promised by him to First Nations last year?

Hon. Linda Jeffrey: I have visited about eight Far North communities this summer, and I was disappointed when the standing committee wasn’t able to visit the Far North, but it became an opportunity for me to visit those communities first-hand. I was able to spend whole days in communities and look at the land use planning that a lot of communities have already done. We have some communities that are far into the process and some that are just beginning that process.

We have a lot of youth who need skills-based training. They need the dollars; they need the capacity. We can put our head in the sand, or we can understand that there is development happening in the Far North today.

We have a chromite deposit that we’ve discovered in the Far North, and the world is watching what we do. We need to do land use planning in the north similar to the way we do it in the south. We need to give the Far North communities the resources to move forward so we can protect the environment and find a balance on land use planning in the north.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Minister, the only one with its head in the sand is the Liberal government when it comes to this issue. It is clear: Each and every community residing in the Far North, in the area that you’re trying to affect by this act, has sent you resolutions by band council. They’ve had resolutions sent to your office and to the Premier’s office, along with petitions, saying, “Stop this process.” They want to ensure that, in the end, if

an act does come forward, it is one that will meet with their consent.

I ask you again, will you do the right thing and stop this legislation in its tracks and allow the First Nations to do what needs to be done so that we can actually get it right?

Hon. Linda Jeffrey: I guess I want to convince everybody today, if I could, that this is just the beginning of the conversation. I think we’ve had conversations for the last two years about this legislation. We’ve met with communities that want to do land use planning. We continue to want to have that conversation, but it is a little disheartening—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Members will please come to order. We have guests here who want to hear the answer.

Minister.

Hon. Linda Jeffrey: Bill 191 represents a change in the working relationship between First Nations and Ontario in the Far North. If passed, this bill will provide a new approach to land use planning, one of co-operation and joint responsibility. It’s about community-land-based planning that is initiated by a First Nations community, and will have final approval, should it be approved.

That’s historic in the way that we have approached this in the past. It’s based on advice that we received from chiefs in the Far North. I was listening to them. We continue to listen to them. This is a dialogue. This is not the end of the process; this is just the beginning.

CANADIAN CENSUS /

RECENSEMENT CANADIEN

Mr. Bob Delaney: My question is for the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. Minister, this summer, the federal government announced that they would eliminate the mandatory long-form census. The federal government’s decision has resulted in a loud outcry from individuals in western Mississauga and across Ontario.

For years, community and social services groups have depended on the long census information to develop programs to serve their measurable population segments. Mississauga–Streetsville social service providers such as the Peel Multicultural Council have relied on the long-form census to identify high-needs immigrant communities that require services in such languages as Urdu, Punjabi, Dari, Bengali, Russian, Spanish and Romanian in a culturally appropriate manner.

Would the minister tell the House how the federal government’s decision to end the long-form census will hurt Ontario’s ability to serve our newcomers?

Hon. Eric Hoskins: I’m very concerned that the federal government is proceeding to eliminate the long-form census, particularly without consulting with the Ontario government, Ontarians and the thousands of organizations that depend on the census data. By ending the long-form census, Ontario will no longer have information about newcomers’ place of birth, their ethnicity, their education or their income levels. Without reliable, accurate information of this sort, captured only by the long-form census, Ontario will be less able to develop and deliver programs that help our newcomers succeed.

On behalf of all Ontarians, and particularly Ontario’s newcomers, I once again urge the federal government to reconsider this ill-advised decision to end the long-form census. We need to count our newcomers so that they can count on us. When our newcomers succeed, Ontario succeeds.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

M. Bob Delaney: La décision du gouvernement fédéral affecte toutes les communautés, les nouveaux arrivants comme les francophones. Dans ma circonscription, j’ai reçu plusieurs messages des francophones qui s’inquiètent et qui m’ont demandé la position de notre gouvernement sur cette question. Je sais que cette inquiétude est partagée par d’autres francophones partout en Ontario.

Quelle est la position de notre province et de notre gouvernement concernant l’annonce du gouvernement fédéral? Quel est le risque pour les résidents de Streetsville, Lisgar, Meadowvale et toutes les communautés partout en Ontario?

L’hon. Eric Hoskins: Je réfère la question à la ministre déléguée aux Affaires francophones.

L’hon. Madeleine Meilleur: Premièrement, je voudrais remercier le député de Mississauga–Streetsville pour sa question. Je partage vraiment l’inquiétude de ses commettants. En plus, un

article dans le Globe and Mail du 9 septembre confirmait que Statistique Canada pense qu’un recensement volontaire sera source d’erreurs. Je suis donc surprise et inquiète de la décision du gouvernement fédéral, moi aussi.

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

COMMUNITY SAFETY

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: My question is for the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services. Even before you sprung eco taxes and the HST on Ontario families on the same day, you had another trick up your sleeve: Your secret G20 law caught everyone by surprise, and of course we all know now that you made a major blunder. The regulation was used to arrest people who were walking on the sidewalk outside the security fence for the conference. It was passed while this House was still sitting, but you didn’t make a peep about it. We still don’t know why you tried to sneak it past us. What made you think that you can get away with this?

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): I just remind the member that I ruled on that word earlier. Please withdraw the comment.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: I withdraw it.

Hon. James J. Bradley: I would hope the member would recognize that, on that particular day—because I heard his leader talking about the police and being very supportive of what happened on that day. That was an initial reaction. They were confronted with a very, very difficult circumstance on that particular day. You will recall that—

Interjections.

Hon. James J. Bradley: He doesn’t want an answer.

Interjections.

Hon. James J. Bradley: Several members are interjecting over there. I’m trying to answer my good friend’s excellent question. He has good questions.

I want to say to the member that it was a very difficult day. Everyone recognizes what a difficult day it was. He would know that the Ombudsman is conducting an investigation into this matter, and we will await his results and the results of two other reviews of these circumstances that are taking place at the present time.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The time for question period has ended. There being no deferred votes, this House stands recessed until 1 p.m.

The House recessed from 1138 to 1300.

INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS

Mr. Kevin Daniel Flynn: I’d like to take the opportunity today to welcome to the chamber Sarah Cannon and Gaby Wess, from Parents for Children’s Mental Health. Sarah was the first person to present to the Select Committee on Mental Health and Addictions. It’s her testimony, along with that of many others, that contributed to the final recommendations. They’ve joined us today to witness the tabling of the final report from the committee. Please welcome them to Queen’s Park.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): And a special welcome to my constituent Gaby as well.

MEMBERS’ STATEMENTS

HIGHWAY SAFETY

Mr. Norm Miller: I rise in the House today to raise awareness of a private member’s bill that we will be debating on Thursday. The bill would amend the Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act to include at least a metre-wide paved shoulder on designated provincial highways when they are repaved. This amendment will improve public safety and promote a healthier means of transportation and activity for the public.

In my press conference last week, Eleanor McMahon, founder of Share the Road Cycling Coalition, brought the tragic death of her husband to our attention. These types of accidents can be prevented. In Australia, where shoulders have been paved, such accidents have declined significantly.

Paved shoulders would have positive benefits on health, safety and the environment. The public will be encouraged to take active transportation without fear. Cyclists, runners and walkers will all enjoy greater safety, as will motorists. There are also cost savings related to road maintenance.

Since hosting a press conference last week, I’ve received tremendous public support and interest in my private member’s bill. In addition, I have support and encouragement from Dr. Charles Gardner, chief medical officer of health, Simcoe Muskoka District Health Unit; Carol Craig, of the nutrition and physical activity action team, Sudbury and District Health Unit; the Ontario Road Builders’ Association; Kristi MacDonald, from the Bike Shop in Gravenhurst; Dan Andrews, from Trans Canada Trail Ontario; and Margaret Casey, on behalf of Muskoka Trails Council.

I ask all members to support my “pave the shoulders” private member’s bill this Thursday.

ROSH HASHANAH

Mr. Mike Colle: I’m pleased today to extend my warmest wishes to all Ontarians observing Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year, especially to the many Jewish families and dear friends in my own riding of Eglinton–Lawrence.

In Hebrew, Rosh Hashanah means “head of the year.” It is a time for both celebration and repentance, and marks one of the holiest days in the Jewish calendar.

There are a number of customary traditions followed by those observing Rosh Hashanah. Observers listen for the shofar, or ram’s horn, which serves as a reminder of the importance of this holiday and marking the time for reflection.

The holiday includes traditional foods, such as apples and honey, to represent hope for a sweet new year. The circular shape of challah, bread baked into braids, symbolizes the continuation of life.

Ontario has been most fortunate to have had so many people of the Jewish faith live in our communities. Their contributions to all aspects of our life have enriched our province enormously.

Rosh Hashanah is a time to examine one’s life, repenting of any wrongs in the previous year, and for making amends. It is also a time to rejoice in the creation of the world and celebrate God’s compassion and mercy. For many, it is a time for renewal, of making peace and of making resolutions for the year ahead.

To all those observing Rosh Hashanah, L’Shana Tova. May you have a sweet new year filled with health, happiness and good fortune.

DAVID JOHNSTON

Mrs. Elizabeth Witmer: I would like to take this opportunity to extend my warmest congratulations to Canada’s next Governor General, David Johnston. This appointment is confirmation of his distinguished record of public service and his excellence in leadership.

As David leaves his position as president of the University of Waterloo after 11 years at the helm, I look back at those years with joy at all his successes but also sadness that he will no longer be involved in our university and community. We have been blessed by his presence, and he has given us countless reasons to celebrate. Tomorrow, we will celebrate and gather to thank him.

One of David’s most remarkable personal attributes is that he is an enthusiastic and energetic visionary who has successfully challenged all of us, whether at the university or in the region of Waterloo, to dream big, to raise our expectations of what is possible and to work in co-operation to achieve our goals. Under his leadership, the university experienced historic accomplishments, such as the establishment of the research and technology park, the school of pharmacy, the Institute for Quantum Computing and the health sciences centre.

In closing, on behalf of everyone in the region of Waterloo, I want to express my sincere appreciation to David. Thank you for believing in us. Thank you for being our chief barn-raiser and cheerleader. Thank you for making Waterloo a better place to live and prosper.

Congratulations and warmest wishes to you and Sharon, your daughters and grandchildren as you embark on this new journey as our Governor General.

CAPITAL PRIDE

Mr. Yasir Naqvi: Welcome back, to all the members, to the Legislature.

It is my great honour today to recognize the 25th anniversary of the pride festival in our nation’s capital, Ottawa. From August 20 to 29 of this year, Capital Pride and the GLBTTQ community of Ottawa-Gatineau hosted a rainbow of events primarily located in my riding of Ottawa Centre.

Ottawa’s most colourful parade attracts more than 35,000 spectators and participants annually, and this year was no different. The parade runs down Wellington Street, past the Supreme Court and Parliament Hill, and ends at Ottawa city hall for the Capital Pride community fair.

For a parade which highlights equality and the diversity of our communities, it’s remarkable, when you pass by the Supreme Court and Parliament Hill, how blessed we are in the great country we live in, right here in Canada.

In Ottawa, the first gay pride celebration was organized in 1986 by GO, Gays of Ottawa. In 1989, the pride celebration became a week of activities, dances, exhibits, films, sporting events and receptions. Three hundred people attended the first parade and picnic. The then mayor of the city of Ottawa, Jim Durrell, proclaimed Equality Day.

In 1997 and 1998 respectively, Regional Chair Bob Chiarelli, now the Minister of Infrastructure, and then-Prime Minister Jean Chrétien issued a proclamation supporting the festival. The year 2002’s parade events exceeded all expectations: 55,000 people attended the parade and the street party. The parade has been going since then.

Congratulations to all organizers for their hard work.

PEACE RANCH

Ms. Sylvia Jones: I rise today to congratulate Peace Ranch on their 20th anniversary.

Peace Ranch is a beautiful heritage farm on 26 acres in Caledon. Using social and recreational rehabilitation programs through horticultural and animal-assisted therapies, Peace Ranch is dedicated to providing residential and day programs for individuals struggling to manage a serious mental illness and co-occurring addiction challenges.

Peace Ranch embraces the principles of hope, empowerment, choice and responsibility. Residents and day-program participants work on the farm and in the gardens and, through this, regain strength and dignity in their lives. The farming program has recently been expanded with the launch of Eeyore’s Market Garden.

I’ve visited Peace Ranch on many occasions and have seen first-hand the wonderful work they are doing to treat individuals with a mental illness. I want to take this opportunity to thank executive director Eric Tripp-McKay and his staff, the board of directors and the many other volunteers who make such an important contribution to improving the lives of those who live and participate in programs at Peace Ranch.

The Select Committee on Mental Health and Addictions gave us a unique opportunity to focus the Legislature’s attention on mental health and addictions issues. I urge all members to support our recommendations so that we can improve the lives of Ontarians living with a mental illness.

Peace Ranch is a bright light in a very fractured mental health system. I offer my congratulations to Peace Ranch on their 20th anniversary and wish them many more years of success.

CLIMATE CHANGE

Mr. Peter Tabuns: This summer, we’ve been witness to a variety of severe weather events around the world that speak to the changing climate. In Russia, an unprecedented heat wave and drought have led to the loss of almost a third of their wheat crop. Toxic air in Moscow led to the morgues overflowing. In Pakistan, almost 14 million people have been displaced by unprecedented rains and flooding. In China, flooding and landslides had impacts in the billions of dollars. Climate scientists say that it’s very clear that these incidents are consistent with the kind of weather events you get in a warming world.

The McGuinty government’s climate plan was weak to begin with. The clear failure to even meet its own weak targets is simply immoral. The McGuinty government, as all other governments, has a duty to act decisively and recognize the reality of what’s going on in the world. There is no more pressing task facing the world and this province today.

EDUCATION /

ÉDUCATION

Mr. Jean-Marc Lalonde: It’s good to be back and to see so many enthusiastic faces in this Legislature today. I think we share the excitement felt by students who have also started back to school. I’m sure that most of us have heard positive feedback from parents about the McGuinty government’s full-day learning program for four- and five-year-olds.

Durant les dernières années, nous avons investi davantage dans le domaine de l’éducation. Plusieurs études ont été menées afin d’identifier les stratégies qui visent à maximiser le plein potentiel de chaque élève.

Nous remarquons dans nos écoles ontariennes l’excellence en éducation. Selon une étude complétée par le D r Pascal, le gouvernement McGuinty offre maintenant une éducation à plein temps dès l’âge de quatre ans dans plus de 600 écoles en Ontario. Cette initiative a pour objectif de développer des élèves autonomes et responsables dès leur arrivée en première année, et aussi devenir des citoyens engagés qui contribueront à l’économie de notre province.

As the grandfather of three young children, I am very encouraged by the positive steps our government is taking in education.

GOVERNMENT INVESTMENTS

Mr. Rick Johnson: I’m pleased to rise in the House today to talk about a fail-proof investment, and I assure you this investment is a sure thing.

First, some investment basics: Don’t choose to invest in something; choose to invest for something. Invest for security, for returns, for growth.

Thanks to the McGuinty government’s commitment to education, we have invested for security, returns, growth and more. We have invested for higher literacy, numeracy, critical thinking and citizenship. We have invested for smaller class sizes that maximize the positive impact made by our outstanding teachers and early childhood educators. We have invested for safer and more welcoming schools, healthier students and more engaged, worry-free parents. We have invested for student achievement through new and innovative programs, programs that give our students a head start and a leg up.

We have invested for the skilled workforce Ontario needs, resulting in higher family incomes, improved health and reduced social services costs. We have invested for success—which our students are realizing each day in the classroom and taking with them to the workforce.

My riding of Haliburton–Kawartha Lakes–Brock is home to more than 40 schools represented by five different school boards. In my riding, we’re seeing security, returns, growth and more. So you can see that this investment is indeed a sure thing, and you can see how honoured I am to be part of a government that invests in a strong, publicly funded education system that is the foundation for Ontario’s power and prosperity.

EDUCATION

Mr. Bob Delaney: Since my first election in 2003, I’ve had the privilege of visiting with students in western Mississauga in their schools. I’m proud of the improvements made in classrooms and in the lives of students in Streetsville, Meadowvale and Lisgar.

Before our government was elected, it was common to see 35 kids in a grade 1 classroom. Strikes interrupted day-to-day learning and prevented students from participating in extracurricular activities that foster teamwork and build confidence in our kids. One in three students was not graduating from high school, and standardized test scores were too low to be competitive in the 21st century. That was then.

Today, seven years later, nearly all grade 1 classrooms in Meadowvale, Streetsville and Lisgar have 20 students or less; student achievement has improved; standardized test scores have been up every year; and I shake hands with more and more high school graduates every fall and every spring at commencement ceremonies.

Not a single school day has been lost to a strike in almost eight years. The full-day learning program started at Plowman’s Park Public School in Meadowvale this fall, and our kids now get the best start possible.

Good schools are a commitment to our future, and Ontario’s achievements in education represent a bright future for our province.

TABLING OF SESSIONAL PAPERS

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): I beg to inform the House that during the adjournment the following reports were tabled: on June 15, 2010, the 2009-10 annual report of the Ombudsman of Ontario; on June 17, 2010, the 2009-10 annual report of the Office of the Integrity Commissioner; on July 27, 2010, a special report from the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario entitled Getting it Right: Paying for the Management of Household Hazardous Wastes; on August 10, 2010, from the Ombudsman of Ontario, a report regarding the Hamilton Niagara Haldimand Brant Local Health Integration Network.

ROYAL ASSENT /

SANCTION ROYALE

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): I beg to inform the House that, in the name of Her Majesty the Queen, His Honour the Administrator was pleased to assent to certain bills in his office on June 8, 2010.

The Clerk-at-the-Table (Ms. Tonia Grannum):

An Act to regulate retirement homes / Loi réglementant les maisons de retraite.

An Act to amend the Post-secondary Education Choice and Excellence Act, 2000, the Private Career Colleges Act, 2005 and the Ontario College of Art & Design Act, 2002 / Loi modifiant la Loi de 2000 favorisant le choix et l’excellence au niveau postsecondaire, la Loi de 2005 sur les collèges privés d’enseignement professionnel et la Loi de 2002 sur l’École d’art et de design de l’Ontario.

An Act to implement the Northern Ontario energy credit / Loi mettant en oeuvre le crédit pour les coûts d’énergie dans le Nord de l’Ontario.

An Act respecting the care provided by health care organizations / Loi relative aux soins fournis par les organismes de soins de santé.

An Act to revive 962 Bloor Street West Limited.

An Act to revive the Durham Region Classic Mustang Club.

An Act to revive Deepa Gas Limited.

An Act to revive Sandringham Developments Ltd.

An Act respecting the Luso Canadian Charitable Society.

An Act respecting the Ontario Institute of the Purchasing Management Association of Canada Inc.

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

COMITÉ PERMANENT

DE LA POLITIQUE SOCIALE /

STANDING COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL POLICY

M. Shafiq Qaadri: Je demande la permission de déposer un rapport du Comité permanent de la politique sociale et je propose son adoption.

I beg leave to present a report from the Standing Committee on Social Policy and move its adoption, and send it to you by way of page Henry.

The Clerk-at-the-Table (Ms. Tonia Grannum): Your committee begs to report the following bill as amended:

Bill 65,

An Act to revise the law in respect of not-for-profit corporations / Projet de loi 65, Loi modifiant des lois en ce qui concerne les organisations sans but lucratif.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Shall the report be received and adopted? Agreed.

Report adopted.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Pursuant to the order of the House dated June 1, 2010, the bill is ordered for third reading.

STANDING COMMITTEE ON FINANCE AND ECONOMIC AFFAIRS

Mr. Kevin Daniel Flynn: I beg leave to present a report from the Standing Committee on Finance and Economic Affairs and move its adoption.

The Clerk-at-the-Table (Ms. Tonia Grannum): Your committee begs to report the following bill as amended:

Bill 68,

An Act to promote Ontario as open for business by amending or repealing certain Acts / Projet de loi 68, Loi favorisant un Ontario propice aux affaires en modifiant ou en abrogeant certaines lois.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Shall the report be received and adopted? Agreed.

Report adopted.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Pursuant to the order of the House dated June 2, 2010, the bill is ordered for third reading.

SELECT COMMITTEE ON MENTAL HEALTH AND ADDICTIONS

Mr. Kevin Daniel Flynn: Pursuant to the order of the House dated February 24, 2009, I beg leave to present the final report from the Select Committee on Mental Health and Addictions entitled Navigating the Journey to Wellness: The Comprehensive Mental Health and Addictions Action Plan for Ontarians. I move the adoption of its recommendations.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Mr. Flynn presents the committee’s report and moves the adoption of its recommendations.

Does the member wish to make a brief statement?

Mr. Kevin Daniel Flynn: Thank you. I’m especially proud of this report and I think that all members of our committee are. The final report of the Select Committee on Mental Health and Addictions, Navigating the Journey to Wellness: The Comprehensive Mental Health and Addictions Action Plan for Ontarians, is the culmination of an intensive 18-month process. The committee was comprised of members from all three political parties, and I know all those members are especially proud of how they worked in a non-partisan way.

From February 2009 to August 2010, the committee heard the testimony of more than 230 individuals and organizations, received more than 300 written submissions and travelled across the province. We visited communities. We visited hospitals and mental health and addictions agencies. As a result of those visits, the committee concluded that a major transformation of Ontarians’ mental health and addictions system is needed and has brought forward 23 recommendations to make this happen.

The members of the select committee strongly encourage the Legislature to endorse the recommendations found therein and advocate for their implementation.

We’re joined today by some of the staff members who assisted in this: Elaine Campbell, Carrie Hull and, of course, Susan Sourial.

It has been an exceptional experience, one that I’m especially proud to be part of. I hope it does make a difference for some of the people who have joined us today in the chamber, especially from the Parents for Children’s Mental Health.

I would move adjournment of the debate.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Mr. Flynn has moved adjournment of the debate. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry?

All those in favour will say “aye.”

All those opposed will say “nay.”

In my opinion, the ayes have it. I declare the motion carried.

Debate adjourned.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

CHILDREN’S ACTIVITY

TAX CREDIT ACT, 2010 /

LOI DE 2010 SUR LE CRÉDIT D’IMPÔT

POUR LES ACTIVITÉS DES ENFANTS

Mr. Duncan moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 99,

An Act to amend the Taxation Act, 2007 to implement the children’s activity tax credit / Projet de loi 99, Loi modifiant la Loi de 2007 sur les impôts pour mettre en oeuvre le crédit d’impôt pour les activités des enfants.

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

All those in favour will say “aye.”

All those opposed will say “nay.”

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

First reading agreed to.

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

Hon. Dwight Duncan: Ministerial statements, Mr. Speaker.

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION

AND HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT

AMENDMENT ACT, 2010 /

LOI DE 2010 MODIFIANT

LA

LOI SUR L’AMÉNAGEMENT

DES VOIES PUBLIQUES

ET DES TRANSPORTS EN COMMUN

Mr. Norm Miller moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 100,

An Act to amend the Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act / Projet de loi 100, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur l’aménagement des voies publiques et des transports en commun.

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

First reading agreed to.

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

Mr. Norm Miller: This bill will be debated this Thursday in private members’ time. The bill amends the Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act by requiring the Minister of Transportation to construct paved shoulders on prescribed highways. The paved shoulders must extend at least one metre from the roadway of the highway and the construction must occur when the highway or a portion it is significantly repaved or resurfaced.

I think this will be a benefit for cyclists; it will be safer for cyclists to ride. It will also be a benefit for automobile drivers to have that extra paved shoulder.

MOTIONS

PRIVATE MEMBERS’

PUBLIC BUSINESS

Hon. Monique M. Smith: I believe we have unanimous consent to put forward a motion without notice regarding private members’ public business.

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

Hon. Monique M. Smith: I move that, notwithstanding any standing order, Mr. Sorbara be removed from the order of precedence for private members’ public business and ballot item 32 be assumed by Ms. Jaczek; and that Mr. Arthurs and Mr. Rinaldi exchange places in the order of precedence such that Mr. Rinaldi assumes ballot item 28 and Mr. Arthurs assumes ballot item 37; and that Mr. Chudleigh and Mr. Bailey exchange places in the order of precedence such that Mr. Bailey assumes ballot item 29 and Mr. Chudleigh assumes ballot item 34; and that, notwithstanding standing order 98(g), the requirement for notice be waived with respect to ballot items 28, 29, 34 and 37.

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

Motion agreed to.

HOUSE SITTINGS

Hon. Monique M. Smith: I believe we have unanimous consent to put forward a motion without notice regarding the House schedule.

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

Hon. Monique M. Smith: I move that, notwithstanding standing order 6(a), when the House adjourns on Thursday, September 16, 2010, it shall stand adjourned until Wednesday, September 22, 2010.

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

Motion agreed to.

HOUSE SITTINGS

Hon. Monique M. Smith: I believe we have unanimous consent to put forward another motion without notice regarding the House schedule.

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

Hon. Monique M. Smith: Member for Parry Sound–Muskoka, I think this is the one that you were expecting before.

I move that, notwithstanding standing order 6(a)(i), the spring sessional period of 2011 shall commence on Tuesday, February 22, 2011.

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

Motion agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Motions?

Mr. John Yakabuski: I seek unanimous consent to move a motion to rescind the government’s time allocation motion on Bill 191 and allow for public consultations.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Mr. Yakabuski seeks unanimous consent of the House. Agreed? I’m afraid I heard a no.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

CHILDREN’S ACTIVITY TAX CREDIT

Hon. Dwight Duncan: I’m pleased to stand today in the House for the introduction of the Children’s Activity Tax Credit Act, 2010. This proposed act contains amendments to the Taxation Act, 2007, to implement a new permanent tax credit for Ontario families.

We know that children benefit immensely from a diversity of experiences and opportunities. Our government wants to make it easier for parents to give their kids these opportunities by saving families money and helping with their budgets. The children’s activity tax credit would help parents with the cost of enrolling their children in activities that encourage them to be healthy and active.

Under our proposed tax credit, parents and guardians would be able to claim up to $500 in eligible expenses for a credit of $50 per child under 16 years of age or $100 for a child with a disability under age 18.

The tax credit builds on the federal children’s fitness tax credit but is different in two significant ways. First, our children’s activity tax credit would be refundable, meaning that low-income parents who pay little or no income tax would also be able to benefit, unlike the federal tax benefit. All Ontario parents could claim the tax credit on their annual income tax returns, beginning with the 2010 tax year. Any eligible expenses incurred on or after January 1, 2010, would qualify.

Secondly, the Ontario tax credit would cover a wide range of activities, not just sports. These activities include music, dance and art classes, as well as activities with a substantial focus on wilderness and the natural environment. Other activities include language instruction, enrichment or tutoring in academic subjects, and activities with a focus on helping children develop and use intellectual or interpersonal skills.

The criteria for fitness activities would be the same as for the federal children’s fitness tax credit. The activities would require a significant amount of physical activity that contributes to cardio-respiratory endurance and to one or more of the following: muscular strength, muscular endurance, flexibility and balance.

To be eligible for the credit, both fitness and non-fitness activities would have to be supervised and suitable for children. Furthermore, unlike the federal credit, the maximum amounts that may be claimed for the credit would be indexed to rise annually with the cost of living.

This new permanent tax credit would put $75 million each year back into the pockets of Ontario parents and would benefit more than 1.8 million children in about 1.1 million Ontario families.

This measure directly supports our Open Ontario plan by helping children stay healthy, active and productive so they can reach their full potential. This tax credit is the right thing to do for our kids, our economy and Ontario. I ask the honourable members to support this legislation so we can move forward to help Ontario families.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Responses?

Mr. Norm Miller: I’m pleased to have a chance to respond to this new bill that was just introduced by the Minister of Finance, the Children’s Activity Tax Credit Act, 2010. My response is that the government takes with one hand and then they give a little back with the other hand, but they’ve been doing a lot more taking than giving over the last number of years.

They’re talking about a $50 tax credit. Well, let’s look at some of the costs that have increased for families in the province of Ontario—of course the big one, most recently, being the HST. They’re going to be paying that 8% additional tax on the memberships, on hockey fees, on figure skating fees, soccer fees, on the gas used to drive to the soccer field or the hockey arena—and having had three kids who played hockey, I can tell you that we did an awful lot of driving around. I would suggest that that’s going to be far more than the $50 amount that the government is talking about now giving back.

You look at all the various ways this government has made things more expensive for Ontario families: the HST—I’ve mentioned that one—that’s on your hydro bills and gas bill; most recently, the same day that came in, the eco fees; the big one a couple of years back, the health tax, which was a huge, huge tax increase for families; and recently, as of September 1, of course, the government made changes to auto insurance, so now you pay the same or more and get less coverage. These are all additional costs for Ontario families, and now we find for kids in sporting activities, they’re going to be getting $50 back.

This seems to be a favourite technique of the government. They recently had the northern Ontario energy credit, and they also had cheques going out in the mail with the HST rebate. With that one maybe it’s part of their political strategy, because with the HST cheques there was also a nice letter from the Premier outlining all the supposed benefits of the policy. I recall that it listed off a whole bunch of things with the cheque mailed out to people.

I would wonder, when this one is refundable and they’re going to be getting a cheque, is there going to be another political letter going along with it, a message, with the upcoming election happening next year? I would be interested to know that.

When they passed the HST just last year, coming into effect July 1, why didn’t they just exempt children’s sporting activities? I know we had gyms coming around to the finance committee, asking if they could be exempt. They didn’t exempt them, but then they exempted the under-$4 purchases at Tim Horton’s, probably because there was more political push-back on that one. They’re exempting doughnuts and coffee but taxing sporting memberships under the HST.

Here we have this bill coming through. It’s a similar pattern to others. There will probably be a cheque in the mail with a political message, as I mentioned to you. That’s what happened with the HST cheques, and in that message, they were talking about how they were going to create all kinds of jobs. Well, since the HST has come into effect, we have actually lost jobs in Ontario—private sector jobs. That message hasn’t exactly been correct to this point.

It was just introduced now. We’ll have a chance to look at it. I don’t think there will be that much. It’s a fairly specific bill. I think it’s more about politics than anything else. Of course, families will look forward to getting any money they can back from this government because they have been paying so much more in so many different ways under the McGuinty government—as I say, there’s a long list of different things they’ve had to pay more for—and now they will be getting a tiny bit back with a nice political message, I’m sure, saying all the wonderful things that the McGuinty government is doing for them.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: It’s quite amazing to me. I’m surprised there isn’t a brass band out front, that there aren’t banners flying, that balloons have not been released that at last the millennium has been properly recognized. This is a pittance. This is an action by a finance minister who has taken money here, there and everywhere from the people of this province and, frankly, has decided to give them back a small, shiny rhinestone, something that gleams, something that you can go out and say, “We’re doing something for kids,” but in fact doesn’t deliver, doesn’t act on the big issues that parents and children are wrestling with every day.

My colleague Mr. Howard Hampton, just quickly looking at what he pays out now in expenses for his children to engage in hockey—the extra cost of the HST will more than eat up any of this refund. Parents who take their kids to soccer are going to look at HST increases in their costs. That will eat this up. A friend of mine teaches music in downtown Toronto in a school. In the school that she’s teaching in, when an instrument breaks, that instrument gets moved out of the band because they can’t get money to keep the instruments in shape.

You’re seeing, in fact, a decay in the arts in our schools, a decay that needs to be corrected, arrested, with actual investment. Instead, people who are in a position to put out $500 can, miracle of miracles, get back $50 next year.

I’m glad it’s an income tax credit, because that means that people who aren’t paying income tax, who don’t have that much money, will actually get cash back in hand. But where are they going to get that $500 to put down in the first place to wait until next year to get that refund? I don’t see it.

This summer, I had the opportunity to go door to door and talk to my constituents. I came across a number of families who were dealing with the cost of daycare. I know that this government will say that it has introduced full-day early learning, but I want to say to you that there are many parents who aren’t going to schools where that’s being introduced in the next year or two or three, who are paying $1,000 and more per child, who find that the expense of child care is crippling their family budget. And yet, the announcement today is of this shiny little bauble, this up-to-$50, don’t-spend-it-all-in-one-toy-store event.

When we talk to parents who need affordable daycare now, when we talk to parents who are going to get hit hard when they send their kids to hockey and pay the cost of the HST on that, when we talk to people who work with schools and look at the condition of the buildings—this morning I had an opportunity to talk to a friend of mine who is interested in renewable energy, solar panels on schools, and they’re doing a survey of roofs. Roof after roof was leaking, had structural problems and wasn’t fit, in the condition it was in, to actually have solar panels put on top of it.

Where is the money that is supposed to make sure those schools are in excellent shape because that’s where our children are?

This is a shell game: Under one large shell is an amount of money that is needed to actually deal with the needs of our children; under one very small shell is up to $50 to go back to parents who can afford to spend up to $500. Who is going to vote against giving parents and their children a small rebate? But let’s not kid ourselves, and let’s not kid anyone else. In terms of what this province needs and in terms of what the children and parents of this province need, this is totally inadequate.

PETITIONS

ONTARIO SOCIETY

FOR THE PREVENTION

OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

Mr. Ernie Hardeman: I have a petition to the provincial Parliament.

“Whereas the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals ... recently and unilaterally announced that it would euthanize all animals in its care in its Newmarket shelter, citing a ringworm outbreak as justification;

“Whereas the euthanasia plan was stopped in the face of repeated calls for a stay in the Legislature and by the public, but not until 99 animals had been killed;

“Whereas the Premier and Community Safety Minister Rick Bartolucci refused to act, claiming the provincial government has no jurisdiction over the OSPCA;

“Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Parliament of Ontario to immediately implement the resolution tabled at Queen’s Park by Newmarket–Aurora MPP Frank Klees on June 1, 2010, which reads as follows:

“‘That, in the opinion of this House, the Ontario Legislature should call on the government of Ontario to review the powers and authority granted to the OSPCA under the OSPCA Act and to make the necessary legislative changes to bring these powers under the authority of the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services to ensure that there is a clearly defined and effective provincial oversight of all animal shelter services in the province, and to separate the inspection and enforcement powers of the OSPCA from its functions as a charity providing animal shelter services.’”

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

DEVELOPMENT IN

VILLAGES OF HEART LAKE

Mr. Ted Chudleigh: I’m pleased to present a petition with over 6,000 names on it.

“Petition to the Legislature of Ontario:

“We, the undersigned, voice our disapproval of the Ontario Municipal Board’s decision of April 15, 2010, to build a development which includes six high-density, high-rise apartment buildings in the Villages of Heart Lake. This is a small tract in the centre of an area of single-family dwellings, and this proposed development simply does not belong in this area. Our officials unanimously rejected this proposal, yet the OMB, which is not an elected body and supplies no infrastructure support to the city, has ignored the wishes of both council and the residents by approving this development. We are upset and would like this stopped now.”

NORTHERN ONTARIO DEVELOPMENT

Mr. Howard Hampton: I have a petition from 188 members of Kingfisher Lake First Nation, and it reads as follows:

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the Legislative Assembly of Ontario proposes to pass Bill 191, the Far North Act, it violates the treaties and disrespects our jurisdiction. It is not a true partnership. It imposes a massive, interconnected protected area over Nishnawbe-Aski Nation ... homelands without any compensation. If Bill 191 passes, we will not recognize it;

“Whereas we, the people of Kingfisher Lake First Nation within Nishnawbe-Aski Nation, have not yet been consulted and accommodated;

“Whereas we, the people of Kingfisher Lake within Nishnawbe-Aski Nation, have not given free prior and informed consent to Bill 191, all development and protection decisions within Kingfisher Lake within NAN territory require the free, prior and informed consent of the people;

“Whereas we, the people of Kingfisher Lake within Nishnawbe-Aski Nation will make the final land use decisions, Ontario has an obligation to honour and respect Treaty number 9 and Treaty number 5 and First Nations’ inherent jurisdiction. We will continue to work on local, community-driven land planning initiatives based on our jurisdiction; and

“Whereas we call on all interested parties, including environmental organizations and industry, to withdraw their support for Bill 191;

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

“To oppose third reading of Bill 191, the Far North Act, and call on Ontario to withdraw it;

“To engage in honourable consultation with the First Nations whose homelands and treaty and aboriginal rights are impacted by Bill 191; and

“To obtain the free, prior and informed consent of the First Nations whose homelands and treaty and aboriginal rights are impacted by Bill 191.”

As I indicated, this has been signed by 188 members of Kingfisher Lake First Nation. I have affixed my signature, as well.

SERVICES FOR THE DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

Mrs. Julia Munro: “To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas almost 12,000 Ontario citizens who have an intellectual disability are on waiting lists for residential supports;

“Whereas another 7,000 individuals are waiting for other supports;

“Whereas 80% of the 1,500 parents providing primary care for their adult children waiting for residential services are over the age of 70;

“Whereas the government of Ontario made a commitment in 2007 to provide a 2% base funding increase to agencies providing developmental services every year up to 2010-11;

“Whereas the government has decided not to provide the 2% funding increase promised for the current year;

“Whereas the failure to honour this funding commitment will cause further deterioration of supports and services for people who have an intellectual disability;

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

“That the government of Ontario reinstate the 2% base funding increase promised four years ago to ... providers in the developmental services sector.”

I have affixed my signature.

ONTARIO SOCIETY

FOR THE PREVENTION

OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

Mr. Ted Arnott: I have a petition that I’d like to present to the Legislature of Ontario. It reads as follows:

“Whereas the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals ... recently and unilaterally announced that it would euthanize all animals in its care at its Newmarket shelter, citing a ringworm outbreak as justification;

“Whereas the euthanasia plan was stopped in the face of repeated calls for a stay in the Legislature and by the public, but not until 99 animals had been killed;

“Whereas the Premier and Community Safety Minister Rick Bartolucci refused to act, claiming the provincial government has no jurisdiction over the OSPCA;

“Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Parliament of Ontario to immediately implement the resolution tabled at Queen’s Park by Newmarket–Aurora MPP Frank Klees on June 1, 2010, which reads as follows:

“‘That, in the opinion of this House, the Ontario Legislature” should “call on the government of Ontario to review the powers and authority granted to the OSPCA under the OSPCA Act and to make the necessary legislative changes to bring those powers under the authority of the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services to ensure that there is a clearly defined and effective provincial oversight of all animal shelter services in the province, and to separate the inspection and enforcement powers of the OSPCA from its functions as a charity providing animal shelter services.’”

This has been signed by a number of my constituents. I want to thank Paulette Young for bringing this issue to my attention.

NORTHERN ONTARIO DEVELOPMENT

Mr. Howard Hampton: I have a petition from 119 members of North Spirit Lake First Nation. The petition reads as follows:

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas we oppose Bill 191, the Far North Act, and call on the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to withdraw it;

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

“Bill 191 violates the treaties and disrespects our jurisdiction. It imposes a massive interconnected, protected area over our homelands without any compensation. It splits our northern First Nations from our southern First Nations.

“Ontario has an obligation to honour and respect our treaties and our inherent jurisdiction. All development and protection decisions within NAN territory require the free, prior and informed consent of NAN First Nations.

“We call on the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to immediately withdraw Bill 191 and, instead, initiate a respectful government-to-government dialogue with NAN First Nations.”

As I said, this is signed by 119 members of the North Spirit Lake First Nation, and I have affixed my signature as well.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Mr. Gerry Martiniuk: I have a petition signed by employees of Waterloo Region District School Board, which reads:

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas Cambridge Memorial Hospital and other hospitals in the Waterloo region are experiencing substantial increased demands due to population growth; and

“Whereas the McGuinty government’s freeze on new long-term-care facilities has resulted in additional long-term-care patients in our hospitals; and

“Whereas the McGuinty government’s cuts to hospital funding have resulted in a dangerous environment for patients and staff in Cambridge and across Ontario;

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

“That the McGuinty government meet its obligations to introduce a population-needs-based funding formula for hospitals, as has been done in other Canadian provinces.”

Pursuant to the rules, I affix my name thereto.

NORTHERN ONTARIO DEVELOPMENT

Mr. Howard Hampton: I have a number of petitions from Wunnumin Lake First Nation, and I would like to read them now. The petition reads as follows:

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the Legislative Assembly of Ontario proposes to pass Bill 191, the Far North Act, [and] it violates the treaties and disrespects our jurisdiction. It is not a true partnership. It imposes a massive, interconnected, designated protected area over Nishnawbe-Aski Nation homelands without any compensation. If Bill 191 passes, we will not recognize it.

“Whereas we, the people of Wunnumin Lake First Nation within the Nishnawbe-Aski Nation, have not been consulted and accommodated;

“Whereas we, the people of Wunnumin Lake First Nation within the Nishnawbe-Aski Nation, have not given our free, prior and informed consent to Bill 191, [and] all development and protection decisions within Wunnumin Lake First Nation of Nishnawbe-Aski Nation require the free, prior and informed consent of the people;

“Whereas we, the people of Wunnumin Lake First Nation within the Nishnawbe-Aski Nation, will make the final land use decisions. Ontario has an obligation to honour and respect Treaty number 9 and Treaty number 5 and First Nations’ inherent jurisdiction. We will continue to work on our local, community-driven land use planning initiatives based on our jurisdiction;

“Whereas we call on all interested parties, including environmental organizations and industry, to withdraw their support for Bill 191;

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

“To oppose the third reading of Bill 191, the Far North Act, and call on Ontario to withdraw it;

“To engage in honourable consultation with the First Nations whose homelands and treaty and aboriginal rights are impacted by Bill 191; and

“To obtain the free, prior and informed consent of the First Nations whose homelands and treaty and aboriginal rights are impacted by Bill 191.”

As I indicated, this petition has been signed by 293 members of Wunnumin Lake First Nation. I have attached my signature as well.

TAXATION

Mr. Gerry Martiniuk: I have a petition regarding the HST.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas Dalton McGuinty will increase taxes yet again on Canada Day 2010 with his new combined 13% GST, at a time when families and businesses can least afford it; and

“Whereas Dalton McGuinty’s new 13% combined GST will increase the cost of goods and services that families and businesses buy every day, such as:”—and there’s a number of examples, including haircuts, dry cleaning, taxi fares, train fares;

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

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

DIAGNOSTIC SERVICES

M me France Gélinas: I have a petition from the people of Nickel Belt, and it reads as follows:

“Whereas the Ontario government is making ... PET scanning a publicly insured health service available to cancer and cardiac patients under” certain “conditions...; and

“Whereas” since “October 2009, insured PET scans” are “performed in Ottawa, London, Toronto, Hamilton and Thunder Bay; and

“Whereas the city of Greater Sudbury is a hub for health care” services “in northeastern Ontario, with the Sudbury Regional Hospital, its regional cancer program and the Northern Ontario School of Medicine;”

They petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario “to make PET scans available through the Sudbury Regional Hospital, thereby serving and providing equitable access to the citizens of northeastern Ontario.”

I fully support this petition, will affix my name to it and send it to the Clerk with Thomas.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

WATER OPPORTUNITIES AND WATER

CONSERVATION ACT, 2010 /

LOI DE 2010 SUR LE DÉVELOPPEMENT

DES TECHNOLOGIES DE L’EAU

ET LA CONSERVATION DE L’EAU

Ms. Smith, on behalf of Mr. Wilkinson, moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 72,

An Act to enact the Water Opportunities Act, 2010 and to amend other Acts in respect of water conservation and other matters / Projet de loi 72, Loi édictant la Loi de 2010 sur le développement des technologies de l’eau et modifiant d’autres lois en ce qui concerne la conservation de l’eau et d’autres questions.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Debate?

Hon. Monique M. Smith: I’ll be sharing my time with the member from Oak Ridges–Markham.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The member from Oak Ridges–Markham.

Ms. Helena Jaczek: It is my honour to rise today to begin second reading debate on the McGuinty government’s proposed Water Opportunities and Water Conservation Act.

In this great province, we are blessed with vast quantities of fresh water. The very name “Ontario” has its roots in a number of aboriginal languages that describe “a beautiful lake.”

From the Great Lakes, which contain close to one fifth of the planet’s fresh surface water, to the thousands of rivers, lakes and streams that are a unique part of our geography, Ontario is fortunate to have water resources that are the envy of the world. At the same time, we need to understand that this resource is not limitless. We need to respect what we have and use it more responsibly.

Water has played a fundamental role throughout Ontario’s history in building our prosperity and our quality of life. It enabled early trade and transportation. It was the foundation of our mill towns and essential to our farms, our fisheries and our factories. It adds immeasurably to our quality of life and enhances our enjoyment of our natural environment.

And water will help guide our future. Exporting our technology for clean water is a key part of the McGuinty government’s Open Ontario plan, seeking to support and develop Ontario’s existing strengths such as our banking system, centred in Toronto and envied around the globe, and one of the strongest post-secondary school systems in the world.

Protecting and conserving our water will be among the most important actions we can take to ensure the continuing success of our province for our economic vitality and environmental health.

Clean, safe water is in critical demand around the world. That demand is just going to continue to rise, spurred on by climate change, population growth and urbanization. In the next 20 years, experts predict a 40% gap between global supply and demand for water, a crisis in the making of extreme proportions. Some reports indicate that in 15 years’ time, 1.8 billion people will live in regions of water scarcity.

Along with the growing demand for water comes the demand for technologies and processes that can make the most of this scarce and valuable resource—technologies that can treat water and make it safe, innovative approaches that can conserve water, and technologies that can make the most of the water that is available.

The Conference Board of Canada estimates the market for clean water technology at $400 billion and growing at a rate of 15% annually. Ontario cannot afford to be left behind. What we are proposing is to make Ontario a North American leader in the water and waste water technology sector. Let me reiterate what Premier McGuinty has already clearly stated: We are not selling our water; we are capitalizing on our know-how and our leading-edge technology.

This proposed legislation, if passed, would make Ontario a key jurisdiction in the water technology sector much in the way the Green Energy and Green Economy Act has moved Ontario to the forefront on renewable energy, with significant economic benefits for Ontarians and their families.

Our proposed Water Opportunities and Water Conservation Act would, if passed, lay the groundwork for innovation in what is the fastest-growing segment in the environmental industry. It would help to support the growth and expansion of Ontario water tech businesses and create good jobs for Ontarians in an industry that already employs close to 22,000 people.

Let me outline again for my colleagues the three outcomes we want to achieve. The proposed Water Opportunities and Water Conservation Act, if passed, would, first, assist in making Ontario a North American leader in the development and sale of technologies for water treatment and water conservation; second, encourage sustainable infrastructure and conservation planning, including using innovative technologies to solve water, waste water and storm water infrastructure challenges; and third, encourage Ontarians to use water more wisely. I’d like to expand on each of these in turn, beginning with the first point: how we envision putting Ontario’s know-how in water technology on the map.

One of the first steps would involve establishing a new water partnership called the Water Technology Acceleration Project—WaterTAP for short—a new non-crown corporation that would support research and development as well as the commercialization of new technologies and innovations in Ontario’s water sector. This new corporation would bring together government, industry, academic and financial experts to support the creation and growth of globally competitive companies.

The Water Technology Acceleration Project is a key component of our strategy. It would provide a trusted source of information about the Ontario water sector and help build the made-in-Ontario brand through marketing and global outreach, and would, on the request of the Minister of Research and Innovation, provide advice on such matters as product labelling and technology verification. While some Ontario companies are already acknowledged leaders in certain areas of clean water technology such as ultraviolet disinfection, compact sewage treatment and plant design, the industry is composed of some 300 small firms.

This project would bring all these companies, academics and government together, helping to create an economy of scale that benefits our environment and our economy. By connecting people from different companies and from different research and technology centres, we can identify areas for co-operation and collaboration.

If directed by the Minister of Research and Innovation, the corporation could coordinate and host an international conference on water, showcasing Ontario’s water tech companies and linking potential buyers from around the world with our products and services. It would also help identify demonstration and early adoption opportunities, as well as provide advice to government. This would help spur on great made-in-Ontario products and services and take our innovative and new water technologies from the drawing board to the marketplace.

Along with this new corporation, the act, if passed, would expand the mandate of the Ontario Clean Water Agency, which already has substantial expertise in water and waste water technology, thereby allowing the agency to play a leadership role in supporting innovation, facilitating the demonstration of Ontario-based technologies and supporting the water technology acceleration project outside Ontario.

The second outcome I spoke about earlier would allow for the creation of an integrated approach to municipal water infrastructure planning in order to achieve long-term sustainability. Water efficiency is the most cost-effective way to generate water and waste water capacity. In fact, the cost of conservation programs may be as little as a quarter of the cost of new infrastructure.

Some forward-looking municipalities in Ontario are already planning for long-term sustainability and have developed their own forward-thinking water conservation and efficiency plans. They understand that water conservation planning saves water and costs, both infrastructure costs and energy costs. For example, in 1999 the city of Guelph was faced with having to source new water supplies to meet the growing needs of residents. Instead, they chose to implement a water conservation and efficiency program, including incentives such as toilet rebate programs, rain barrel programs and public education.

Investment in water conservation since 2006 has resulted in water savings worth up to $7.3 million in the avoided cost of a new water supply.

Guelph was also faced with a decision in 2005 to build a new waste water treatment plant to meet its capacity needs, anticipated to cost $30 million. By investing $1.5 million to date in optimization of their current system instead, the city expects to avoid the need for a new plant.

The proposed act would help municipalities improve the efficiency of municipal water infrastructure and services by encouraging municipalities to look for innovative cost-effective solutions to solve water, waste water and storm water challenges, including water conservation; optimize systems and improve water conservation; identify opportunities to demonstrate and implement new and emerging Ontario water technologies and services; and move toward measures and targets to demonstrate progress.

Let me now turn to conservation on the part of individuals, the third outcome we wish to achieve. More than half of Ontarians believe that fresh water is our most important natural resource. At the same time, they may not be fully aware of the need to conserve and safeguard our water since we have always had such a good supply virtually at our fingertips. In fact, the average person in our province uses around 267 litres of water every day. Compare that to the average in countries such as Germany, the Netherlands and France, where people use about 150 litres per day.

Moving towards a similar target in Ontario is attainable. One of the key ways to do that is to help people understand how they can do their part to conserve water.

The proposed act, if passed, would help encourage efforts to reduce Ontario’s residential water use significantly. Using water efficiently is one of the most cost-effective ways to address water and waste water needs. Our proposed act, if passed, would help encourage efforts that significantly reduce residential water use. It would give the government the authority to require standardized information on water bills to help people understand how much water they use and allow them to track their progress as they reduce their use.

We are also proposing, for example, water efficiency standards for more consumer products, such as shower heads, to help people use less water and save money. As a complementary measure, we would also consider opportunities to bring water labelling to Ontario. That would make it easier for people to find and purchase high-performance water-efficient products, much the way the WaterSense program works in the United States.

The residential sector accounts for 40% of all energy used in Ontario, and heating water is typically the second-largest consumer of energy in buildings. Improved water efficiency will save not only water but also energy well into the future.

A number of Ontario municipalities have identified water and waste water facilities as significant energy consumers, reportedly accounting for between 25% and 60% of their respective municipal electricity bills, so one of the key goals of our proposed act would be to encourage the use of innovative water technologies and services to reduce the use of water and energy.

Something many people don’t realize is that much of the cost of providing clean water and treating waste water is the cost of energy associated with these activities. New technology is often much more efficient, using much less water to run the same systems, potentially providing cost savings to municipalities and ultimately to consumers.

It would enable the government to demonstrate leadership through considering water conservation in procurement and through water conservation planning by all public entities, such as universities, schools and hospitals.

The proposed act, if passed, would also amend the Building Code Act to ensure consideration of water conservation and expand the mandate of the Building Code Energy Advisory Council.

We are talking about moving Ontario forward in a way that will help us build a sustainable future, support leading clean tech innovations, and generate new good jobs well into the future.

When it comes to Ontario’s water tech sector, we already have a number of successful and innovative companies winning recognition for their products and services. We intend to take that to the next level.

Ontario innovations are already at work around the world, in Orange county, California, in northern Holland, and in places like Saudi Arabia. We want to build on any existing synergies among small, medium and large water tech businesses, academia, researchers and financial experts, to connect all the dots so our water tech companies can connect with the world. Under our