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

October 31, 2006

38th Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2006-Oct-31 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Tuesday 31 October 2006 Mardi 31 octobre 2006

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

GO TRANSIT

LONDON TRAINING CENTRE

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

SMALL BUSINESS

GOVERNMENT'S RECORD

TRANSPORT SCOLAIRE

CORNWALL ECONOMY

AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY

ACADEMIC TESTING

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

GENERAL GOVERNMENT

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

VISITORS

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

SCHOOL FACILITIES /

INSTALLATIONS SCOLAIRES

INVESTMENT IN ONTARIO

SCHOOL FACILITIES

INVESTMENT IN ONTARIO

SCHOOL FACILITIES

ORAL QUESTIONS

NATIVE LAND DISPUTE

ONTARIO LOTTERY AND

GAMING CORP.

FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL

FISCAL POLICIES

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

SCHOOL FACILITIES

ALCOHOL AND DRUG TREATMENT

GREENBELT

TORONTO EXPO 2015

LONG-TERM CARE

WATER QUALITY

AGRICULTURE PROGRAMS

HYDRO RATES

PETITIONS

LANDFILL

COMMUNITY MEDIATION

WATER QUALITY

FAIR ACCESS TO PROFESSIONS

HEALTH PREMIUMS

PUBLIC TRANSIT

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

HEALTH PREMIUMS

LANDFILL

WATER QUALITY

PROPERTY RIGHTS

CAFETERIA FOOD GUIDELINES

IMMIGRANTS' SKILLS

ORDERS OF THE DAY

BUDGET MEASURES ACT, 2006 (NO. 2) /

LOI DE 2006 SUR LES MESURES

BUDGÉTAIRES (NO 2)

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

GO TRANSIT

Mr. John O'Toole (Durham): I rise in this House today to remind the members of the scary record of this McGuinty government. Their more than 50 broken promises continue to haunt Ontario.

More seriously, tackling gridlock is just one of their many broken promises. It's clear that gridlock is growing and that this government still has no concrete plan, but they would say anything to get elected.

For example, yesterday commuters had to cope with signal malfunctions at the Mimico GO station that caused cancellations and delays for most of the day. The minister should know that GO Transit is a vitally important part of solving the gridlock

problem in the GTA. You should also know that on a typical day GO moves 190,000 passengers; that's 48 million passengers per year who rely on GO Transit rail and bus services.

The GO Transit board has a vision to revitalize Union Station, as well as their tracks, bridges and platforms, and to reorganize and modernize the signal system. They're all examples of the GO organization's

leadership and initiative. But GO can't do it alone. The GO board and riders together want support from the McGuinty government. We haven't had much of a plan coming forward recently from this government with respect to GO Transit. We've seen

gridlock increase and service levels decrease.

On Halloween, and every day, we need a government that --

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

LONDON TRAINING CENTRE

Ms. Deborah Matthews (London North Centre): Today I'd like to recognize a terrific non-profit organization in my riding of London North Centre. Under the leadership of David Corke and Mary

Whitaker, the London Training Centre is partnering with employers and other community agencies in London to help unemployed and at-risk youth, women, new Canadians and older unemployed workers to develop their skills so they can find jobs,

independence and a brighter future.

The London Training Centre has formed a strong partnership with the Western Fair Association to train people in food service and hospitality programs, fields with a high demand for new workers. Among other

things, the Western Fair donates the use of their industrial kitchens to the program.

Last week I met three extraordinary and determined women who have graduated. Samina Malik is a new Canadian and a single mother of four children who is now working in a high school cafeteria. Laurel Helmuth

dropped out of school, but thanks to this program is now working at a photography studio and is headed to college. Carol Kechego got a job at Kellogg's after a long absence from the workforce.

These are just three of the 1,000 people who have graduated from the London Training Centre in the last three years, 92% of whom have found employment. Recently, the Ontario Trillium Foundation awarded this

organization a grant to expand this very successful program to 12 other communities across the province.

I congratulate Samina, Laurel, Carol and the great team at the London Training Centre and the Western Fair Association and thank them for helping make our community stronger.

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

Mr. Ernie Hardeman (Oxford): The McGuinty government has once again demonstrated that they don't deserve the trust of the people of Ontario. In the spring, the McGuinty government sent cheques

out to municipalities with no strings attached but said that they trusted the municipalities would use the money on roads and bridges as intended. But in the same situation, when the federal government sent a cheque to Ontario for affordable

housing, the McGuinty government demonstrated they do not deserve to be trusted. The McGuinty government had a chance to fix their broken promise on affordable housing, but they chose to lock $392 million in the bank instead of keeping their

promise.

Their high taxes and economic policies are costing Ontario jobs and increasing the need for affordable housing, but the McGuinty government is refusing to spend the money. They've tried to blame the delay on the

federal government, but the facts are clear. The federal government paid their share. The hold-up isn't the federal government. The hold-up is the fact that the McGuinty cabinet is keeping the money locked in a trust fund while they debate whether

to take some of the money and use it in other projects. Maybe they're saving the money to take another letter out of the OLGC or to give more pay increases to their friends.

The Liberals have no problem announcing the money and doing the photo ops. For once, the McGuinty government should follow through on a promise and spend the money, as announced, on affordable housing.

SMALL BUSINESS

Mr. Phil McNeely (Ottawa-Orléans): I rise in the House today, in the spirit of Ontario's Salute to Small Business Month, to congratulate business owners and young entrepreneurs in

Ottawa-Orléans who have turned their ideas into successful businesses.

On October 18, I was pleased to attend the fifth annual People's Choice Business Awards held by the Orléans Chamber of Commerce. I watched with pride as several businesses in my riding were honoured for

their hard work. Among the many recipients that evening was a young man named Remi Paquette, who started his business as a student at the University of Ottawa. He took home the awards for technology business of the year and young business person

of the year.

His success can be attributed in part to the McGuinty government's strong support for Ontario's young entrepreneurs. To date we have provided $1.7 million to the Canadian Youth Business Foundation. As the

Minister of Small Business and Entrepreneurship mentioned the other day, this financial support will help our youth to get their ideas off the ground and into the marketplace. It is estimated that this funding will create 2,500 new jobs and

generate $50 million in revenue over the next four years. By supporting our young entrepreneurs and future business leaders, this government is keeping Ontario's economy strong and prosperous.

I commend Mr. Paquette for his hard work and vision. I would also like to congratulate Judith Cane, who was voted business person of the year and professional adviser of the year, and all the other individuals

and businesses that were honoured for their success at this awards ceremony.

GOVERNMENT'S RECORD

Mr. Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln): I'm pleased to rise today, on Halloween, to remind Ontarians of the McGuinty Liberal government's scary record in the province to date. After three years of being

in power in Ontario, the Liberals are continuing to be haunted by their bevy of broken promises like, "I won't raise your taxes," "I won't raise your hydro rates," "We'll have a hard cap of 20 students for early grades and stop school closures."

And remember that old goblin that continues to nibble at their heels, that they would balance the budget every year of the mandate? And let's not forget the Liberals' attempt to rule from the grave by extending their partisan Liberal appointments

to years beyond their term, or the fact that Ontario is now becoming a graveyard for manufacturing jobs in Dalton McGuinty's Ontario.

The McGuinty Liberals have adopted a trick-or-treat approach to governing this province: If they can't trick people by saying anything to get elected, they will offer a treat in the form of some timely

announcement, only to be broken after the next election.

There's no doubt that there has been an eerie pattern of behaviour by the McGuinty Liberals. They don't act like a governing party. Instead, they blame everything on somebody else, namely, the federal government

and ghosts of governments past -- with one exception: Bob Rae no longer haunts the Liberal government. He has actually moved over to that side of the Legislature, which makes statements of Finance Minister Greg Sorbara condemning Bob Rae only a

few years ago very ironic. Be afraid, be very afraid.

TRANSPORT SCOLAIRE

M. Gilles Bisson (Timmins-Baie James): I want to start my comments by applauding that one. That was pretty good.

J'aimerais amener à l'attention de l'Assemblée une situation qui a commencé cette année avec le gouvernement provincial de M. McGuinty qui, encore, ne comprend pas les enjeux quand ça

vient aux difficultés pour les jeunes du nord de l'Ontario.

On sait tous qu'il y a des écoles, telles que l'école Jules-Léger à Ottawa, qui offrent des services aux enfants en difficulté pour avancer leur apprentissage à travers le

système scolaire. Dans le passé, la manière dont ça marchait, c'est que les conseils locaux organisaient le transport pour être capables de transporter leurs jeunes directement à l'école provinciale d'Ottawa.

Pour nous, c'était une bonne affaire parce que notre conseil, le conseil scolaire catholique des Grandes Rivières de notre région, avait un très bon service pour assister ces jeunes-là et pour être capable de les

transporter d'une manière qui faisait du bon sens pour eux et pour leurs familles.

Le gouvernement provincial de M. McGuinty, avec l'ancien ministre M. Gerard Kennedy, a décidé qu'ils vont centraliser le transport pour tous ces jeunes et ont donné l'autorité de

centraliser ces services à travers le conseil scolaire catholique d'Ottawa. Je peux dire que c'est un problème pour nous, parce que le service à cette heure, qui est mené, c'est un système qui est moindre de ce à quoi

on est habitués, et le conseil scolaire catholique des Grandes Rivières offrait un meilleur service.

Je dis à la ministre de l'Éducation, vous avez une chance d'être capable de renverser cette situation. On vous demande de le faire pour le bon de nos jeunes de notre région.

CORNWALL ECONOMY

Mr. Jim Brownell (Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh): It is well known in this House that my riding of Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh has faced a number of job losses in the last year. However,

rather than taking this as a fatal blow, the people of communities like Chesterville, Iroquois and Cornwall have chosen to take this as a chance to reinvent themselves.

This government has been a willing partner in this time of transition. Initiatives like the forgiveness of the downtown loan, hospital capital projects and key investments that this government has undertaken in

skills training are starting to pay off. There is much still to be done, but new businesses are starting to settle in Cornwall.

I would like to take this opportunity to welcome Pharmetics Inc., Cornwall's newest business. Pharmetics is a company that makes and distributes over-the-counter drug products as well as vitamins, minerals and

herbal supplements for companies such as Costco, Loblaws and Shoppers Drug Mart.

The pharmaceutical sector is one in the process of expansion and will find that Cornwall and its people create a perfect environment to develop their interests. Businesses like Pharmetics Inc. will play an

important role in the transitional economies of communities across Ontario like Cornwall. With the strategic support of this government, these businesses will find plenty of opportunity in this province.

It gives me great pleasure to welcome Pharmetics to Cornwall, and I look forward to a long and positive relationship with them in the future.

AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY

Mr. Kevin Daniel Flynn (Oakville): Today I rise before the House to celebrate the October 16 announcement at the Ford assembly plant in my riding of Oakville.

With Wayne Gretzky on hand, Ford announced that the two new models, the Ford Edge and the Lincoln MKX, will begin production in Oakville. This is fantastic news for the almost 4,000 people employed at the plant.

These hard-working men and women can breathe a much-deserved sigh of relief, thanks in part to the $100-million investment made by the McGuinty government in support of that plant's $1-billion conversion to a flexible manufacturing operation.

The plant has returned to a two-shift workday. Ford forecasts production of over 1,200 vehicles each and every day, with a total of 250,000 vehicles produced in 48 weeks. To add to this fantastic news is a

forecasted addition of a third vehicle to the plant's production in 2008.

This is just the beginning of great things to come for Oakville and Ontario as a result of the Liberal initiatives that have already generated over $7 billion in investments in the Ontario auto industry.

I'm proud to be part of a government committed to supporting the auto industry. We should all celebrate this fantastic news and the promise and hope it brings to the Ontario economy and its continued strength

and prosperity.

ACADEMIC TESTING

Mr. Peter Fonseca (Mississauga East): Just last month our government, in concert with EQAO, released another round of testing results for our schools here in the great province of Ontario. These

outcomes are a testament to the continued commitment our government has shown since we took office back in 2003. The results are a far cry from the Conservative days where there were constant classroom disruptions and slashes to government

funding. Instead, Ontario schools have shown an overall average increase of 10% in their test results.

A perfect example of these results is being seen in a school in my riding of Mississauga East. The third grade classes of Thornwood Public School have shown a dramatic overall average increase from 44% to a

whopping 89% in tested areas of reading, writing and mathematics since we took office in 2003. Each member of this school's faculty, parents and especially the children should be applauded for their efforts and their ongoing commitment to better

education.

I am reminded of a quote by the Greek philosopher Plato: "The direction in which education starts a man will determine his future life."

Mr. Kormos: What about women?

Mr. Fonseca: And women, as the member from Niagara says.

The Ministry of Education should be congratulated on the hard work they continue to do on a daily basis to provide the direction our children need to prepare themselves for a positive future.

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

GENERAL GOVERNMENT

Mrs. Linda Jeffrey (Brampton Centre): Speaker, I beg leave to present a report from the standing committee on general government and move its adoption.

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

Bill 148,

An Act to amend the Highway Traffic Act respecting the use of seat belts / Projet de loi 148, Loi modifiant le Code de la route en ce qui concerne le port de la ceinture de sécurité.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Shall the report be received and adopted? Agreed.

The bill is therefore ordered for third reading.

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

Hon. David Caplan (Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal, Deputy Government House Leader): I move that pursuant to standing order 9(c)(i), the House shall meet from 6:45 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. on

Tuesday, October 31, 2006, for the purpose of considering government business.

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

All those in favour will say "aye."

All opposed will say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1348 to 1353.

The Speaker: Mr. Caplan has moved government notice of motion number 220. All those in favour will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

Arnott, Ted

Arthurs, Wayne

Balkissoon, Bas

Barrett, Toby

Bartolucci, Rick

Bentley, Christopher

Bradley, James J.

Broten, Laurel C.

Brownell, Jim

Bryant, Michael

Cansfield, Donna H.

Caplan, David

Chambers, Mary Anne V.

Colle, Mike

Crozier, Bruce

Delaney, Bob

Dhillon, Vic

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duguid, Brad

Flynn, Kevin Daniel

Fonseca, Peter

Gerretsen, John

Hardeman, Ernie

Hoy, Pat

Hudak, Tim

Jeffrey, Linda

Klees, Frank

Kular, Kuldip

Levac, Dave

Martiniuk, Gerry

Matthews, Deborah

Mauro, Bill

McNeely, Phil

Meilleur, Madeleine

Miller, Norm

Milloy, John

Mitchell, Carol

Munro, Julia

Orazietti, David

Patten, Richard

Peters, Steve

Phillips, Gerry

Pupatello, Sandra

Qaadri, Shafiq

Racco, Mario G.

Ramal, Khalil

Rinaldi, Lou

Ruprecht, Tony

Sandals, Liz

Scott, Laurie

Smith, Monique

Sorbara, Gregory S.

Tory, John

Van Bommel, Maria

Watson, Jim

Witmer, Elizabeth

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Zimmer, David

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

Nays

Bisson, Gilles

Chudleigh, Ted

DiNovo, Cheri

Elliott, Christine

Horwath, Andrea

Kormos, Peter

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

Murdoch, Bill

O'Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Prue, Michael

Tabuns, Peter

Yakabuski, John

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 59; the nays are 14.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

VISITORS

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): We have with us in the Speaker's gallery today two chief whips from the Parliament of Ghana. They are the Honourable Osei Kyei Mensah-Bonsu, the majority

chief whip, and the Honourable John Tia, minority chief whip. Please join me in welcoming our guests.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

SCHOOL FACILITIES /

INSTALLATIONS SCOLAIRES

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne (Minister of Education): The McGuinty government understands that a school is much more than a building for teaching and learning. Our schools should serve as hubs for

Ontario's communities, improving our quality of life and building the future prosperity of our people. That's why I'm delighted today to announce a new government investment that will build approximately 100 new schools across the province over

the next few years.

One hundred new schools will be built with $1 billion worth of funding: $700 million will be invested to replace schools that are in poor condition as part of the government's comprehensive $4-billion Good

Places to Learn initiative to renew Ontario's schools; $220 million will be invested to ensure that French-language school boards can provide schools in areas where Franco-Ontarians live; and another $137 million will be invested in new school

construction for school boards experiencing pockets of growth in new residential areas.

These 100 new schools are in addition to the 200 that have already been opened or are in construction under the McGuinty government.

Le soutien aux écoles en tant que pivots communautaires et l'amélioration des environnements d'apprentissage pour les élèves font

partie des mesures que prend le gouvernement McGuinty pour

appuyer chaque élève et pour oeuvrer du côté des familles ontariennes qui veulent avoir la meilleure éducation publique pour leurs enfants.

A key priority of the McGuinty government has been to keep good schools open. Immediately upon taking office, the government asks school boards to put a moratorium on school closures. This pause allowed the

government to develop a new tool for boards to empower local decision-making on school closures.

The new pupil accommodation review guidelines that we released today will ensure that capital planning decisions are made with the meaningful participation of the community and that those decisions are based

on the school's value to the students and to the community.

No longer will parents and community members fight to be heard, no longer will they struggle to get the information they need and no longer will they feel that the process has been rushed through because the

decision was already made.

Thanks to these new guidelines and our government's investments, school boards will be able to close some of the schools that are in poor condition and build or expand schools to replace them.

Les conseils scolaires et les parents participeront aux décisions sur ce qui arrivera aux installations scolaires de leur région.

We want to make sure that all students go to school in a safe, healthy and vibrant learning environment. These guidelines are just one part of many initiatives this government is undertaking, including new

schools, school repairs and new programs, that will help us achieve that goal. By fixing our schools, we're creating good places to learn and helping students across the province to reach their full potential. Because, if we reach every student

and help them achieve their full potential, we're working to ensure a strong and prosperous Ontario for us all.

INVESTMENT IN ONTARIO

Hon. Sandra Pupatello (Minister of Economic Development and Trade, minister responsible for women's issues): It gives me great pleasure to announce to this House another outstanding investment

in Ontario. The Premier, the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Leona Dombrowsky, and I were on hand for the groundbreaking of yet another great investment in Ontario, and I say "great" on purpose. Kellogg's will build a breakfast cereal

production plant in Belleville -- congratulations to Belleville -- the first of its kind to be developed by the company in North America in 20 years, and they're doing it right here in Ontario.

This is great news for Belleville and the surrounding area. It means hundreds of new jobs and many opportunities for workers and their families.

Kellogg's has an outstanding reputation, with 100 years of global success. This year they're celebrating their 100th anniversary. It instills a strong culture of continuous improvement -- a level of innovation

that our government aggressively supports through Ontario's advanced manufacturing investment strategy.

As a government, we are helping companies position themselves as global leaders so they will continue to have success here in our province by creating good jobs and generating wealth in our communities. This

is another great Ontario success story that will help attract more investment and create high-value jobs for families. It tells us we're moving in the right direction when we continue to win major investments like this one, at a time when

jurisdictions around the world are competing head-to-head.

This is a great show of confidence in Ontario's economy, in our future, and in our agriculture and manufacturing sectors, a workforce that has given Kellogg's cause to invest more in Ontario. It confirms

Ontario is a great place to invest, and that's a strong message, one that we are taking around the world. I hope you're going to indulge us when I say, in the great words of Tony the Tiger, this is grrreat.

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

Mr. Ted Chudleigh (Halton): Kellogg's new facility is great news to the folks in Belleville, especially the 80 people who just lost their jobs at GH Packaging and Nordenia International when

they closed their doors in September; it will be welcome news to the families employed by Monico Industrial Cleaners, who are all out of work with the announced closing of their facility in Belleville; and there will be yet another 145 families

looking for work in Belleville once Lipton-Unilever closes its doors forever, as it has announced.

This government continues to ignore the real issues faced by businesses and investors in Ontario. We are all growing weary of their policy of saying anything to get elected. This government seems to have a

habit of attempting to take credit for any good-news stories it happens to stumble across when it comes to our economy, but they continue to ignore the plant closures in Ontario.

Plant closures and layoffs stain the landscapes in Ontario. One does not have to look too far to see the true effects of Dalton McGuinty's high-tax regime in Ontario. You'd be hard-pressed to find one member

in this Legislature who hasn't had a layoff or a plant closure notice in his or her riding since the Liberals took power in 2003. Instead of piggybacking on good-news announcements by private investors, the government should be working on

alleviating the tax burdens of Ontario's businesses by moving more quickly to phase out capital tax, reform the provincial sales tax to avoid taxing business inputs, and reduce the corporate tax rate.

Three years into its mandate, I have to wonder when exactly this government plans to put business investment in Ontario back on the right track. When talking about the new Kellogg's plant, the Premier ends his

release by stating that he is going to work on keeping Ontario one of the most competitive places in the world. Wake up and smell the coffee, Premier -- oh, wait: Maybe you can't smell the coffee because Nestlé's closed the door of its coffee

plant in Chesterville back in May, putting 300 more people in eastern Ontario out of work.

So Kellogg's is bringing 100 new jobs into Belleville, but what else have we got? We've got GH Packaging, 80 jobs lost; Lipton's, 145 jobs lost; and Monico, 55 jobs lost. That's 280 jobs lost; 100 jobs gained.

I don't like your math, Minister.

When will you stop saying anything to get elected and make Ontario a more competitive place to do business in?

SCHOOL FACILITIES

Mr. Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): In response to the Minister of Education's announcement today that she is going to provide funding for some 100 schools, it's interesting that she says, "within

the next few years." What we don't know is whether that's two years, five years or 10 years. But typical of how this government continues to make announcements, she announces $1 billion; what she doesn't tell us is how much of that $1 billion

this government will actually transfer to school boards to build those schools. She gives us a clue: Of the $137 million, she's prepared to transfer $10 million. Essentially what that means is that the minister today has made an announcement that

by providing $10 million to school boards, she'll allow them to go into debt for $127 million. That's what we have from this minister. She also hasn't told us what is going to happen to many of the schools in this province that are now on the

plans of school boards to be torn down, to be closed. In one breath, she announced 100 schools to be built at some point in the future; very quietly she tells us that she is going to start closing schools.

I'm going to ask the minister to come very clean with the people of this province. And she laughs. What she is telling you is that she is not prepared to tell us the facts about this announcement today.

February 2005 is when this announcement was first made. It was a $4-billion announcement. Based on true calculations, this minister only plans on transferring 7% of $4 billion and is inviting school boards to

go into debt for the balance. If this is a clue of the kind of mismanagement this government is wreaking on school boards, we can hardly wait to see the next budget come from the Minister of Finance which, no doubt, will have more of this snake

oil salesman type of accounting that the Minister of Education has given school boards to date.

What we would ask the minister to do is to factually present to this House and to the people of Ontario the true state of finances in the Ministry of Education. Multibillions of dollars of committed spending

shorted by her ministry to school boards across the province: That's why we have school boards in deficit situations, in serious problems, in this province.

Minister, come clean with the people of Ontario. We ask you to do the responsible thing --

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

INVESTMENT IN ONTARIO

Mr. Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): On behalf of New Democrats, we say to the people of Belleville that this is much-needed good news, because we know there's been a lot of bad news over

the last three years since the government has taken office, when it comes to the thousands of jobs that have been lost, or the tens of thousands of jobs that have been lost in northern Ontario, and 100,000 overall across the province.

It has been a very difficult time for many families in this province. We've seen from communities in Fort Frances to Hamilton to Niagara to Sarnia to Cornwall to Ottawa that thousands and thousands of people

lost their jobs under the McGuinty government's watch. Finally we have some good news.

Despite what this government's doing in Belleville, we say congratulations to the community of Belleville. These are jobs that will be well needed, but we also understand there is much left to do.

I just say to the minister across the way, if you can only convince the rest of the cabinet and people within your government to deal with the issues that are crucial to making the economy move in Ontario,

such as dealing with the price of electricity and others, we would be a lot better off at the end of the day.

SCHOOL FACILITIES

Mr. Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): It is a pleasure to speak to this oleaginous, saponaceous and lubricious announcement by this minister. And this is true.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Order.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Member for Trinity-Spadina.

Mr. Marchese: The Minister of Education is right. I used to use those words for the Conservative government, and she ought to be surprised that I'm using them for her and her government. Why

do I say this? Let me, please, do a review.

I remember mon ami M. Kennedy in the first year announcing $200 million to deal with the $4 billion of capital needs the Tories had identified in 2002, monies they never spent, but at least they identified the

needs. And so Kennedy comes into power and says, "We are going to spend $200 million, which will generate $3 billion worth of capital projects."

The first year went by; not one cent had been spent. The next year he comes and makes another announcement -- an announcing, pre-announcing, re-announcing kind of announcement -- and then he announces that

$275 million will be spent. We're waiting and we're waiting for the money to flow, and they keep on announcing and re-announcing the same money.

Finally, Good Places to Learn comes forth: $75 million will be spent immediately. We're waiting and waiting, looking at the facts, if we can, if they release it. Well, some money was spent, but it wasn't $75

million. Of all the $275 million they promised -- that doesn't exist; it's fictitious -- only about $22 million has been spent, and now the minister announces another of that billion dollars will be spent for yet another 100 new schools. They're

just announcements after announcements.

You've got to love these Liberals. You almost believe them every time they announce it. You say, "Maybe this time," and then they find some parents or some trustees to say, "Thank God, another announcement.

More money is coming." And it never flows. That's why I say, "Oleaginous, saponaceous and lubricious announcements by the Liberals," because it's greasy, it's sticky, it's something you can't get hold of. It's money that just slips through your

hands.

So we say to you, when are you going to bring in that standing committee on education finance so we can actually get a chance to review your numbers, so that can you tell us how great you are with your

numbers, so that we can get people to come to the committee and say, "But you haven't spent the money that you said you did"? When are you going to keep that simple promise of having a standing committee on education finance so we could make you

accountable, as you want to be held accountable, as you often say you are?

Do we not need clarity and accountability? Yes, we do. Is that what the Liberals claim they're doing? No, they are not doing it at all, each and every time. You've got a foul, failed, flawed Conservative

funding formula that you are still using, and until you fix that, we've got a financial problem on our hands. So the Liberals finally release this policy on the closure of small schools. I'm going to tell you, until you fix the funding formula,

boards are going to want to close schools, because without adequate money they have no other option but to close small schools even if they want to keep them open.

What you've done with the Toronto board, by forcing them to use $40 million of capital money for operational dollars, I tell you, is, for Liberals, disrespectful at best. Even Peel Catholic said, "We wanted to

do the same. We had a meeting with the minister and she said, `You can't do that.'" Toronto board has its meeting: $40 million from capital is being used for operations.

You've got to fix the foul, failed, flawed Conservative funding formula, and until you do that, our school system is in trouble.

ORAL QUESTIONS

NATIVE LAND DISPUTE

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the Premier, and it concerns Caledonia. For 246 days now, the Douglas Creek Estates lands have been occupied by protestors, and the

government over that time has adopted many different positions. First they ignored the situation for months, then they downplayed the situation, then they said they weren't going to negotiate until certain conditions were met, but a matter of

hours later, before the condition were met, they started negotiating again. Then they said they'd compensate homeowners, but four months later there has been no compensation. Then they said they were working very well with the federal government,

but now they're saying something quite different. I think it's clear that this government will say anything they can get away with in this matter and do as little as possible in the meantime.

My question is this: On August 30, 2006, the Premier said that the protestors had to be off the land come winter. Is the Premier going to keep his word on this and maintain the consistency of that position or

has he changed his mind on that as well?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): The leader of the official opposition will know that the minister responsible for aboriginal affairs is meeting this

afternoon in Ottawa with his counterpart, Minister Prentice. I think it would be helpful if the leader of the official opposition would pick up the phone, speak with either Prime Minister Harper or Minister Prentice, and help them understand that

what we have here is a long-standing dispute between the federal government and the Six Nations community. We're doing what we can to manage this situation on the ground, but at the end of the day the only resolution that is going to come about

will come about when the federal government demonstrates some resolve, some conviction and some determination to deal with this matter in a forthright fashion.

Mr. Tory: The only person who requires some resolve, some conviction and determination is the Premier of Ontario, who has his own responsibilities that he hasn't faced up to in this

matter.

We all read, of course, that your minister is going down to Ottawa today to plead for some compensation from the federal government in respect of decisions that the Premier of this province took to buy the

land, and the policing decisions, at your cost, and they're your responsibility.

Not long ago, we asked the Premier what the total costs were for this matter so far. We estimated $55 million, a number the Premier would neither confirm nor deny. His minister said it will cost what it will

cost -- an incredible attitude with respect to the taxpayers' money. It's now a month later and we think the costs could be up to $60 million or $65 million. The minister is going to Ottawa to ask for an unspecified amount from the federal

government.

My question is this: Why can't the Premier tell us, if he's the man in charge of the taxpayers' money, how much this has cost us so far? You must know the answer to that question and you should share it with

the taxpayers right now.

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: The leader of the official opposition will know that we have now provided support in the following ways: We have purchased the Douglas Creek Estates, something the leader of

the official opposition opposes; we provided money for a business assistance plan; we provided money for signage and markings on the land; we are, in fact, going to provide additional monies for assistance for residents; we provided provincial

money for a marketing campaign; we provided provincial money for a new school fence and security cameras; we provided provincial money for communications help for the municipality; provincial money for a toll-free info line, and a website; and, of

course, there remain outstanding Ontario Provincial Police costs.

All of that is provincial money. All of that is something that Ontario taxpayers have been encumbered with as a result of this matter stretching out further and further and longer and longer.

I want you to know that the federal government has not spent a single penny in order to provide assistance to the people of the community of Caledonia. So I'm looking forward to the result of this meeting this

afternoon, and again I ask the leader of the official opposition whether or not he intends to support the demand on behalf of --

Interjections.

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

Mr. Tory: All that was missing from that list was some conviction, some resolve and some determination to actually get something done.

The government has been asked time and time again about the cost, and all the Premier and his ministers are able to say is that it will cost what it's going to cost.

On August 1, 2006, the Hamilton Spectator submitted a freedom of information request to the OPP via the government, requesting policing costs for the ongoing operation. The response, as happens so often, was

that it would take 200 hours and cost $6,000, and we're still waiting. That was on August 1. Compare this to the actions of the RCMP, in a truly open and transparent government, where they responded quickly with more than 250 documents, including

the estimates of the cost or the actual costs, and at no cost to the person asking.

On this matter, I would argue that the Premier of Ontario, the man entrusted with the taxpayers' money, should know how much that whole list costs that he recited a few moments ago and be prepared to share it

with the taxpayers. My question is this: Will you find out the accurate estimate of the policing and other costs so far, save a public servant the 20 hours of work, and save the Hamilton Spectator --

The Speaker: The question has been asked.

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I said to the media this morning, when asked about this, that we would be making the total figure public very shortly.

Again I say to the leader of the official opposition, no, we will not direct the Ontario Provincial Police.

Mr. Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln): I think you already did.

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: We will continue to work with the communities involved. What we have done is organize a negotiating table that has brought all parties together. We have arranged for the

purchase of the land in question, which we are holding in trust. We are working with the community on an ongoing basis to ease tensions.

I notice that one of my good friends opposite is implying directly that somebody somehow, on this side of the House, has provided direction to the Ontario Provincial Police. I want to make it clear to him, as

I have to the media and all others in Ontario, that no such direction has been provided and I will not, unlike what has been suggested by the leader of the official opposition, provide any instructions of any kind to the police when it comes to

managing this situation.

The Speaker: New question.

Mr. Tory: We'll see who said what to who when we have a full inquiry, which we'll call into this matter when we form the government.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. The Attorney General will come to order.

ONTARIO LOTTERY AND

GAMING CORP.

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): As the Premier is aware, there were last week serious allegations which go to the root of the trust in the activities of the Ontario Lottery and

Gaming Corp. and its security procedures. We asked several times whether the government would appoint a forensic auditor to come in and investigate the allegations and all the facts surrounding this matter on the television report. The government

has so far refused, relying on an internal review and analysis, as they call it, and the Ombudsman, who likely doesn't have the resources to finance a proper audit.

Then we find out on Global Television last Thursday that the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corp. has commissioned a poll to see if everybody can kind of skate this through. Now, how is it, I ask the Premier, that

we're able to find the tens of thousands of dollars to finance a poll but you will not allow this matter to be investigated completely by an independent, outside forensic auditor to get to the bottom of it? Why can you afford one and not the

other?

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

Hon. David Caplan (Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal, Deputy Government House Leader): I am concerned that the member opposite doesn't have faith in an independent officer of this

Legislature: the Ombudsman. I welcome his investigation.

I'm surprised as well that the member opposite is not familiar with the firm of Ernst and Young, one of Canada's leading forensic audit companies. They had a chance to take a look at the OLG's internal

controls, and I would quote from their May 15, 2006, report: "The Insider Win policy provides the utmost integrity of the OLG in the conduct of lottery games by ensuring that there is no perception of an unfair advantage by an OLG lottery winner

who is closely affiliated with the OLG."

I say with respect that I would recommend to the Leader of the Opposition that we allow the Ombudsman to do his work, issue his report, and any necessary action will be taken.

Mr. Tory: Perhaps I could follow up to the Premier and ask this: In the event that we have the Ernst and Young letter that you referred to, which does not, of course, take account of the facts

brought to light by the Fifth Estate television program, and in the event that the Ombudsman finds he doesn't have the resources to do this himself, will you commit now that you will make the funds available to retain that very same firm, Ernst

and Young, to update the audit they did earlier to include the facts contained in the Fifth Estate program so that people who go up to the counter at the store to buy their ticket will know that you left no stone unturned in trying to get to the

bottom and have outside professional people look at this? A simple request: Will you allow the Ombudsman to have the money, or your self-financed Ernst and Young, to have an independent, outside update of the investigation of these particular

allegations so lottery ticket buyers can have confidence that you've gone right to the bottom of this? Will you do it?

Hon. Mr. Caplan: I can tell you that a request has been made, at least I hope it has so far, from the Ombudsman to the Fifth Estate to provide the information, the data they used, the

methodology that was used, the analysis they did to come to the conclusion of a very serious allegation. I treat this matter and this government treats this matter with the utmost seriousness. That's why I've asked the chair, on behalf of all the

shareholders -- the people of Ontario -- to conduct a review and analysis and to report back as quickly as possible.

I note to the member opposite that I have full confidence in the Ombudsman, who receives funding and support from this Legislature, as supported by all members of the Board of Internal Economy. The Ombudsman

says he will report within 90 days. I suggest that we allow the Ombudsman to do his work and give his report. I want to assure the member that any necessary action will be taken by this government to protect the integrity of the lottery and gaming

system in the province of Ontario.

Mr. Tory: I am asking the minister perhaps one more time. He said that he took this matter with the utmost seriousness, and I'll take him at his word on that. Therefore, if you wanted to "do

everything necessary" -- those are the kinds of words that are sometimes used without answering what was a very direct question. I'll ask it again: If you want to do everything necessary to reassure people who are going in and playing the games

and buying the tickets that everything is being done to investigate this and determine if it's true or not and what needs to be done about it, why wouldn't you stand up in your place right now and say that you will commit to updating the Ernst and

Young study and to having money made available to the Ombudsman, should he request it or that you do it yourself, to make sure that someone independent looks at this and decides if there's something to it or not and what recommendations they would

make?

Back in opposition, your Premier said you didn't believe that people should investigate themselves. When you say the chairman is doing it, that's the lottery corporation investigating itself. Will you commit

to the money being made available, directly or through the Ombudsman, to finance an audit if he asks for one? Will you do it?

Hon. Mr. Caplan: I'm shocked that the member doesn't understand basic corporate governance, that the board of a corporation does not represent the interests of the corporation but rather the

interests of the shareholder.

Interjections.

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

Hon. Mr. Caplan: Apparently, I've touched a nerve of the members opposite.

I have full faith and confidence in the Ombudsman. He has proven to be quite an effective advocate when matters are brought to his attention and when he launches an investigation. I know he will do a thorough

job. I welcome his report. When it is unveiled publicly, we will have a chance to see what his recommendations are and take the appropriate actions at that time.

In the meantime, notwithstanding that, the chair of the board, Mr. Gough, who was supported by all members of the all-party standing committee on government agencies, which I say to the member opposite was

chaired by a member of his caucus, an excellent member -- to protect the public interest, to get to the bottom of things and to have action ensue as quickly as possible. That is the desire of this government --

The Speaker: Thank you.

FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL

FISCAL POLICIES

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): Premier, every day working women and men in Ontario do their best to make ends meet. They look to their governments to provide some leadership and some

direction that will help them in their day-to-day lives. But today, when they open their newspapers, they see you and Stephen Harper engaging in insults and passing the buck.

Shortly after your election, you claimed -- and I want to quote you here -- to have "ushered in a new era of working constructively with the federal government." Can you explain, Premier, why the new era looks

a lot like the same old pointing of fingers at Ottawa and blaming someone else?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): I guess I should apologize to the leader of the NDP if I'm making him feel a little bit uncomfortable because we do what we

think is right on behalf of the people of Ontario. It was Prime Minister Harper who said he was going to address this issue of the fiscal imbalance. He said that before, during and after the campaign, after he'd earned the privilege of serving

Canadians as the leader of their new government.

We have a very good case to make on behalf of the people of Ontario. By and large, it's the same case we made to the previous federal government, and we will continue to make that case. I thought we had the

support of the leader of the NDP. I thought we had two all-party resolutions which said that together we would stand up on behalf of the people of Ontario and, among other things, we would say that when it comes to the money we receive from the

federal government for our health care and education, we shouldn't get a penny less than Canadians get in other provinces. We're being shortchanged by $1.1 billion. I'd ask the leader of the NDP to stand with Ontarians --

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

Mr. Hampton: Premier, my point is that you promised a new era of co-operation with the federal government but what ordinary Ontarians see, when they turn on the television, is the same old

blame game being engaged in by your government.

A year ago, the federal government was forced to rewrite their federal budget. As a result of that, there was $1 billion of new money for students in colleges and universities to reduce tuition fees. There was

$1.4 billion in new federal money for people waiting for affordable housing. There was $900 million of new federal money for people who use public transit. Your government received that money, received it all. But you know what? Tuition fees

haven't come down, they've gone up, there are higher transit fees, and the waiting list for affordable housing gets longer and longer. What did you do with that money, Premier?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I've seen a lot of things in my 16 years in this Legislature, but for the first time, I've seen the leader of the NDP become an apologist for a federal Conservative

government -- the very first time.

The leader of the NDP may not think it's important, but we think that Ontarians should receive the same for their health care and education as other Canadians do. We think that Ontarians should receive the

same for their infrastructure as other Canadians do. We think that Ontarians should receive the same for their training as other Canadians do. We think that unemployed Ontarians should receive the same for employment insurance as other Canadians

do. We're not looking for a special deal; we're just looking for a fair deal. We're looking for Prime Minister Harper to honour the commitment he made to Ontarians before, during and after the campaign.

Again I ask the leader of the NDP, when did he decide that he's no longer going to stand up for Ontarians and that, instead, he's going to stand up for the Harper government in this Legislature?

Mr. Hampton: I'm standing up for the working families across Ontario who want to know what happened to the tuition fee money.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order.

Interjection.

The Speaker: Minister of Health Promotion, I will not warn you again.

Leader of the third party.

Mr. Hampton: You see, Premier, those working families want to know what happened to that money that was supposed to be used to reduce tuition fees. What happened to that money that was

supposed to be used to build new affordable housing? For example, Nova Scotia used that new federal money to actually stop tuition fee increases. Here in Ontario, you took the money that was supposed to be used to reduce tuition fees, you pocketed

it, and now you're going to raise tuition fees by 36% over four years.

I'm simply asking, Premier, what did you do with the new federal money that was already sent to Ontario in the last year? It wasn't used for new affordable housing, it wasn't used to reduce tuition fees, and

transit fees are higher than ever. What did you do with the new federal money you already got?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I think the leader of the NDP well understands that we're putting billions into housing, post-secondary education and health care as well.

Hon. Greg Sorbara (Minister of Finance, Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet): And student assistance.

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: And student assistance. He knows that our $6.2-billion plan for post-secondary education is the first of its kind in 40 years in this province, and it puts us head and

shoulders above any other provincial government in terms of our manifest commitment to the younger generation. I think that's very clear.

Where we remain unclear is where Mr. Hampton stands with respect to standing up for the people of Ontario. Is he or is he not with us when it comes to laying claim to the $86 per capita we should be getting

for our health care and education? Is he with us or against us when it comes to getting the $314 million for additional training opportunities for the people of Ontario? Is he with us or against us when it comes to claiming that $1.2 billion for

infrastructure? What the people of Ontario want to know is where the NDP stands when it comes to standing up for the people of Ontario.

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): The Premier mentions housing. There are 122,000 families in Ontario waiting for affordable housing. You promised to build 20,000 new units of

affordable housing. In your fourth year of government, you're not even one quarter of the way there. You got $400 million of new federal money to spend on affordable housing, but you're not spending it on affordable housing. Instead, you've got it

in a bank account.

Premier, instead of spending all your time bickering and squabbling with Stephen Harper, why haven't you taken that $400 million of new federal money that was given to you to build affordable housing and used

it to build affordable housing?

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

Hon. John Gerretsen (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): Let's get one thing straight: The amount of money that was set aside by both the federal and the provincial governments last

year, namely $602 million, currently is being spent on affordable housing.

One hundred twenty-eight projects are either built or have been built, are occupied or are in the planning stage right now clear across this province, from Toronto to the smallest community that's out there.

It's going to create something like 6,500 units of new affordable housing. That's in addition to the 3,500 rent supplement units that we've got out on the market since 2003 and in addition to the 5,000 units for housing allowances that are out

there right now, to be used by the service managers for all those vacant units across this province that can be used. We are spending the money that has been allocated for affordable housing on the affordable housing program. We'll continue to do

that. We're going to meet our commitment. We're going to make sure --

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

Mr. Hampton: For all those working families across Ontario that are desperately waiting for affordable housing, here is the reality under the McGuinty government. You haven't even spent the

provincial money that you promised to build affordable housing. You're not even halfway to the 20,000 units that you promised. Meanwhile, there is $400 million of new federal money, which is supposed to be used to build affordable housing, that

you're sitting on in a bank account.

I say to the Premier, who promised a new era of co-operation with the federal government, with so many working families desperate for affordable housing, why are you sitting on $400 million of new federal

money intended to be used to build affordable housing? Why aren't you using it to build affordable housing?

Hon. Mr. Gerretsen: The thing that is absolutely fascinating is that all the affordable housing money that was set aside by the federal government and provincial government was in the budget

for this year, and that party voted against the budget. They voted against the affordable housing units that are currently being built.

As the member well knows, it takes time for projects to be developed; it takes time to go through the planning processes. There are municipalities that have said that their approvals are involved. We are

moving as fast as we can to make sure that the commitments we made in April 2005, when the agreement with the federal government was signed -- to make sure that those units are being built and occupied as soon as possible.

Mr. Hampton: Well, Minister, even your own officials don't agree with you. We met with Ministry of Finance officials and they were very clear that you haven't spent the $400 million of new,

additional federal money for affordable housing. Yes, you may have booked it in your budget, but it hasn't been spent on affordable housing. In fact, they say that you might not spend it on affordable housing, that you might spend it on something

else.

I ask again of the Premier -- instead of pointing the finger at Ottawa and their pointing the finger back at you: You've received money for affordable housing; you haven't spent it on affordable housing. You

received money to reduce tuition fees; you didn't reduce tuition fees. In fact, you're going to increase them by 36% over the next four years. You received money to lower transit fees; instead, transit fees are going up. Why haven't you spent the

federal money that you've already received to make a difference for working families in Ontario?

Hon. Mr. Gerretsen: The trust monies, the way I understand it, were only received by the province less than a month ago. As the member well knows, it's going to take time to develop the kind

of program that will be needed in order to get that housing money out the door.

It's always been part of the plan with respect to new affordable housing, with respect to the housing allowance program, that it was going to take a period of time to roll this money out. It isn't a question

of getting the money one day and just starting a project the next day. If you've ever been involved in a project of affordable housing, you darn well know that. It's going to take time to plan the project, it's going to take time to get the

necessary approvals, it's going to take time to build the project, and only after that can the buildings actually be occupied.

We are going to live up to our commitment on affordable housing. We've got $602 million of federal and provincial money set aside for that right now. That money will be spent on affordable housing so that the

vulnerable in our society, whether they're seniors, whether they're disabled or families, can be --

The Speaker: Thank you.

SCHOOL FACILITIES

Mr. Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): To the Minister of Education: This morning, Ontarians were treated to yet another one of the minister's dog-and-pony shows. She announced $1 billion to build 100

new schools in Ontario. What we would like to know is, and I'm sure what Ontarians would like to know, how much of the $1 billion that she announced today will the Ministry of Education actually transfer to school boards? Of the $1 billion

announced as a government investment in new schools, how much will your ministry transfer to school boards?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne (Minister of Education): I think I would have expected a little more sophistication from the member opposite in terms of an understanding of how financing works. What we

said when we announced Good Places to Learn is that we were going to flow $280 million a year to school boards, each year for four years, which would leverage $4 billion of investments in our schools. What we are doing is giving money to school

boards in order that they can borrow, and we're changing a regulation so they can borrow at a very good rate over the long term, which is the way school board projects have always been done over time.

I think it would behoove the member opposite to have a conversation with some of the people at the York region school board, where 171 projects have been completed or are under way because of the money that

has flowed to them.

Mr. Klees: That brings me to the character education program that I believe this minister should be undertaking, because her announcement makes it very clear and leaves the impression that

this government today announced a $1-billion investment. It is not that. As the minister has just admitted, it's a mere 7% of $1 billion, and her $4-billion investment that was announced by the previous minister is 7% of that.

Effectively, what I want the minister to do is to admit that what she has announced and what her government has announced is that they are advocating that school boards across the province that are already

facing deficits are now encouraged by this government to incur a multi-billion dollar debt load that they have no way of carrying. Will the minister admit that?

Hon. Ms. Wynne: What we have done today is two things: We have allowed school boards to have access to a billion dollars so they can build new schools. The second thing we've done is put in

place accommodation review guidelines, which boards have been waiting for, that are going to allow boards to value their schools, to look at the value to the students, the value to the community, the value to the employers in the community, so

that we can make real what governments have talked about in the past: schools as hubs. How do we value the schools in our communities? How do we make sure the services that are available to the community can be located in the school, can work with

the school, schools that have libraries in them, as I was told about in North Bay yesterday? Those are creative solutions that we need around the province -- to keep our schools open, to close schools where it's necessary -- and we're allowing

schools to do that while we're building new schools.

ALCOHOL AND DRUG TREATMENT

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): My question is to the Premier. Premier, across the province, especially in the GTA, teens are struggling with drugs like never before. The Toronto Star says

more youth than ever are getting high every day, using serious street drugs and getting into trouble with the law. Teens who want to break the cycle, you know very well, can't do it alone. But they're not getting the help they need under your

government. Publicly funded teen treatment programs are just not there for them, especially in the GTA. Private programs can cost tens of thousands of dollars that teens and their parents simply can't afford. Premier, these kids deserve a second

chance. When are you going to address the huge and growing demand for residential drug treatment programs for our youth in trouble?

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): I would just take this one second to remind members that they need to address their questions and responses through the Chair. Premier?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): Minister of Health Promotion, Speaker.

Hon. Jim Watson (Minister of Health Promotion): Through the Ministry of Health Promotion, we are pleased to be the primary funder and sponsor of the Focus program. The Ontario Focus Community

Program implements activities to address the problems, including misuse of alcohol and other drugs. This government, under the leadership of Premier McGuinty, has provided an additional $400,000 to provide a variety of community groups that the

honourable member is talking about, support to deal with alcohol and drug prevention in the province of Ontario. So, yes, we have to do more, but the Focus program has been widely accepted throughout the province as a very effective grassroots

program that deals particularly with young people on alcohol and substance abuse in this province.

Ms. Horwath: The government needs to focus on the problem of drug addictions of youth across the GTA, and a $400,000 program is just not going to cut it. The reality is the number of youth

struggling with addictions is up 20% over the past 15 years. There are two provincially funded residential treatment facilities right now, and both of them have huge waiting lists. The GTA needs residential treatment facilities to help these kids

to conquer their addictions and to support them as they try to re-enter the community. If we don't deal with these problems among our youth right now, we're going to be forced to pay for them through increased payments over time, in our social

services budgets, in our health budgets, in our justice budgets, and that's just not acceptable. So I ask you again, when are you going to provide the treatment that our youth need, the residential treatment programs to help them get off these

drugs and start to create lives for themselves?

Hon. Mr. Watson: I just want to correct the record. The $400,000, in fact, is new money. We're actually providing $2.4 million across the province for the Focus program, including

organizations like the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, the Regent Park Focus Program; in Vanier, for instance, Action antidrogue Focus, $99,000; in northwestern Ontario, in Rainy River, $94,400. These are programs, as I said, that are in

the prevention stage to encourage those young people to stay away from drugs and alcohol, and drug and alcohol abuse. It's a program that has been widely accepted and commended by the Centre for Addition and Mental Health. And the fact of the

matter is that these are new initiatives that have been brought in by the McGuinty government because we recognize the need to ensure that we put more resources in the front end, preventing these kinds of tragedies taking place, as opposed to

waiting for the back end when in many cases, it's too late.

GREENBELT

Mr. Kevin Daniel Flynn (Oakville): I have a question today for the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Minister, our government has always been committed to protecting Ontario's

precious green space. We made a promise to the people of Ontario to create a greenbelt. In February 2005, our government permanently protected 1.8 million acres around the greater Golden Horseshoe. Throughout this process, however, Mr. Tory and

his party opposed preserving our watersheds, opposed preserving our rivers, our forests, our prime agricultural land. They even voted against the creation of a study area, and they voted against the final boundaries. They voted against preserving

green space for generations of Ontarians to come.

Minister, what have the people of Ontario told you they think about our greenbelt?

Hon. John Gerretsen (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): Let me first of all congratulate this member for his ongoing and outstanding commitment to the greenbelt. He has been right

there from the beginning, and he truly believes in it.

It was interesting to read this morning in the Toronto Star that, according to a poll they've taken, 90% of the people in the GTA not only support the greenbelt but think it was absolutely the right thing to

do. Of course, they're just echoing something that David Suzuki mentioned to us last year when we created the greenbelt, when he stated: "I congratulate you for recognizing that urban sprawl represents a major negative impact on the

environment.... Congratulations on this initiative." He was talking about the greenbelt.

So 90% of the people of the GTA and David Suzuki think the greenbelt is a great idea. What we want to know is: Does Mr. Tory support the greenbelt at this stage or not? Does he think it's a great idea? That's

what the people of Ontario want to know.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): I again remind members that the question should come through the Speaker.

The member for Oakville.

Mr. Flynn: Speaker, a question through you: Minister, I know in my own riding of Oakville that the preservation of the greenbelt has been seen as a huge victory for generations to come. It's

just one measure our government has taken to ensure that Ontarians can enjoy green space now and in the future.

Here we are a year and a half later, and 90% of people asked, as the minister has just told us, support the greenbelt. We obviously still support the greenbelt, but where is Mr. Tory on this issue? He's in the

same place he was during the clean water debates: absolutely nowhere. He wants to pave over our green space while our government protects it. His party voted against protecting thousands of acres of prime agricultural land and tender fruit land so

farmers can continue to grow the foods we eat.

Minister, would you please expand to the House, under our government's greenbelt initiative, what else has been accomplished?

Hon. Mr. Gerretsen: In addition to the one million acres that were added to the already existing Niagara Escarpment and the Oak Ridges moraine lands for a total of 1.8 million acres of land,

about 100,000 acres of Niagara Peninsula tender fruit and grape specialty crop area was included, and 15,000 acres in the Holland Marsh for that specialty crop area. Of course, we're also supporting the preservation of the natural-heritage system

for about three quarters of the lakes, wetlands and forests within the greenbelt. We extended greenbelt protection to the sensitive parts of the Rouge River watershed in Richmond Hill. All of this is being done under the auspices of the Greenbelt

Council currently and the Greenbelt Foundation.

We think it's absolutely the right thing to do for generations to come. We think that our children's children will thank us for this absolutely outstanding achievement of a greenbelt in the GTA.

TORONTO EXPO 2015

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the Minister of Tourism, unaccustomed as he may be. I think he's probably close by.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Do you want to stand it down or -- he is appearing.

The Leader of the Opposition.

Mr. Tory: I thought the minister was looking a bit left out.

Minister, we're down to three days left before the bidding deadline for a Toronto world's fair bid in 2015. Earlier this year in March, the minister said that he thought such an event would be great for

Toronto and great for Ontario, and he said the McGuinty government would be in support.

Now the bid is struggling. I don't think there's anyone here who would support any government in this country writing a blank cheque, but there also doesn't seem to be anybody in the McGuinty government who

even appears to be using every possible effort with every possible minute that's left to see if we can find a solution and save the bid.

Milan and the Turkish bidders seem to have their act together. My question is this: What specific actions and initiatives are you prepared to undertake as Ontario's Minister of Tourism in the remaining days to

make every effort to make sure we keep the bid alive and see if we can have a proper bid for the world's fair in 2015?

Hon. James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism, minister responsible for seniors, Government House Leader): I'm actually glad that the Leader of the Opposition asked that question, because of

course our province has indicated its very strong support for infrastructure matters that have to be dealt with on the waterfront. We have been the ones who have already been in on this. We provided $125,000 for the feasibility study in 2004 and

half of the million dollars for the city's $2.1-million phase 1 pre-bid study in 2005. We've indicated we're happy to help with marketing. We're happy to help in every way we can, but, as you know, the stumbling block is, shall the people of

Ontario write a blank cheque to cover any cost overrun? Our province, as you know, does not have the financial capacity to do that. I know that the federal government had a $13-billion surplus last time. They may well wish to do that, but if

you're saying this province should write a blank cheque for this, I'm very surprised.

Mr. Tory: I very clearly said that no one in this assembly would be arguing that the government of Ontario or any government in Canada should be writing a blank cheque. It may well be that a

deal can't be reached, but not to even try is a pathetic abdication of leadership.

It's my understanding that Ontario didn't even have senior level representation, compared to the other two governments at the meeting that took place last Friday. But my question to you is this: With a big

boost for tourism, jobs and investment possibly and a hurry-up on infrastructure at stake, don't you think it is worth it for you to do everything possible to show some leadership and get the governments at the table in a room to see if in the

next three days we can get something done to save this bid and see if Toronto can be a part of this? Are you just going to drop out altogether and give up? That's not leadership. What are you going to do?

Hon. Mr. Bradley: I go back to the Leader of the Opposition and ask him -- because the make or break is on who will write the blank cheque for any cost overruns. If you, as a so-called

responsible politician in this province, one who believes in fiscal responsibility, are prepared to write a blank cheque on behalf of the people of this province to ensure that this proceeds, then I'm very surprised by that.

The federal government has the capacity financially to do so. If you think they should do so, you can indicate that to the Prime Minister, but on behalf of the province of Ontario, we cannot responsibly write

a blank cheque to cover this. We will do everything else possible. We've been in discussions with them on an ongoing basis. They did not satisfy the federal government initially with their business plan. We have been at the table all along, but

the roadblock is the blank cheque. Are you prepared to write a blank cheque on behalf of the people of this province for any cost overrun? That's the question to you.

LONG-TERM CARE

Mr. Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): My question is to the Minister of Community and Social Services. It's a simple question: Do you think the most appropriate place for an adult with a

developmental disability is a senior citizens' long-term-care home?

Hon. Madeleine Meilleur (Minister of Community and Social Services, minister responsible for francophone affairs): I will say to the member of the third party that people with developmental

disabilities have the same rights in Ontario as any other people. If the need is that they go to long-term care, they will, but it's not the approach that we have taken so far.

I will say to the member of the NDP that we have been working very closely with the family, because it's important that these people are placed in the right place in the community, in a group home close to

their family and with the full participation of the family. No one will be placed in the community without having all the services they need.

In the supplementary, I will continue to explain the process that has been taken by this government to make sure that these individuals are full participants in the community.

Mr. Prue: Again to the minister: Many people with developmental disabilities and their advocates don't think they should be warehoused in long-term-care homes or facilities. They showed up at

ministry round tables to tell you so and to say that people with disabilities should be supported in the communities. But your July 2006 long-term-care home access protocol for adults with a developmental disability says providers should move

"individuals with increasing health care needs that they are currently supporting residentially into an appropriate LTC home."

Will you force agencies to go against the best interests of their clients, or will you admit your error and reconsider this regressive protocol?

Hon. Mrs. Meilleur: I'm very surprised to hear comments like this from the member of the third party, because when the parents went into court to object to the closure of the institution, the

judge congratulated the government on the approach it took before placing these individuals.

I will say to you that these individuals have the same rights as any Ontarian. The approach that we have been taking is a very personable and caring approach. The family is fully involved in the decision as to

where their loved one will go, and no one is placed in the community without having the full participation and approval of their family. But the main objective is where the best place is for these individuals to go.

WATER QUALITY

Mrs. Carol Mitchell (Huron-Bruce): My question is for the Minister of the Environment. The members of the NDP and Conservative caucuses now seem to be very proud of the fact that they voted

against the Clean Water Act. It's clear: A vote against the Clean Water Act is a vote against clean water. When my constituents hear the members of Conservative caucus almost boastfully saying that they voted against the Clean Water Act, they just

don't understand. They obviously are not in touch with rural Ontario. I'm wondering if perhaps they were confused in what they were doing.

The Clean Water Act is all about protection. It seems to me that this is the very point of the act, and they just don't get it. Minister, will you lay out in the simplest of terms exactly what the Clean Water

Act does so my friends in Her Majesty's loyal opposition will understand and stop staying with pride that they voted --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): The question's been asked.

Hon. Laurel C. Broten (Minister of the Environment): I want to thank the member for her championing of the issues on behalf of all Ontarians, particularly rural Ontarians.

The members of the NDP and Conservative caucuses have chosen to vote in the clearest of terms against the single most important recommendation that came out of Justice O'Connor's recommendations. Twelve

recommendations will be met directly by the Clean Water Act, and the act itself speaks to the operational implementation of 22 recommendations.

A vote against the Clean Water Act is a vote against prevention. It's a vote against

an act which will be providing Ontarians with some of the best-protected drinking water in all of North America. It's

an act

which is leading the way in jurisdictions right around the world as to our approach to source water protection, because the most effective way to ensure that Ontarians have clean, safe drinking water is to keep it clean in the first place.

Mrs. Mitchell: Thank you for explaining to the members of the NDP and Conservative caucuses what they voted against. But by voting against the recommendations of the Walkerton inquiry, it's

clear they're flip-flopping and playing politics with our water. Instead of listening to the hard-working families in rural Ontario, the members of the Conservative caucus have decided to ignore what rural Ontarians want and deserve.

I heard that you met with the members of the advisory panel --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order.

Interjections.

The Speaker: The members for Oxford and Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound will come to order.

Member for Huron-Bruce.

Mrs. Mitchell: I heard that you met with the members of the advisory panel of the Ontario drinking water stewardship program yesterday, and I'm very thrilled to know that there are several

rural representatives on this panel. It's proof that our government listens to rural Ontarians and wants them to play an active role in protecting our water.

Since the Conservative caucus members have no interest in accurately informing their constituents about how the passing of the Clean Water Act is good for rural Ontarians, can you tell rural Ontarians more

about this important piece of legislation?

Hon. Ms. Broten: I'm very pleased to relate to this House that I did have an opportunity to meet with the Ontario drinking water stewardship panel yesterday. That panel comprises 11

representatives, many of them from rural Ontario: Al Lauzon, the chair, a University of Guelph professor and past chair of the Ontario Rural Council; Ron Bonnett, president of the Ontario Federation of Agriculture; Dale Cowan, the director of the

Ontario Agri Business Association; John Maaskant of the Chicken Farmers of Ontario, chair of the Ontario Farm Animal Council and co-chair of the Ontario Farm Environmental Coalition; and many other members who will help our government examine and

deliver the $7 million in stewardship funding that has been put in place, $5 million of which will be allocated to support action to protect land and water surrounding municipal water wells and surface water intake, and $2 million to support local

outreach programs so that we can deliver clean, safe drinking water right across the province, something that the opposition obviously --

The Speaker: New question.

AGRICULTURE PROGRAMS

Mr. Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): A question to the Minister of Agriculture: On October 18, 2005, during estimates you said, "The CAIS program has not met their needs." You were

referring to grain and oilseed farmers. On November 23 last year, you said, "Their needs are not being met by the business risk management program that's in place at the present time." And on April 7, this spring, you said, "All provinces

recognize that CAIS is not working well."

Minister, you've talked about the need to transform CAIS. The only transformation we've seen is your disappearing act of late. Where is the analysis the Ontario Federation of Agriculture requested on farm

income if NISA was still in place? Has that analysis been done?

Hon. Leona Dombrowsky (Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs): I'm very happy to have an opportunity to correct the record for the honourable member and to speak about CAIS and how

our government is working with our colleague ministers from across Canada to improve the CAIS program.

In 2005, we acted very swiftly to replace the deposit that was required of those who were going to participate, and it has now been replaced with a fee. That's what they wanted. We also announced that we are

amending the formula to make negative margins coverable under this program. Another thing that we did just in September came at a cost of some $96 million, but we did adjust inventory valuations for the program. This is something that was

identified by producers. Not all provincial governments across Canada have done this, but we have. At our last meeting in June, again with respect to CAIS, our provincial ministers said that they want to look at --

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

Mr. Barrett: Minister, please don't tell us about changing the method for inventory evaluation. That's old news. That was four months late as it was. You've had three years to get this right.

Farmers are getting tired of being tricked on this file. Don McCabe of the OFA says, "We need to see immediate action." OFA president Bonnett states, "Workable proposals to rectify inequities have been repeatedly put forward but ignored by

governments."

Just what is this transformation, Minister? Some questions: Are you funding a risk management program for cash crop? Are you bringing back NISA for farmers? What about self-directed production insurance for

hort.? What is the transformation? What are you doing?

Hon. Mrs. Dombrowsky: I'm very happy to stand in this House and remind the honourable member -- I find it interesting you are quoting Ron Bonnett today when just the question before, our

member cited Ron Bonnett, the president of the OFA, and you laughed at him. Shame on you.

What our government has committed to do with respect to business risk management for farmers -- in our budget document, we said that this government remains committed to a multi-year strategy that will

stabilize and strengthen the agriculture industry, but it does require the federal government's participation. And let me remind the honourable member that a few weeks ago, when the federal government had a $13-billion surplus, they put it in the

bank. They didn't assign one cent to farmers or to risk management programs. So if you want to talk about people stepping aside from the issue, you call your federal member.

The Speaker: New question.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. The leader of the third party is waiting to ask his question.

HYDRO RATES

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Premier. Forest-sector communities across northern Ontario have been devastated by the McGuinty government's misguided hydro

rate policy, your policy of driving hydro rates through the roof. The northern Ontario Forestry Coalition says that a total of 25,000 direct and indirect jobs are being destroyed as a result of your misguided hydro rate policy. The latest casualty

is St. Marys Paper of Sault Ste. Marie, which filed for bankruptcy protection last Thursday. The question is this: Is your government going to act to reduce industrial hydro rates for the forest products sector in northern Ontario, or are you

going to destroy an additional 400 direct jobs at St. Marys Paper in Sault Ste. Marie?

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

Hon. Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy): I'm pleased to inform the House that the Independent Electricity System Operator now points out that the industrial price of electricity is lower today

than when this government took office three years ago.

We acknowledge that there is a challenge for the forestry sector, and this government has responded with a $1-billion investment that is applied across the north, particularly in the northwest. We remain

committed to working with those communities.

It's because of the steps we undertook three years ago, steps that member voted against -- you know, he's really interesting. He voted against putting a price cap on power and then he voted against taking it

off. He's been all over the map on it.

I've got to tell you, the only way to lower price in electricity is to increase the supply of electricity or to decrease the demand for it. We're doing both: a $13-billion investment in the energy sector

that's resulting in lower power prices.

I say to the member, unlike the 40% price increase you inflicted on this province, the industrial price of electricity is --

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

Mr. Hampton: I'm not surprised that the Premier doesn't want to answer this question. After all, it was the Premier who spoke to northern municipal leaders, now about seven months ago, and

said that the McGuinty government was going to look at reducing hydro rates. But since then, thousands more jobs have been destroyed in the northern Ontario forest sector.

Premier, you know what northern Ontario municipal leaders, union leaders and forest sector leaders asked of your government. They said, reduce the hydro rate for the forest products sector to 4.5 cents a

kilowatt hour, all fees and charges included. St. Marys, in their press release, said that your misguided policy of driving hydro rates through the roof was a major factor in driving them to seek bankruptcy protection.

My question to the Premier is this: When are you going to act on what you said in Thunder Bay? When are you going to reduce hydro rates for the forest products sector --

The Speaker: Thank you. The Minister of Energy.

Hon. Mr. Duncan: A skill-testing question for the House: Who was it that in 2002 said regional pricing wouldn't work? In fact, what did he say? Here's what someone said -- a skill-testing

question for the member, who lacks any skill when it comes to electricity. He said, "This essentially means that the one-price system we've always had, the system that says we're all equal citizens of Ontario, would be gone.... It means some

consumers should be prepared to get whacked over the head." He opposed that then; now he's changed his mind.

Let me tell you what we've done. We have increased the supply of electricity and decreased the price of electricity. Unlike that member opposite, whose government cancelled conservation programs, we have

embraced them in a terrific way. In terms of the forest sector industry, $1 billion in investments to protect the northern economy, to protect the men and women who draw their incomes --

The Speaker: Thank you.

PETITIONS

LANDFILL

Mr. Norman W. Sterling (Lanark-Carleton): To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas there is currently a proposal to more than double the size of the Carp landfill in west Ottawa; and

"Whereas this site has been in operation for some 30 years and had been expected to close in 2010; and

"Whereas the surrounding community has grown rapidly for the past 10 years and is continuing to grow; and

"Whereas other options to an expanded landfill have yet to be considered; and

"Whereas the municipal councillors representing this area ... and the MPP, Norm Sterling, all oppose this expansion;

"We, the undersigned, support our local representatives and petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to ensure the Minister of the Environment does not approve the expansion of the Carp landfill and

instead finds other waste management alternatives."

COMMUNITY MEDIATION

Mr. Bob Delaney (Mississauga West): I have a petition to the Ontario Legislative Assembly. It has been sent to me by Wayne Browning and Gillian Taylor from Inter-Cultural Neighbourhood Social

Services; they're some of the 50,000 clients of ICNSS every year. It reads as follows:

"Whereas many types of civil disputes may be resolved through community mediation delivered by trained mediators, who are volunteers working with the parties in the dispute; and

"Whereas Inter-Cultural Neighbourhood Social Services established the Peel Community Mediation Service in 1999 with support from the government of Ontario through the Trillium Foundation, the Rotary Club of

Mississauga West and the United Way of Peel, and has proven the viability and success of community mediation; and

"Whereas the city of Mississauga and the town of Caledon have endorsed the Peel Community Mediation Service, and law enforcement bodies refer many cases to the Peel Community Mediation Service as an

alternative to a court dispute; and

"Whereas court facilities and court time are both scarce and expensive, the cost of community mediation is very small, and the extra expense incurred for lack of community mediation in Peel region would be

much greater than the small annual cost of funding community mediation;

"Be it therefore resolved that the government of Ontario, through the Ministry of the Attorney General, support and fund the ongoing service delivery of the Peel Community Mediation Service through

Inter-Cultural Neighbourhood Social Services."

This is an excellent petition. I am pleased to sign and support it and to ask page Adam to carry it for me.

WATER QUALITY

Mr. John O'Toole (Durham): I am pleased to present a petition on clean water. It may explain one of the questions in the House today. It reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas every Ontarian wants the best water quality possible; and

"Whereas the goal of clean water can be achieved effectively through amendments to existing legislation; and

"Whereas the McGuinty Liberals are determined to hammer through the flawed legislation known as the Clean Water Act; and

"Whereas the McGuinty Liberals have failed to put in place adequate, stable, long-term funding into" Bill 43; and

"Whereas the McGuinty Liberals have failed to effectively address the numerous problems in the bill; and

"Whereas rural Ontario stands to suffer significantly under this poorly-thought-out policy;

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

"To not pass Bill 43 (the Clean Water Act) until proper funding and amendments are in place."

I am pleased to present this on behalf of Megan Doherty of Peterborough, Martin Dinnisson of Kapuskasing and other people from the province of Ontario.

FAIR ACCESS TO PROFESSIONS

Mr. Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): Speaker, thank you very much for recognizing me. I keep getting petitions on Bill 124 in support of skilled immigrants. The Minister of Citizenship is here to

listen to this. It reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the McGuinty government is committed to establishing measures that will break down barriers for Ontario newcomers; and

"Whereas these measures will ensure that the 34 regulatory professions in Ontario have admissions and application practices that are fair, clear and open; and

"Whereas these measures will include the establishment of a fairness commissioner and an access centre for internationally trained individuals; and

"Whereas, through providing a fair and equitable system, newcomers will be able to apply their global experience, which will not only be beneficial to their long-term career goals, but also to the Ontario

economy as a whole;

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

"That all members of the House support the Fair Access to Regulated Professions Act, 2006, Bill 124, and work to ensure its prompt passage in the Ontario Legislature."

I'm delighted to affix my signature to this petition, because I --

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Petitions, the member for Ottawa-Orléans.

Ms. Lisa MacLeod (Nepean-Carleton): Nepean-Carleton.

The Deputy Speaker: The member for Nepean-Carleton.

Ms. MacLeod: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I look a lot like the member for Ottawa-Orléans, eh?

HEALTH PREMIUMS

Ms. Lisa MacLeod (Nepean-Carleton): In any event, "We Call on the Government of Ontario to Eliminate the Health Tax....

"Whereas, according to the Department of National Defence, there are over 30,000 serving military personnel calling Ontario home; and

"Whereas, according to the most recent census data, there are more than 1.6 million senior citizens over the age of 65 living in Ontario; and

"Whereas the Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario plans on eliminating this illegitimate tax for all Ontarians after it forms government in 2007; and

"Whereas, as an interim measure, the illegitimate health tax should be removed from those who protect Canada and those who have built Ontario;

"We, the undersigned, call on the government of Ontario to immediately eliminate the illegitimate health tax, beginning with serving military personnel and senior citizens."

I approve of this, and I will affix my signature.

PUBLIC TRANSIT

Mr. Lorenzo Berardinetti (Scarborough Southwest): I have a petition. It's addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, and it reads as follows:

"Whereas Scarborough Southwest is a growing community dependent on public transit to move people around;

"Whereas the city of Toronto and the Toronto Transit Commission are calling for and predicting continued growth in Scarborough Southwest over the next 25 years;

"Whereas the Toronto Transit Commission, in its growth plan, has called for the expansion of subway service to cover more of Scarborough;

"Whereas the government of Ontario has traditionally assisted the city of Toronto in funding subway expansion as recently as the Sheppard subway expansion project;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to work in concert with the city of Toronto and come up with a funding arrangement to assist in expanding subway service to Scarborough."

I agree with this petition, affix my signature to it and give it to page Jasmine, who is here with me today.

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): I have more petitions I've received to do with hydro line maintenance. It reads: "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas Hydro One Networks Inc. provides hydro to many communities in the region of Parry Sound-Muskoka; and

"Whereas there have recently been several lengthy power outages in this region affecting both private residences, schools and businesses; and

"Whereas rural customers pay among the highest distribution and delivery charges for electricity;

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

"That the Minister of Energy and the Ontario Energy Board require Hydro One Networks Inc. to make improvements in line maintenance and forestry management in the region of Parry Sound-Muskoka to ensure

reliable energy for its customers."

I support this petition and affix my signature.

HEALTH PREMIUMS

Mr. Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): This one is titled "We Call on the Government of Ontario to Eliminate the Health Tax

"To the Parliament of Ontario:

"Whereas, according to the Department of National Defence, there are over 30,000 serving military personnel calling Ontario home; and

"Whereas, according to the most recent census data, there are more than 1.6 million senior citizens over the age of 65 living in Ontario; and

"Whereas the Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario plans on eliminating this illegitimate tax for all Ontarians after it forms government in 2007; and

"Whereas, as an interim measure, the illegitimate health tax should be removed from those who protect Canada and those who have built Ontario;

"We, the undersigned, call on the government of Ontario to immediately eliminate the illegitimate health tax, beginning with serving military personnel and senior citizens."

I wholeheartedly support this petition and affix my signature.

LANDFILL

Ms. Lisa MacLeod (Nepean-Carleton): This is on behalf of my constituents in Nepean-Carleton.

"Whereas there is currently a proposal to more than double the size of the Carp landfill in west Ottawa; and

"Whereas this site has been in operation for some 30 years and had been expected to close in 2010; and

"Whereas the surrounding community has grown rapidly for the past 10 years and is continuing to grow; and

"Whereas other options to an expanded landfill have yet to be considered; and

"Whereas the municipal councillors representing this area ..." as well as myself "and the MPP, Norm Sterling, all oppose this expansion;

"We, the undersigned, support our local representatives and petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to ensure the Minister of the Environment does not approve the expansion of the Carp landfill and

instead to find other waste management alternatives."

I affix my signature. I support this wholeheartedly.

WATER QUALITY

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): I've received petitions to do with the Clean Water Act. This petition reads:

"Amend the Clean Water Act

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas every Ontarian wants the best water quality possible; and

"Whereas the goal of clean water can be achieved effectively through amendments to existing legislation; and

"Whereas the McGuinty Liberals are determined to hammer through the flawed legislation known as the Clean Water Act; and

"Whereas the McGuinty Liberals have failed to put in place adequate, stable, long-term funding into the bill; and

"Whereas the McGuinty Liberals have failed to effectively address the numerous problems in the bill; and

"Whereas rural Ontario stands to suffer significantly under this poorly thought out policy;

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

"To not pass Bill 43 (the Clean Water Act) until proper funding and amendments are in place."

PROPERTY RIGHTS

Ms. Lisa MacLeod (Nepean-Carleton): This is a very important issue to my constituents in Nepean-Carleton.

"Whereas the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is silent on property rights; and

"Whereas the Alberta Bill of Rights specifically protects the right to the enjoyment of property; and

"Whereas the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms provides that `Every person has a right to the peaceful enjoyment and free disposition of his property, except to the extent provided by law'; and

"Whereas ownership rights should not be abridged or usurped without due process of law; and

"Whereas owners of all lands affected by expropriation should have the right to be included as parties to a required inquiry to consider the merits of the objectives of the expropriating authority; and

"Whereas the decision of an expropriating authority should be subject to judicial review; and

"Whereas, subject to specific limitations of law, the right to peaceful enjoyment of one's land must be recognized by Ontario law;

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

"To pass Bill 57, the Land Rights and Responsibilities Act, 2006."

Since I spoke in favour of and voted for that bill, I affix my signature.

CAFETERIA FOOD GUIDELINES

Mr. Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas childhood obesity rates have tripled over the past two decades in Canada; and

"Whereas the annual amount of money the health care system uses to mend preventable obesity-related illnesses is $1.6 billion; and

"Whereas the Ontario food premises regulation only provides safety policies that must be followed by the Ontario school boards' cafeterias, but no defined regulations regarding the nutrition standard of the

food being served at the cafeterias; and

"Whereas there is a need to encourage nutritious standards in high school cafeterias that support Canada's Guidelines for Healthy Eating; and

"Whereas the private member's bill proposed by Nupur Dogra under Making the Grade and her fellow students at Iroquois Ridge High School will require all Ontario school boards' cafeterias to adopt and abide

[by] healthier eating standards (similar to Canada's Guidelines for Healthy Eating) that will govern the food choices;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to pass the private member's bill that will amend the Ontario school boards' cafeteria food guidelines to follow healthier food standards in

all Ontario high school cafeterias."

IMMIGRANTS' SKILLS

Ms. Deborah Matthews (London North Centre): This is to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas Ontario enjoys the continuing benefit of the contributions of men and women who choose to leave their country of origin in order to settle in Canada, raise their families, educate their children and

pursue their livelihoods and careers; and

"Whereas newcomers to Canada who choose to settle in Ontario find frequent, arbitrary and unnecessary obstacles that prevent skilled tradespeople, professional and managerial talent from practising the

professions, trades and occupations for which they have been trained in their country of origin; and

"Whereas action by Ontario's trades and professions could remove many such barriers, but Ontario's trades and professions have failed to recognize that such structural barriers exist, much less to take action

to remove them, and to provide fair, timely, transparent and cost-effective access to trades and professions for new Canadians trained outside Canada;

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

"That the Ontario Legislative Assembly urge the members of all parties to swiftly pass Bill 124, the Fair Access to Regulated Professions Act, 2006, and to require Ontario's regulated professions and trades to

review and modify their procedures and qualification requirements to swiftly meet the needs of Ontario's employers, Ontario's newcomers and their own membership, all of whom desperately need the very skills new Canadians bring working for their

organizations, for their trades and professions, and for their families."

I completely agree with this and will sign it.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

BUDGET MEASURES ACT, 2006 (NO. 2) /

LOI DE 2006 SUR LES MESURES

BUDGÉTAIRES (NO 2)

Resuming the debate adjourned on October 30, 2006, on the motion for second reading of Bill 151,

An Act to enact various 2006 Budget measures and to enact, amend or repeal various Acts / Projet de loi

151, Loi édictant diverses mesures énoncées dans le Budget de 2006 et édictant, modifiant ou abrogeant diverses lois.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Further debate?

Ms. Lisa MacLeod (Nepean-Carleton): I'm pleased to kick off today's debate for the Budget Measures Act, the second act stemming from the 2006 Ontario budget. The PC finance critic, my good

friend from Erie-Lincoln, will be speaking to this bill tomorrow night, on his birthday no less, as a deferred lead. I'm sure he will present the Legislature with a very detailed and thorough presentation.

As you know, Mr. Speaker, around six months ago, shortly after the March 30 by-election, I gave my inaugural speech in this place. In fact, my inaugural speech was regarding the original budget bill. Members

may recall I ran on the heels of the by-election budget, a smoke-and-mirrors show by the McGuinty Liberals to buy votes off the electorate using the electorate's own money. Of course, we know how this worked; in fact, it didn't work. That is why

I'm joined here by my colleagues and friends the members from Whitby-Ajax and Toronto-Danforth, who also ran in the by-election.

At the time of my inaugural speech, on April 18, 2006, I indicated to this chamber the points of view of the people of Nepean-Carleton. As you will agree, the people of Whitby-Ajax, Toronto-Danforth and

Nepean-Carleton all had a direct voice on how they viewed this McGuinty budget. I informed the Legislature last April that the people of Nepean-Carleton viewed the budget with cynicism. I told this place:

"When a government spends itself purposely into deficit when it should be in the black and continues to tax Ontarians, the people of Nepean-Carleton are justifiably concerned. When a government takes a

$2.4-billion tax hike in an illegitimate McGuinty health tax -- a tax ... on hard-working families -- and then the government claims to provide better health care yet has spent millions of that health tax outside the health sector, you will

understand that families are understandably upset. When a government has the audacity to call its leader the education Premier while college professors are on strike and thousands of students are fretting over a lost school year, it is more than

reasonable for parents, students and college professors to demand that their government take some leadership on a crisis that you'll remember only came to a head as election day drew near. These are the very sorts of issues that condemned the

scandal-ridden federal Liberal Party out of office and into defeat."

Mr. Speaker, you know all too well that my party has opposed each of the budgets of this government. That is because we fundamentally oppose the high taxes, high hydro rates, and runaway-spending nature of

this McGuinty government. The McGuinty Liberals have over $6 billion more in revenue than they said they needed in the last election campaign in order to keep their plentiful promises. It is time they reduced the burden of taxes on Ontario's

working families, seniors and businesses. This budget lacks tax relief for the working families and seniors of Ontario. The McGuinty government has approximately $6 billion in surplus, as compared to their election fiscal plan, yet continues to

condemn working families to paying $2,000 more in taxes, user fees and hydro costs than they did before the last election.

Last May, when I asked this Legislature to join me in supporting my motion to eliminate the illegitimate health tax for seniors and serving military personnel, even though there was this massive surplus, the

Liberals voted against it. That's shameful. Why does the McGuinty government have such disdain for working Ontarians? Even though the dollars were there and with a good, clear conscience we could have given a hand to our seniors living on a fixed

income and to our soldiers sacrificing their lives for us in Afghanistan, who are not even covered under OHIP, this Liberal government voted against them. There is still no plan for this Liberal government to repeal their illegitimate health tax,

the single biggest promise of this government. The Premier looked into the camera and promised Ontarians he would not raise taxes, but he did it anyway.

In fact, the only reason the McGuinty Liberals had to break their promise on taxes is that they also broke a promise on spending restraint. Their own public accounts prove that, in 2006, they spent a massive

$5.7 billion more than they promised in the fiscal plan released during the 2003 election. The Premier claimed, when he implemented the health tax on the middle class, that it was needed -- needed -- to pay for his promises in health and

education, but the public accounts prove that's just not true. He needed $2.4 billion from the so-called health tax on the middle class in this province to fund that broken spending promise and still balance the budget.

That being said, provincial revenue without the health tax was actually $2.7 billion more than he counted on in his election promise, and the last budget still wasn't balanced. That will be just another in a

long line of saying anything just to get and stay elected.

The McGuinty Liberals tried to use the report of former auditor Erik Peters to say that there was a permanent or structural deficit and that they needed a permanent tax on the middle class to deal with it, but

Mr. Peters never said there was a structural deficit. In fact, $4.4 billion of the potential $5.6-billion deficit he identified was in revenue shortfalls, mainly because of one-time factors. Let me read them to you. In fact, most of the

circumstances he cited were one-time events. These one-time events included $961 million in lower crown corporation revenues because of SARS and the blackout; $1.16 billion in lower tax revenues due to SARS and the sudden appreciation in the

dollar; $720 million in SARS-related health spending; and $130 million in tourism tax breaks after SARS.

Peters also assumed that the $771 million in increased transfers from the then federal Liberal government would not flow. In reality, a few months later, the federal transfers flowed as outlined in the Eves

budget. Peters accepted the Liberal assumption that there wouldn't be any of the estimated $300 million in year-end savings, even though the Liberals included at least that much in year-end savings in every subsequent budget and have actually

increased it steadily until it reached $700 million in the 2006-07 budget.

Now, the so-called health tax wasn't to meet their spending promises. After all, if the McGuinty Liberals had kept their spending promises, they would have eliminated that health tax last year and still would

have had a surplus of over $2 billion. Speaking of breaking the promise on fiscal restraint, if there's one thing that characterizes the McGuinty government more than anything else, it's broken promises: broken promises on energy costs; broken

promises on coal plants; broken promises on private hospitals. In my own constituency, the Royal Ottawa Hospital: we campaigned, of course, in 2003 to build that hospital; they, on the other side, campaigned against it. I remember being at the

rally that said, "Save our hospital. We will build this hospital." But they were too afraid. They flip-flopped and broke their promise, and now that hospital, of course, is flourishing like it should be.

They broke their promises on taxes, as I've just said, broken promises that have hurt hard-pressed families right across Ontario, and today, we add one more to the list: Dalton McGuinty's broken promise to

restrain spending. Over the past three years, under the McGuinty Liberals' watch, program spending has increased by an average of 8.4% while the economy was growing at 4.4% GDP, and this when times were good. What we are seeing now is more of the

same runaway, out-of-control Liberal spending, but now the economy is slowing and good jobs are disappearing.

We've seen this before. Government spending that exceeds the growth of the economy simply isn't sustainable. It doesn't protect jobs, and it doesn't help real families cope with economic uncertainty. Mr.

McGuinty simply cannot break his spending restraint promise by almost $6 billion and still have an attractive business climate at a time, by the government's own reckoning, that we need it the most to encourage investment and help save good-paying

jobs.

This is a major disconnect between McGuinty's spending and real people's lives, the people we represent on the floor of this Legislature.

As I said in my inaugural speech, during the by-election budget, the people of Nepean-Carleton were given an opportunity to judge the McGuinty government and its priorities against their values, and they

resoundingly rejected this government, its priorities and its ever-convenient by-election budget. Nowhere in the budget were self-reliance, strong families or safer streets. In fact Nepean-Carleton and the city of Ottawa weren't valued at all.

Instead, we saw a budget from the GTA where $244 million was taken out of the agriculture budget and $82 million was taken from the children and youth services ministry. There were no new infrastructure funding announcements in my city of Ottawa

and no new long-term-care beds, which we desperately need in our city.

The McGuinty government did little to offer the people of Nepean-Carleton strong leadership in that budget and they did nothing to offer the farmers in my community solutions to the crisis on the family farm,

whether they are from Greely, Richmond, Osgoode or Metcalfe. Farmers have all been forgotten by this government, and we see that each and every day with different pieces of legislation.

The McGuinty government also did nothing to offer young families like mine who live in Stittsville, Barrhaven, Manotick and Greely, a better way to make ends meet. Instead, families like mine with young

children are paying over $2,000 more in taxes since this government took office.

The McGuinty government did nothing to offer patients reduced wait times. In fact, each week in this Legislature, I raise the issue of long-term-care beds and the crisis that's evolving in my city because we

are short, as I have mentioned repeatedly, 850 long-term-care beds, and they're doing nothing about it -- absolutely nothing -- three years into their mandate; just a pittance of funding, only after it's raised in this Legislature.

This is a government addicted to spending but without a plan. There's no accountability, no guarantee that we ever get value for money. Rather, they recklessly spend on items that are meaningless to the people

of Ontario and certainly to the people of Nepean-Carleton.

Let me illustrate how the crowd opposite recklessly spends our money: $6 million to drop the C from OLGC; $20 million for raises for Liberal appointees on government agencies and boards; $100 million for

partisan government advertising; $91 million to fire nurses; $219,000 to pay Liberal ad firms to redraw our trillium -- a trillium logo, I might add, that made it through 42 years, seven governments and three major political parties, yet members

opposite believe they are above an institution that has served this province for over 42 years. That is the blatant disrespect they not only have for Ontario's institutions but for Ontario's voters and taxpayers. This government is out of touch,

spending ridiculous amounts of money while thousands of hard-pressed Ontarians can barely keep up with the bills.

This bill implements measures contained in the 2006 Ontario budget that was presented to the Legislature by the former Minister of Finance, Dwight Duncan, on March 23, 2006. Nothing has changed since the seven

days preceding that by-election budget. As I said, on April 18, my people had a choice between a McGuinty government that cuts and slashes the agriculture budget or the Progressive Conservative Party that defends the family farm, and they chose

the Progressive Conservative Party, the party of rural Ontario, and they'll do it again on October 4, 2007. The families of Nepean-Carleton had a choice between the fiscal irresponsibility of this Liberal government or the Progressive Conservative

Party of Ontario that demands balanced budgets and scrapping an unaccountable tax on families. That's what they're going to get on October 4, 2007.

Last March, they chose fiscal accountability and sent a Progressive Conservative to Queen's Park because families like mine need a break. They need to make sure that the health tax is not in the government's

pocket, because it's going to anything and everything but health care in this province. You can tell when you're looking at surgical wait times in my city, which are the highest on average in all of Ontario, when you look at the wait times at

CHEO, which I know the members opposite are hanging their heads about right now, because the children in Ottawa are waiting, on average, one year to get spinal surgery. We don't have that type of time for young children who are developing. We

don't have a year to wait. The platitudes --

Mr. Ted McMeekin (Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Aldershot): Send us the cheque.

Ms. MacLeod: Yes, "Send us the cheque." That's what they're asking right now, if we can just send a cheque to the Liberal Party of Ontario so they can continue to spend your money recklessly.

But seniors in Nepean-Carleton had a choice, too, between a McGuinty government that creates more bureaucracy -- not more doctors, not more nurses and not reduced waiting times -- with its local health integration networks or the Progressive

Conservative Party, the party that wants to explore new options in health care so we can put patients and seniors -- not more red tape -- first. I'm begging them today, if they want to fix that long-term health crisis in Ottawa right now, do it.

You can take the credit for it. I can just keep raising it every single day in this Legislature, but fix the problem. Eight hundred and fifty beds -- if you want to do it, I encourage you to do it.

This government lost credibility on day one with the everyday hard-working Ontarian and the everyday person who lives in Ottawa, because they're struggling to pay the bills and there is absolutely no

improvement in their life whatsoever. When a government claims a deficit but has a surplus, and yet continues to tax families, just as this government does, people lose faith in their institutions and their representatives.

The people of Nepean-Carleton are not alone in judging the Budg