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

March 27, 2007

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 2007-Mar-27 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Tuesday 27 March 2007 Mardi 27 mars 2007

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

GOVERNMENT'S RECORD

SOUTHSIDE SHUFFLE

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

YOUTH BOCCE CANADA TOURNAMENT

GTA POOLING

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

ONTARIO BUDGET

MOTIONS

COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

CHILD POVERTY

ORAL QUESTIONS

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

CHILD POVERTY

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

PROPERTY TAXATION

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

NOTICE OF DISSATISFACTION

PETITIONS

SMITHS FALLS ECONOMY

LONG-TERM CARE

GTA POOLING

LONG-TERM CARE

LAKERIDGE HEALTH

LONG-TERM CARE

STEVENSON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL

LAKERIDGE HEALTH

GRAVESITES OF FORMER PREMIERS

LAKERIDGE HEALTH

IDENTITY THEFT

LABORATORY SERVICES

LAKERIDGE HEALTH

GTA POOLING

ORDERS OF THE DAY

2007 ONTARIO BUDGET /

BUDGET DE L'ONTARIO DE 2007

ADJOURNMENT DEBATE

HORSE RACING INDUSTRY

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

GOVERNMENT'S RECORD

Mr. Ernie Hardeman (Oxford): Today I rise to ask who is running the province of Ontario. Over and over we have seen Dalton McGuinty asleep on the job, denying problems exist until the Ombudsman catches him with his hand in the cookie jar. Then he is suddenly shocked that a problem exists and promises he will implement all the recommendations.

Despite the calls from homeowners, Dalton McGuinty did nothing about property tax assessment until the Ombudsman released his report.

Despite complaints from victims, Dalton McGuinty did nothing about the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board until the Ombudsman released his report.

Despite questions in this House, the Fifth Estate and articles in every paper in Ontario, Dalton McGuinty denied there was a problem at the OLG. The Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal promised that everything was fine. The people of Ontario went on spending their hard-earned money on lottery tickets, believing that everything was fair.

Once again, the Ombudsman seems to care more about the people of Ontario than this government does. He investigated. He found the problem. He came up with recommendations. And suddenly, now that he got caught, the minister recognizes that there is a problem at the OLG. He is trying to blame it on everyone else, but the truth is that he is the minister, he is the one responsible, he is the one who got caught covering up the problem. He is the one who should take the blame, and this time an apology isn't enough.

SOUTHSIDE SHUFFLE

Mr. Tim Peterson (Mississauga South): I rise today to give credit to festivals that add so much to the fabric of our communities. I wish to speak about the Southside Shuffle in Mississauga South. It occurs every weekend after Labour Day. We bring in some of the best blues and jazz talent from all over North America. People travel from all over the United States to come to Port Credit, in the heart of south Mississauga, to listen to fantastic blues and jazz.

Three years ago, we formed a special gala committee to raise money for local charities, and last year we were able to donate $40,000 to five local charities in Mississauga South as a great contribution to our community.

The Southside Shuffle was founded by Chuck Jackson of the Downchild Blues Band and is now in its eighth season of great prosperity and great economic development in the town of Port Credit in the heart of Mississauga South.

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

Mr. Joseph N. Tascona (Barrie–Simcoe—Bradford): Lottery is a game of trust which has been broken as the McGuinty government stood by while the lotteries were fixed. This $100-million-plus taxpayer rip-off was ignored by the OLG, according to the Ombudsman's March 2007 report.

The McGuinty government was not only asleep at the switch but used its government majority on the standing committee on government agencies on November 29, 2006, to defeat my motion to recall the OLG to appear before the committee to answer to issues reported on the CBC on matters of public trust in the OLG's operation.

I wrote the dissenting opinion for the official opposition party to the OLG report, which was a whitewash report by the government. The McGuinty Liberals, by shutting down the government agencies committee review of the OLG, not only endorsed the scratch-and-lose rip-off of hard-working, law-abiding Ontarians, but by their actions have undermined the public trust in lotteries and condoned the theft of millions of dollars that could have been used to provide better health care and improve our communities through Trillium grants.

We Ontarians deserve better and more ethical government.

YOUTH BOCCE CANADA TOURNAMENT

Mr. Paul Ferreira (York South—Weston): This past Friday I had the distinct privilege of attending the 14th annual Youth Bocce Canada tournament for athletes with disabilities. The tournament took place in my riding and featured 24 teams of five athletes each who demonstrated the true meaning of good sportsmanship.

At the end of the tournament, eight of the teams were presented with championship trophies. However, it was very clear that all of the athletes were champions. I was delighted to be called upon to hand out one of the trophies and present participation medals to a number of the athletes, who were accompanied by proud parents and teachers.

In addition to the competition, the tournament featured the crowning of a very special young woman named Angelia Nolis as Miss Youth Bocce Canada.

The growing success of Youth Bocce Canada can be attributed to the tireless effort and dedication of its many volunteers, especially the president, Lee Prioriello. Lee founded the organization in 1994, and has seen his passion grow to the point where it now supports more than 350 athletes across the GTA. Youth Bocce Canada is an associate partner of Special Olympics Ontario. Its athletes have competed internationally at the highest levels of the Special Olympics movement. I ask all members of this House to join me in saluting Youth Bocce Canada for the invaluable contribution it is making in enriching the lives of young people with disabilities.

GTA POOLING

Mr. Bob Delaney (Mississauga West): Goodbye, GTA pooling. Mississauga won't miss you. Greater Toronto area pooling was a Mike Harris Tory creation to offset the costs of amalgamating the city of Toronto. By 2006, Peel region had paid approximately $544 million into GTA pooling and got nothing. In the 2006 fiscal year alone, Peel region sent $62 million to the pooling fund, some $40 million of that from the pockets of Mississauga taxpayers. To cover some of this lost revenue and maintain Mississauga's historically balanced budget, Mississauga taxpayers had to raise their property tax rates higher than Toronto's, whose property taxes are subsidized from our GTA pooling money.

Last week's Ontario budget will put an end to this regressive Conservative tax, and it enables revenues generated in the 905 region to address 905 region needs. For 2007, GTA pooling contributions will be rolled back to 2004 levels. For each of the next six years, pooling costs will be reduced by one sixth of the 2004 levels until the program is fully eliminated in 2013. Mississauga's labour shortage results in some 60,000 more people per day commuting into our city than commuting out. The $40 million recovered annually from this Mike Harris Tory legacy tax will address our big-city issues and build the city of Mississauga.

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

Mr. Jim Wilson (Simcoe—Grey): Today Premier McGuinty is visiting Peterborough and Cobourg to talk about his latest budget. Instead of bragging about yet another document filled with promises to be broken, perhaps he should be explaining to the good people of Peterborough and Cobourg why he left a mess at the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corp. before getting out of Dodge. Perhaps the Premier during his travels today will meet some hard-working, tax-paying people who purchased lottery tickets. I sincerely hope he'll be able to look them straight in the eye and tell them why he could not show the leadership expected from a Premier to help restore faith in Ontario's failed lottery system.

The Premier says the opposition is being partisan with this issue. Premier, tell that to the people of Peterborough and Cobourg who could have been cheated out of their lottery winnings because of your lack of leadership and your sweeping-under-the-carpet tactics. The Premier is no doubt hoping that David Caplan, the minister responsible for OLG, will clean up the mess. We know that the minister had months to fix the problem but waited to get his marching orders from the Ombudsman rather than from his real boss, Dalton McGuinty. Ontarians should ask themselves, "If the Ombudsman had not intervened, for how long would David Caplan allow the litany of problems to continue?"

I say to the minister that you can run, but you can't hide from taking the blame for the OLG. The Premier has left you here at Queen's Park today to fend for yourself and put your head on the chopping block.

ONTARIO BUDGET

Mr. Phil McNeely (Ottawa—Orléans): I would like to congratulate the Premier and Minister Sorbara for delivering a successful budget last week, one that continues to prioritize children, education, health care and infrastructure. I would also like to thank them for including another important priority in the budget, and that priority is Ontario's environment. For example, this budget allocates more than $200 million over the next three years to fund climate change initiatives. This announcement is very important to me, as I have introduced a private member's bill to create an annual Climate Change Awareness Day.

This day would help encourage Ontarians to take their own climate change initiatives to complement the work of our government.

There are many other environmental initiatives addressed in the budget as well, including $125 million for immediate initiatives to establish a greener economy. That includes a $150 rebate for homeowners who get the home energy audits, replacing a federal program that was cut but much needed; $2 million to fund tree planting to remove carbon dioxide from the air; and $1.5 million to distribute $500,000 energy-efficient light bulbs to Ontario homes this year. These light bulbs will save enough energy to power 5,200 homes a year.

We're also setting targets to double the installed capacity of renewable energy generation by 2025. We are supporting the production of ethanol fuel in Ontario through the $520-million Ontario ethanol growth fund.

Our government also remains committed to phasing out the use of coal-fired electricity plants, which will reduce greenhouse emissions by 30 million tonnes. We are taking action to reduce gridlock and greenhouse gas emissions by providing alternatives to driving, with a $352 million investment in the Move Ontario program—

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you. The member for Huron—Bruce.

Mrs. Carol Mitchell (Huron—Bruce): More good news for the riding of Huron—Bruce: I rise today to speak about an exciting announcement from the recently tabled 2007 budget and the great things that it will do for the riding of Huron—Bruce.

The 2007 budget was very good news to the riding. I want to share the great news with the members, especially across the way: the announcement of $600 million to construct a 500-kilovolt line from Bruce to Milton on a widened existing transmission corridor.

This new transmission agreement, which was chosen by the Ontario Power Authority as their preferred route for Ontario's newest clean energy corridor, will facilitate the transmission of clean energy from the Bruce Power site and the many wind energy sites in the Huron—Bruce area. By moving forward with this project, which will handle approximately 3,000 megawatts of new energy, this government is taking a major step in addressing the orange zone constraints that have been affecting renewable standard offer contract projects in the area. This new line will be completed by 2011.

This announcement from the budget once again solidifies the fact that the McGuinty government is working for the people of Ontario and that this government is fully committed to supporting clean, renewable energy and a clean baseload power—

The Speaker: Thank you. The member for Perth—Middlesex.

Mr. John Wilkinson (Perth—Middlesex): I rise in the House today to speak about how this government's recent budget will take the better path and improve the economy and, in turn, expand opportunity for all Ontarians.

First of all, we balanced the budget and, if we do not require the reserve next year, we are on track for five consecutive balanced budgets. After inheriting a $5.5-billion deficit from the previous Conservative government, we've restored investors' faith in a fiscally responsible Ontario and are now ushering in a new era of balanced budgets.

Our Liberal budget will cut high business education tax rates, benefiting over 500,000 businesses. The experts agree: Len Crispino, president and CEO of the Ontario Chamber of Commerce, raved about our budget, saying, "The reduction in the BET rates ... will lead to increased productivity, job creation and output. Over 300 communities across this province will benefit from reduced industrial and commercial tax rates totalling $540 million."

Incredibly, the Conservatives say they'll vote against this. The Leader of the Opposition says our budget is simply more Liberal spending. Yes, we are spending, but on programs that matter to Ontarians, and we're doing it in a fiscally responsible manner, unlike the Tories, who cut spending on important programs and still managed to add $48 billion to the debt. We already know that John Tory wants to take $2.6 billion out of the health care system while cutting taxes and increasing spending. This is the kind of back-of-an-envelope policy-making that created the $5.5-billion deficit that we inherited and that destroyed public services. We intend to take the better path.

MOTIONS

COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP

Hon. James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism, minister responsible for seniors, Government House Leader): I ask for unanimous consent to put forth a motion without notice regarding the membership of certain committees.

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

Hon. Mr. Bradley: I move that the following change, effective immediately, be made to the membership of the following committee: On the standing committee on public accounts, Mr. Lalonde replaces Mr. Arthurs.

The Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House the motion carry? Carried.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

CHILD POVERTY

Hon. Mary Anne V. Chambers (Minister of Children and Youth Services): It gives me great pleasure to speak about the Ontario child benefit, which Finance Minister Greg Sorbara unveiled last Thursday. We know the future depends on the type of start that we give our children in life. The $2.1-billion Ontario child benefit is a historic investment that will help to give our vulnerable children the opportunity they deserve. It's at the heart of our government's 2007 budget because our government believes that Ontario's future depends on giving our children the best possible start in life.

Unfortunately, many children come from families who are struggling to make ends meet. If only they had some of the opportunities that so many of us have been fortunate to have been afforded, they could move beyond the poverty they struggle against. Our society pays a heavy price when our children grow up in poverty. That heavy price is the cost of failed opportunities, lost hopes and forgotten dreams.

Let me share with you a sampling of statements on poverty from grade 4 and 5 children in North Bay, taken from excerpts from Our Neighbours' Voices: Will We Listen?

"Poverty is being afraid to tell your mom you need new gym shoes."

"Poverty is feeling ashamed when my dad can't get a job."

"Poverty is not getting a hot dog on hot dog day."

"Poverty is pretending that you forgot your lunch."

"Poverty is hiding your feet so the teacher won't get cross when you don't have boots."

"Poverty is not buying books at the book fair."

"Poverty is not getting to go on school trips."

"Poverty is being teased for the way you are dressed."

An Ontario where children and youth have no hope for the future is not the kind of Ontario that our government wishes for its children and youth. Our government has been tackling the issue of poverty from many angles, and we are determined to do more. That is why we are championing strong, progressive initiatives that will make a difference in the lives of 1.3 million Ontario children in 600,000 lower-income families.

The Ontario child benefit is about opportunity. It is about making that opportunity available to everyone. Our government has taken a giant leap forward to expand opportunities for all Ontario's children and families so no one is left behind because of a lack of opportunity.

We cannot separate social and economic priorities if we want to have an inclusive society. So we went one step further than just simply ending the clawback of the national child benefit supplement. We are providing assistance to every lower-income family in Ontario. The Ontario child benefit is about increasing opportunity to help people get out of poverty and get on with building a better future for their children.

The Ontario child benefit is also about giving parents the opportunity to move off social assistance without worrying about losing support for their children. It is about enabling families to make real choices for the betterment of their children and, more importantly, to see the realization of the hopes and dreams they have for their children.

The Ontario child benefit will fundamentally change how our children receive the benefits they need, benefits that our government believes children deserve.

Most income support is provided through social assistance, and that excludes the majority of low-income working families. The Ontario child benefit provides help to all children in lower income families. In the first five years, these families will receive an additional $2.1 billion. Ontario children and their families will be better off.

The experts agree that our government has made the right investment for the right reasons. Gail Nyberg, executive director of the Daily Bread Food Bank, says, "It's been a long time since poverty reduction measures were at the forefront of a provincial budget in Ontario. We congratulate the government for having the courage to take on this significant issue, and we expect to see a reduction in food bank use in the coming years as a result…. The Ontario child benefit will reduce barriers faced by families with children who are trying to leave welfare for work."

Finally, an editorial from the Globe and Mail last Friday said the McGuinty government has "devised an Ontario child benefit that, when fully implemented in … 2011, would be on the cutting edge of 21st-century social policy reform."

Our budget clearly demonstrates that Ontario is well-positioned to take on the challenges of the 21st century. But in order to ensure our province's prosperity, we will need every person in Ontario to achieve his or her individual potential. The Ontario child benefit will help to make this a reality. Helping children in lower income families to succeed is the right thing to do, and it is the smart thing to do for our society—a society that enables all children a real chance at success in life.

I ask all members of this Legislature to join me in supporting the Ontario child benefit. We owe it to the 1.3 million children of Ontario who will benefit; we owe it to the 600,000 families who will benefit. This is an investment in our children, an investment in Ontario families and an investment in the future.

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

Ms. Lisa MacLeod (Nepean—Carleton): I'm pleased to respond, on behalf of John Tory and the Progressive-Conservative caucus, to the Minister of Children and Youth Services. At first blush, this child benefit program is very supportable. The problem with it is that the child benefit program was not designed with children's poverty in mind; it was designed with votes in mind. The cynicism is that sometime this summer, right before Ontario families go to the polls, they will be receiving $250 per child as a cheque under this new Ontario child benefit law.

Interjections.

Ms. MacLeod: They can applaud all they like, but as my leader John Tory said yesterday in this Legislature, "It's interesting to me that when it moves the government, as a result of the electoral timetable, to have a down payment available of this child benefit on July 1, undoubtedly with some flowing letter from the minister or the Premier taking personal credit for this use of the taxpayers" dollars.

Sadly, Dalton McGuinty has had four years to provide some much-needed help to Ontario's children, but he has refused. Only now at the 11th hour, after three and a half years of dithering and delaying, has Dalton McGuinty decided to get serious about child poverty, and he is only doing so because it is an election year.

As Randall Denley, an Ottawa Citizen columnist, pointed out this past week, "A new program to help families on welfare and the working poor is the centrepiece of the budget. It's the kind of thing that will be applauded by the NDP voters the Liberals are trolling for, but the government can't even afford a modest new monthly payment this fiscal year, settling for a $250 handout in July instead. The real cost of this $2.1-billion program is only $190 million this fiscal year. By moving the big increases out several years," he says, "the government gets maximum political torque for minimum dollar spending. The poor get a pittance."

Randall Denley adds that the poor will only get their full payment by 2011.

So here we are today, celebrating a vote-buying down payment, when it will take another four to five years before Ontario's most vulnerable families will even derive any benefit from the plan. They need this help today.

As Lorrie Goldstein, a Sun chain columnist says of this cynical program, "Worse, McGuinty's budget attempts to guilt-trip middle-class Ontarians into silence. How? By earmarking billions of their tax dollars to be paid out, eventually, to poor families and children now living on welfare, through his so-called Ontario child benefit."

Laughter.

Ms. MacLeod: I hear the ministers laughing, so guess what? Just for them, I'm going to throw in a little bit of rabble.ca, because of course they're thinking that we're a little too right-leaning over here. Michelle Langlois writes:

"People on social assistance will continue to have the federal benefit clawed back from their welfare cheques. The new provincial benefit will not be clawed back....

"Seems like a pretty clear and easy-to-understand policy, right?

"Then why is the McGuinty government trying to confuse people by claiming that the new Ontario child benefit will 'effectively end the current clawback of up to $122 per child per month from the national child benefit supplement' according to ... the Toronto Star on Friday?

"The answer is simple. The Liberal government promised during the 2003 election campaign to end the child tax benefit clawback from the families who need it most desperately: social assistance recipients. As with many of their ... promises, they did not follow through." Their words—rabble's words—not mine.

The word "poverty" never, ever appeared in any other McGuinty budget until last week. So I have to ask: Why the focus now? Why not the full benefit now? Why implement a half-baked scheme right before a provincial election?

This plan will not address the real needs of families in poverty. As always, the McGuinty Liberals will fall far short of offering real results. To take a phrase from the minister, "Poverty is not being addressed today."

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Member for Simcoe North and the Minister of Health, you can have this conversation outside much more productively.

The member for Hamilton East.

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): I have to start by saying how ironic I found it that the amount a low-income family is going to receive under the Ontario child benefit is less than the amount the finance minister spent on his new shoes for budget day. Sales tax included, the finance minister's new shoes, size 7 Ecco lace-ups, cost $256.50, more than the $250 Ontario families are going to receive over one year. That is a reflection of the seriousness that this government doesn't have in terms of ending child poverty in this province. In fact, I've actually taken the opportunity to rename this budget myself.

I consider it the McGuinty government's "inaction plan to deal with child poverty."

Was the purpose of the minister's new shoes to throw the boots at hard-working families in Ontario? It certainly seems that way, because that's what the McGuinty Liberals are doing by continuing to claw back the national child benefit supplement. And, yes, they are continuing to claw back the national child benefit supplement here in Ontario.

Dalton McGuinty first promised to end the clawback in the 2003 election. Now he says that he needs to get elected again to get that done. Ontario's most hard-pressed families have had to wait five more years before seeing an end to the clawback. Premier Dalton McGuinty promised to end the clawback of the national child benefit supplement, and he still has not kept that promise. In fact, he expects people to believe that eventually, if they give him another chance, he might actually get it done in another five years. I don't know. I don't think the people of Ontario are prepared to fall for that once again.

Do you know what? They're not not ending the clawback for lack of impetus to get that done. In fact, New Democrats have asked them to do that many, many times in this House. We've been demanding over and over again—177 times on 52 separate occasions did we try to convince the government that the right thing to do was just to fulfill their very own promise to end the national child benefit clawback, and they still refused to do it.

Finally, when the McGuinty government does act, it's a program of half measures that shows they are completely out of touch with the poverty that has rocked communities across this province, including my own city of Hamilton. The Ontario child benefit amounts to about $190 million this year, which is less—less—than the cost of actually ending the clawback, at about $220 million. They're not ending the clawback today, not this year, not next year, not the year after that. They're phasing in their child benefit over five years, a long, long time in the life of a child.

Dalton McGuinty promised to end it, saying, "The clawback is wrong and we will end it." But instead, now he's pushed the end of the clawback of the federal benefit back yet another five years. Families can't afford to wait that long, Mr. Finance Minister, Madam Minister, Mr. Premier. They cannot wait that long. Another five years is simply unacceptable.

I know that the families in Hamilton can't wait, and that's why Hamilton council took the opportunity not too long ago to try to end the clawback on their own with their very own very tight municipal budget. We know what that budget looks like; at least, anybody from Hamilton should know what that budget looks like. But they tried to do the right thing—not like you. They tried to do the right thing and take your responsibility because they see the pain and the suffering that occurs in neighbourhood after neighbourhood in the city of Hamilton.

And the minister can talk a nice talk, she can say how much she feels their pain, but I can tell you, they don't think that you feel their pain, because they don't see any results in this budget that are going to end that pain. That's the bottom line.

Children who were born when McGuinty promised to end the clawback will be eight years old when their families finally see the value of the national child benefit returned to them. Those who were 10 are going to miss out altogether because they're going to be too old to even receive it. Meanwhile, children living in poverty are still waiting for action on other Dalton McGuinty promises, and I'm going to take an opportunity to list some of those as well.

ODSP and OW rates are barely keeping pace with inflation, and people living on them are still worse off in real terms than they were under the Mike Harris government. Dalton McGuinty promised to invest $300 million in new provincial child care money, but instead he's pocketed over $140 million of federal money that was supposed to be spent on child care. Child care is another key example of the McGuinty Liberals' complete falling down on their promises to kids.

A government that claims to want to help today's working families should be investing in a comprehensive, made-in-Ontario program of affordable, accessible not-for-profit child care. Just yesterday Dr. Fraser Mustard, the leading authority on children's early learning and care, said the McGuinty government's Best Start program of child care is a disaster. The budget delivers very, very little in terms of child care, and the budget delivers very, very little in terms of child poverty, and this government should be ashamed, not proud.

ORAL QUESTIONS

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal, responsible for the lottery corporation. Yesterday, during a press conference, the minister claimed that he was not made aware of potential game-fixing rip-offs running rampant through the lottery corporation until 10 days before the CBC aired its program called Luck of the Draw. Does this McGuinty minister stand by that statement made yesterday?

Hon. David Caplan (Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal, Deputy Government House Leader): I had an opportunity to see the Ombudsman's report and respond to it. I did comment yesterday that the transcript of the CBC program was shared with me approximately 10 days or two weeks prior to its airing and that's when I first became aware of these matters. I would also want the House to know that as soon as that did happen, we ordered a third-party investigation, as was raised in this House, KPMG.

Of course, we had an independent officer of this Legislature investigate, and that was the Ombudsman's report. I had the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corp. fully co-operate with that investigation. The Ombudsman conducted his review, the concerns were raised, and yesterday he issued his report. Yesterday he made some additional allegations in his comments. I have instructed that all of the material that was reviewed by the Ombudsman be forwarded to the Ontario Provincial Police for their review, and they will determine what the next appropriate steps are.

Mr. Tory: The first we've heard of this qualification of now the transcript of the television program being brought to your attention is this very minute in the House, and of course the only reason half the stuff happened in the fall of 2006 was because of the television program and because it was brought to your attention.

But the fact of the matter is that in the Globe and Mail this morning, we read of an e-mail that was sent to two senior officials in your ministry and to Mr. Wilson Lee, who was at the time your communications director, now your chief of staff. That was on April 11, 2006. This e-mail talked about exactly what the CBC was already beginning in April to investigate and asked for the advice of your staff on what should be done relative to that investigation.

So why would you say that you knew nothing about this until October 2006, when in fact senior members of your staff were engaged in e-mail correspondence with the lottery corporation about this very same subject, the subject matter of the TV program, in April? Why do you say it was October, when your office knew in April? Do you expect us to believe your staff didn't brief you on it?

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): The question has been asked. Minister?

Hon. Mr. Caplan: The member is incorrect in the information that he is providing. What happened in April was, as the standard protocol set up by both previous governments, that an FOI request was made. It was simply a heads-up to our office that it had been made, and the advice to Ontario Lottery and Gaming was that they comply with the statutory requirements, that all ministries and agencies are to forward the information as requested under freedom of information. That information is to be used by the parties who request it in whatever way they wish.

Of course, what subsequently ensued was that the Fifth Estate did in fact interview staff at the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corp. That transcript was shared with me about two weeks prior to the program airing.

Mr. Tory: You are trying to have us believe, then, that this really was just treated by your staff and by you—because you implied that they had in fact told you it was a routine request for freedom of information. When the subject matter of that is about members of the public who are buying tickets from the lottery corporation being ripped off, you just treated this as another routine, run-of-the-mill freedom of information request?

The very fact that you would expect any of us to believe that your senior advisers would not tell you in detail and you wouldn't ask any questions about an e-mail that concerned money being stolen from innocent Ontarians, or allegations in that regard, calls into question your fitness for office.

Come clean. Admit now that in April you knew that the CBC was investigating allegations of money being stolen from innocent Ontarians, people who bought their tickets in good faith. Come clean and tell us at least that you knew that in April. Come on, now.

Hon. Mr. Caplan: I'm happy to correct the member in the comments that he makes. He's got it completely wrong.

As the standard protocol set up by previous governments, when an FOI is made, there is an alert, and that is it. In fact, the protocol states that we are not supposed to know who has made the request; you know the nature of the request and what members are going to do with it. I know that the member and members of the other party know full well, having served in government during their time, that this is a standard protocol to provide information, whether it's to opposition parties, to the media or to any member of the general public who requests it. That is in fact the transparency that I and this government adhere to.

I would indicate to the member opposite that we've had an independent officer of this Legislature, whose investigation we welcomed. We brought in KPMG. We've had a standing committee of this Legislature go over and look at the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corp. That is in stark contrast to the record of this member and his government when they were in office, who prevented the standing committee on government agencies from reviewing—

Interjections.

The Speaker: Thank you, Minister. New question.

Mr. Tory: My question again is to the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal and responsible for the lottery corporation. I don't know what turnip truck you think people in this Legislature or in the public fell off of that you would think they would believe that you would receive an alert about freedom of information about people in this province being ripped off of their money by the lottery corporation and that you wouldn't ask any questions. That's an indictment of you in and of itself, that you wouldn't ask any questions about that.

This McGuinty minister is trying to keep up the fiction in this House that he was somehow kept in the dark. You should drop the joke that you were kept in the dark and take some responsibility for the six-month period that passed during which time there was a $100-million scandal involving the theft of money from innocent people across the province.

Either you knew and you were wilfully negligent in not acting on it, or you didn't even bother to ask when someone came in and said there were inquiries being made by the CBC. Either way, you are part of the problem. Either way, you should resign so people can be reassured that this place is actually operating with any sense of integrity at all.

Interjection: What did Hudak know?

Hon. Mr. Caplan: My colleague says, "What did Hudak know?" Mr. Hudak in fact was the minister responsible at the time of the Edmonds case, which was the subject of the FOI request, and I think that's a reasonable question. Why does Mr. Tory prevent Mr. Hudak and Mr. Sterling, two ministers under a previous government responsible for this corporation, from coming forward and sharing what they knew, what they did, what actions they took?

Unfortunately, it speaks volumes that this government has taken great pains to provide transparency and clarity and co-operation with legislative officers, legislative committees, with outside parties like KPMG, in contrast to the previous government, which obstructed, allegedly, legislative officers, which never allowed standing committees on government agencies to meet, which unfortunately presided over these cases and stood by and did nothing—

The Speaker: Supplementary?

Mr. Tory: Only this McGuinty minister would try to blame anybody else he possibly can for the fact that he sat on his derrière for six months while people in this province were ripped off. He knew it was going on, he knew people were asking, and he did absolutely nothing. The ticket-buyers have been ripped off, they have lost confidence in the lottery corporation, and this minister, this McGuinty minister, is part of the problem. We now know he stood by while these lottery games were fixed.

You are also responsible for the LCBO, for billions of dollars' worth of other projects. When someone is under a cloud like this, they can't continue in this job. Why don't you do the honourable thing and step aside pending a full and complete investigation of this matter?

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order.

Minister?

Hon. Mr. Caplan: I know that all members understand the partisan nature of this. That's why I place my faith and trust in an independent, unbiased, non-partisan observer—the independent officer of the Legislature, the Ombudsman. He says, "I commend the minister and the government for its openness and responsiveness to my report and recommendations and for their immediate and resolute commitment to ensuring change."

Taking responsibility means rolling up your sleeves and fixing the problem that we, unfortunately, inherited from previous governments, and that's what I and this government are doing. This government is implementing all of the Ombudsman's recommendations. I've directed the OLG to implement all of the Ombudsman's recommendations and all of the KPMG recommendations.

I am pleased to report to this House that 17 of the 60 recommendations have already been put in place, 25 more will be in place by the end of June, and the other 18 are on track to get implemented. I have also directed that all files be made available to the—

The Speaker: Final supplementary.

Mr. Tory: The one question the Ombudsman was not asked to opine on is what he would have thought of the fact that you, for six months, sat on your can when you knew this rip-off was going on and did absolutely nothing about it, absolutely nothing. I can guarantee that had the Ombudsman been asked to comment on that, he would have said it was a disgraceful abdication of responsibility for you to know about this and do nothing until you were caught. You did nothing until you were caught.

You can't possibly believe yourself that you did everything you could when you knew about this in April. You can't possibly believe it. Millions of dollars potentially being stolen from innocent people, and you did absolutely nothing from April until October, when you were exposed and you had to act, and now you're standing taking credit for it. You knew or you ought to have known, and in either case you should resign because you have demonstrated yourself unfit to hold this office and to have these responsibilities. Will you do the right thing and resign?

Hon. Mr. Caplan: I have had communication from the Ombudsman, and he says in a letter to me, "I am satisfied with the positive commitment made by the corporation and by the Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal to implement my recommendations."

The Ombudsman has confidence in the work that this government and I as minister have undertaken. That's the kind of leadership we have. Unfortunately, in the past, we've covered these matters up; we've looked the other way. The problem was born in a previous government and nurtured by yours. Unfortunately, members opposite did not take this seriously, but I and this government take this responsibility, this allegation and the recommendations extremely seriously.

We will implement them all. We will make sure that public trust and confidence are upheld and restored. I welcome the OPP and all the work they are going to do to get to the bottom of the matters that were raised by the Ombudsman.

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

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora—Rainy River): A question to the minister responsible for lotteries about Dalton McGuinty's $100-million insider lottery scandal, about innocent people being cheated out of millions of dollars, about a Premier who has gone AWOL and about a cabinet minister who needs to be straight with the people of Ontario.

Minister, yesterday you claimed that you were completely in the dark. You heard nothing, you saw nothing and you knew nothing until October 2006, when the CBC got ready to play their show. Do you stand by your tale today, or are you ready to correct your own record?

Hon. Mr. Caplan: As I had a chance to review the chronology earlier with the Leader of the Opposition, those are the facts that I have laid out publicly; that is the truth. I have taken very directed action. In fact, the Ombudsman has commented on what I as minister have done and what this government has done. The Ombudsman says in his report—and I know the member has a copy—"I am happy to see that both the government and OLG appear to be headed in the right direction." He goes further: "I commend the minister and the government for its openness and responsiveness to my report and recommendations and for their immediate and resolute commitment to ensuring" the changes.

I will not shirk my responsibility, which is to instill the public's trust and confidence in the public's corporation. That is a responsibility that I take extremely seriously, and I will continue to do that. I certainly welcome the questions from the member opposite. He would be well advised to know that the Ontario Provincial Police have directed toward them—

The Speaker: Thank you. Supplementary?

Mr. Hampton: After the Ombudsman hits you over the head with the evidence and wakes you up, you suddenly want to say, "Oh, I'm the hero around here." But it's very clear on the record that six months before, three officials in your office in the ministry were informed by the lottery corporation. They weren't informed about any run-of-the-mill details; they were informed about an 82-year-old man being ripped off—cheated—of $250,000 that he had won.

Are you trying to tell the innocent people of Ontario that your staff wouldn't tell you that this was about an innocent man who was cheated out of $250,000, that they wouldn't share those details with you and that, those details being shared with you, you wouldn't ask, "What's going on here?"

Hon. Mr. Caplan: The facts of the matter are, as I've stated here in this House, I have had occasion to be asked about the case of Mr. Edmonds by both the opposition parties. I have apologized to him—that is recorded in Hansard—as have the president and CEO, formerly, of Ontario Lottery and Gaming.

I believe that Mr. Edmonds was treated disrespectfully, improperly, especially from a corporation where I would expect much better to be done. Of course, the gentleman seated two seats to your right was the minister responsible at the time when Mr. Edmonds's case arose in 2001. I would hope that all members, honourable as they are, would come forward with any information they have—what they knew, when they knew it and what they did at that time.

I certainly can't answer on behalf of other members, but perhaps the member from Erie—Lincoln could provide some insight into what was done in the case of Bob Edmonds: What was ordered, what was not, what role he or others played in the treatment that Mr. Edmonds ultimately—

The Speaker: Final supplementary.

Mr. Hampton: Minister, before this is done, we may get to other people, but you see, you were the minister in charge. You were the minister who was supposed to be protecting the innocent people in Ontario when the story of rip-offs unfolded. You were the minister who was happy to sit in your chair like a bump on a log and pretend that you saw nothing, heard nothing and knew nothing while all around you your own staff knew what was going on.

For example, Mike McRae, a senior policy advisor in your ministry, corresponded with the OLG by e-mail about reporters' questions and about the case of Bob Edmonds, the 82-year-old man who was ripped off to the tune of $250,000. This is what they said. On May 11, 2006, McRae wrote that he had no issues with the lottery and gaming corporation's communication plan but he asked, "Do you have a status update on these that I can provide to those interested?"

Minister, you're the one in charge. Are you trying to tell us that you wouldn't be interested?

Hon. Mr. Caplan: Of course the advice that I would expect to be provided to Ontario Lottery and Gaming is to comply with freedom of information, a statute of long standing and a protocol which has been in place in this province through governments of all stripes. I certainly believe that the public interest is paramount and that we need transparency and access to this kind of information, whether it's opposition members, the media or the public in general. That's why I have taken the steps that I have to ensure that this matter comes to light.

Unfortunately, that has not always been the case. The folks in previous governments locked doors or made sure that information was not provided to have these things come out, but that's not the approach that I and this government take. We want to reveal what the problems are and we also want to make sure that the problems are fixed, that Ontarians are not treated in this manner again and that the public corporations are in fact upholding—

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

Mr. Hampton: To the minister responsible for lotteries: Minister, here's what is unbelievably incomprehensible on your part. You see, these weren't e-mails out of the blue. These weren't e-mails that were totally disconnected. You had the court case, where Mr. Edmonds took the lottery corporation to court and said that they had defrauded him. He won the court case. That received media attention. The OLG was forced to pay him $200,000; that received some attention. These are things that any minister with any reasonable intelligence should have known about.

Then there was the police investigation—a criminal investigation. Then your staff get e-mails from staff at the lottery corporation telling you that there is reporters' interest in this. Now, any reasonable cabinet minister with even a margin of intelligence would have thought, "Gee, maybe I'd better ask some questions here." Didn't you think at any time when all of this was unfolding that maybe you should ask some questions and find out what's going on?

Hon. Mr. Caplan: I understand, all members in this House understand, the partisan nature of the different sides of the House. That's why I have considerable faith in the Ombudsman, an unbiased, non-partisan legislative officer. When he writes to me and says, "I am satisfied with the positive commitments made by the corporation and by the Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal to implement my recommendations," I take that to heart and I take that seriously. But the Ombudsman goes further and says, "I commend the minister and the government for its openness and responsiveness to my report and recommendations and for their immediate and resolute commitment to ensuring change."

The Ombudsman understands that this government takes a back seat to no one when it comes to revealing what the problems are and then fixing a mess that is inherited from others. The Ombudsman has confidence in me and the Ombudsman has confidence in this government. The Ombudsman has provided us with an appropriate roadmap in an unbiased and non-partisan way and we understand the—

The Speaker: Thank you. Supplementary.

Mr. Hampton: Minister, Wilson Lee was your communications director, your personal communications director. He wasn't ministry staff. He was your political staff. He was also informed that the CBC was interested in this story about the 82-year-old man who had been cheated out of $250,000. You must know Wilson Lee. He is now your chief of staff. He is your right-hand person. Are you telling us that Wilson Lee didn't tell you that the CBC was doing research about this 82-year-old man who had been cheated out of $250,000 in the lottery scandal, that he didn't tell you about that six months before you say you knew?

Hon. Mr. Caplan: I know that the member for Kenora—Rainy River, a former member of the executive council, is quite familiar with the protocols under freedom of information. He knows quite well that a heads-up is given, but no details are provided, and that it would not be the usual course of business to pursue that and inquire with that further.

He also knows in the case of Bob Edmonds the actions that I have taken as minister and the apology that I have given. He also knows that the member for Erie—Lincoln was the minister at the time when Mr. Edmonds had his unfortunate run-in with Ontario Lottery and Gaming. I cannot answer for what happened in 2001 and 2002, and subsequently, I cannot provide any insight to this House for what actions were taken or not taken, what conversations were had or not had, who made the decision to drag Bob Edmonds through court and to treat him so disrespectfully. I cannot provide those kinds of answers.

I hope that members of this Legislative Assembly, honourable all, will step forward with any information that they have. The police are now reviewing the matters that the Ombudsman has—

The Speaker: Thank you, Minister. Final supplementary.

Mr. Hampton: This is about the events that transpired, after you became minister, in the spring of 2005. This is about the Ontario lottery corporation spending $200,000 to silence Mr. Edmonds, after you became minister. This is about all of that chain of events. Surely Mr. Lee would have said to you, "Minister, here's the chain of events. This is what this is about." In fact, let me put it to you in another way. If Mr.

Lee, as your communications director, didn't tell you about the repercussions, about the fact that this man had been cheated out of $250,000, that it was possible that other people were also being cheated out of money—if Mr. Lee didn't tell you that, wouldn't you say Mr. Lee should resign for being complicit in a cover-up of corruption?

Hon. Mr. Caplan: It's very interesting to hear the member opposite. The Ontario Provincial Police will soon be in receipt of all of the files that the Ombudsman reviewed. They'll soon be in receipt of all of the information in order to make a determination and review what has happened and what the next appropriate step should be.

The Ombudsman in fact has rendered an opinion about the seriousness and the level of commitment of this government and of myself as minister. I will read for the member again the Ombudsman's comments in this regard, where he says on page 68 of his report, "I commend the minister and the government for its openness and responsiveness to my report and recommendations and for their immediate and resolute commitment in ensuring change."

Unfortunately, past governments have chosen to look the other way. Unfortunately, they nurtured this culture, this OLG environment that the Ombudsman talks about that needs to be changed. That is not good enough for this government and for me as minister. I am committed to making and ensuring that the changes are made so that the public interest will be protected. That is my responsibility. That is my job. And that is my commitment to this House, that that work will be done.

The Speaker: New Question. Leader of the Opposition.

Mr. Tory: A question for the minister in charge of the lottery corporation: The fact is that you keep telling the House and the people of Ontario over and over again how the Ombudsman makes these comments about you. He is not commenting at all on the period of time before you got caught. He's not commenting on anything you did before you got caught. You only did anything after you got caught. He specifically is not commenting, and you know it, on the period between April and October when you stood by and saw millions of dollars stolen from people on your watch.

Let's be clear as to exactly what you're saying. Aside from the FOI alert—and you're implying that it was like a sentence that somebody read to you in a note, or just told you that there was an FOI request—you are telling this House and the people of Ontario that there was no discussion at all with anyone as to any money being ripped off from anybody and no discussion at all with your staff or anybody else, no discussion at all about any allegations concerning lottery money being stolen. If that's so, if you expect us to believe that, why didn't you ask some questions about it?

Why didn't you say, "Well, gee, I don't know what the FOI request is about, but is there something going on at the lottery corporation"? Did you feel no responsibility at all to the people whose money was being stolen?

Hon. Mr. Caplan: The Ombudsman comments about a very long period of time of the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corp., going back a long way and up to the present day. So I don't think the member really is very accurate in his comments portraying the Ombudsman's report.

I would also say that the Ombudsman and KPMG have identified some 60 recommendations for implementation: 17 have already been implemented, another 25 will be implemented by the end of June, and the other 18 are a work in progress and have begun. That is why the Ombudsman has in fact said that he commends me as minister and commends this government for taking the necessary and decisive action in order to instill public trust and confidence in their corporation.

Even beyond that, the Ombudsman has made some very serious allegations, and that is why I have directed that the files be forwarded to the Ontario Provincial Police. I understand the leader of the official opposition does not believe that the police should be reviewing the matter. I can't for the life of me understand why, but I think, given the nature of the allegations—

The Speaker: Thank you. Supplementary?

Mr. Tory: Just like every answer he's given, he just stands there and makes up these answers. He stands there and makes up things I say, but unfortunately, he makes up everything else in his answers too.

Now, you can carry on with this non-answering and weaving and dodging all you want, but I just want to make sure that this is perfectly clear on the record in this House, speaking to the Legislature and the people of Ontario. You are telling us that you had no briefings, no discussions with your staff, no discussions with Mr. Brown, no discussions with anybody else from the lottery corporation, and no discussions with anybody else from the board ever before October 2006 on this matter. That is what you are telling us; that is what you just said. That is what you've repeated over and over again today.

You've been dodging and weaving. Get up and confirm once and for all that there were no discussions with any of those people any time—you never asked a question and you never got an answer because you didn't care about people's money being ripped off by these people on your watch. Get up and confirm: no discussions, no briefing with anybody from April to October or any time before October.

Hon. Mr. Caplan: I think it's disappointing that the member opposite, a member of a party that swept these matters under the rug and that nurtured this kind of environment, now doesn't feel that quick and decisive action to deal with problems that he and his government unfortunately left and ignored for many, many years—that he has some difficulty with that. I don't understand why the member opposite would not have the confidence in the Ontario Provincial Police to get to the bottom of the very significant matter that the Ombudsman has raised.

I have stated, now in the eighth reply to questions in this House, that I'm happy to answer all day to the very best of my ability. I can tell you that I believe leadership means rolling up your sleeves and fixing problems that have been left and that others, unfortunately, have swept aside, have ignored and have not had the gumption to deal with.

I want this member, all members of this Legislature and all the people of Ontario to know that these are serious matters, and I will not rest until public trust and confidence is restored in the corporation. That's my undertaking.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. New question.

Mr. Hampton: Again to the minister responsible for lotteries: Minister, you keep trying to insist that you were kept in the dark in April 2006. You see, the e-mail that came from the lotteries corporation to Wilson Lee, your director of communications, asked for his input on what information should be released to the CBC.

Are you trying to tell these innocent people across Ontario who have been ripped off millions of dollars that a communication would come from the lottery corporation to your director of communications, now your chief of staff, now your right-hand person, asking for input on what information should be released, and your director of communications wouldn't say to you, "This is what it's about, Minister"? Do you honestly expect the innocent people across Ontario who have been cheated out of millions of dollars to believe that kind of story?

Hon. Mr. Caplan: I expect the people of Ontario to believe the Ombudsman. I expect them to believe the Ontario Provincial Police. I expect them to believe the truth, that the freedom-of-information protocol, which all governments of all stripes have adhered to, was strictly adhered to here, and any advice to the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corp. would be to comply with the freedom-of-information statute as passed by this Legislature to ensure that—be it a media source, be it an opposition party or any member of the public—they had full access to the information that they had requested.

That was the case under the New Democrats, it was the case under the Conservatives and it is the case under this government as well. Those are the facts of the matter. The facts of the matter are also that this government and myself as minister have taken decisive action to restore the public trust and confidence as outlined by the Ombudsman.

I would highlight the accomplishments. To date, 17 recommendations have already been implemented, 25 more by the end of June, and the remaining 18 recommendations as contained in the two reports have begun and will be—

The Speaker: Thank you, Minister. Supplementary?

Mr. Hampton: Minister, after hundreds, if not thousands, of innocent Ontarians have been ripped off under your watch, after the Ombudsman hits you on the side of the head with a report that talks about a culture of corruption in the lotteries corporation on your watch—but those aren't the questions here. The question is this. Your staff would have at least given you an elementary briefing on this so that you wouldn't be making decisions completely in the dark. They would have at least said, "Bob Edmonds is an 82-year-old man.

He's been cheated out of $250,000." My question is, when you got that kind of elementary briefing, didn't you at some point think to start asking questions about what is going on in the lotteries corporation such that an 82-year-old man can be cheated out of $250,000?

Hon. Mr. Caplan: It's unfortunate that I have to correct the member on the factual comments. Mr. Edmonds's case began in the year 2001. That is a matter of public record. Mr. Edmonds can tell you that himself. The minister at the time was a member from Erie—Lincoln, Mr. Hudak. I would encourage Mr. Hudak to provide answers to the leader of the third party's questions. In fact, I saw earlier that he was conferring with the leader of the official opposition. Perhaps Mr. Tory would be good enough to have Mr. Hudak or—I see Mr.

Sterling, who was also the minister responsible between 2002 and 2003, and I would ask that they please co-operate with the Ontario Provincial Police. I don't know whether they did or did not confer with the Ombudsman.

I can tell you that the commitment to transparency and accountability of this minister and of this government are noted by the Ombudsman, where he provides his commendation for the minister and for the government for its openness and responsiveness.

CHILD POVERTY

Ms. Monique M. Smith (Nipissing): My question is for the Minister of Children and Youth Services. Earlier today in your statement, you quoted from a study prepared in my riding about grade 4 students as they talked about how it felt to live in poverty. In our 2007 budget, we are making a historic investment to assist children living in lower-income families. The introduction of an Ontario child benefit will give lower-income families across Ontario greater opportunities to help their children reach their full potential.

Lana Mitchell, an amazing social advocate in my riding and the executive director of Low Income People Involvement, or LIPI, stated that she was pleased to see the introduction of an Ontario child benefit. Minister, could you please share with us when these families will receive the benefit?

Hon. Mary Anne V. Chambers (Minister of Children and Youth Services): I'd like to thank the member from Nipissing for her question and for her advocacy on behalf of her constituents.

The Ontario child benefit will, in fact, start to make a difference in the lives of kids this year. By the end July 2007, the first payment of up to $250 per child will be received. Each year, the payments will increase, and at full maturity of this initiative in 2011, children can expect to receive up to $1,100 of the Ontario child benefit. Families with a net family income of up to $20,000 per year will be eligible for the full benefit. I should also mention that approximately 95% of families who will receive the Ontario child benefit will be families with net incomes of up to $45,000 per year.

Ms. Smith: This is tremendous support for families in my community and for families across Ontario, who are doing their very best to provide their children with every opportunity possible.

I know that in addition to this financial support, lower-income families in my community also need services for their children, and along with Lana Mitchell, we have some amazing service providers in my riding. Minister, can you share with us the types of other supports that our government provides these families and how our most recent budget improves upon these?

Hon. Mrs. Chambers: Many lower-income families need child care. They say that they need child care, for example, to help them secure good jobs. I'm very pleased that last year, working in partnership with our municipalities, we were able to create almost 15,000 new child care spaces. And starting in January of this year, we have simplified the model used for determining eligibility for child care subsidies. So in fact, a family with net income of up to $20,000 per year should be able to qualify for a full child care subsidy at an average cost of $43 a day. That's a lot of support.

I'm also very pleased—you know, several people in my riding had talked to me about family literacy and parenting centres, which are particularly helpful, as it turns out, to lower-income families. In this budget, we have announced that we're not just going to secure and sustain those centres, we're also going to double the funding for such centres. There is a lot of good news in this budget for—

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): New question? The Leader of the Opposition.

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): A question for the minister responsible for lotteries: While the minister is having documentation sent over to the police, perhaps he could have them send over his emails back and forth between his office and the lottery corporation, and they can investigate the briefings that might have slipped the minister's mind.

He's very fond of quoting from the Ombudsman's report. Let me read him this quote from the Ombudsman's report: "I am not convinced, however, that the public can rely on the corporation alone to ensure that real reform takes place. The danger is too great that the OLG will continue to fall back into its old habits of coddling retailers and dismissing consumers' legitimate complaints."

The fact that you would expect anyone here, or anywhere else for that matter, to believe that you had no briefings, no discussions, no meetings with anybody from the lottery corporation, from the board, with your staff, to do with this matter at all, including the Edmonds settlement, which I believe happened as well on your watch, means that you too are part of the problem, and you can't possibly stand here in this place and assure people that you are going to comfort them that more of their millions are not going to be stolen when you are there and you are still part of the problem, not the solution. Why don't you step aside so—

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): The question has been asked. Minister?

Hon. David Caplan (Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal, Deputy Government House Leader): The member opposite reads a passage from the Ombudsman's report, and that's precisely why the Minister of Government Services is engaged with me and, I can tell you, has met with the Ombudsman, in setting up the proper regulatory environment under the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario.

Would that, when we had set up lotteries and casinos and other gaming activities, we had had the proper oversight then as opposed to today—the culture of an organization, which the Ombudsman I think quite rightly points out, is a significant problem and does need to be addressed or rectified. Would that have happened, we may not have been in the situation where we are today. But given that that's how it was set up, it was nurtured under previous governments, and it takes this minister and this government with the wherewithal to clean up a mess which it has inherited.

Those are the facts of the matter. The Ombudsman has accepted and commended me and the government for the speed, for the responsiveness and for the commitment to acting to ensure that the public trust and confidence—

The Speaker: Thank you. Supplementary?

Mr. Tory: Minister, your credibility in this matter is very much in suspicion here. Your credibility is a big, big issue, and that goes to the very heart of whether or not you have the credibility in fact to oversee the various things that are going on with the Ombudsman, with the Alcohol and Gaming Commission and with all the others involved. And beyond that, it calls into question, frankly, your ability to carry on with the rest of your job.

If there is a cloud of suspicion over you with respect to what you did not do between April and October, what you covered up, the fact that you turned your back on the fact and stood by while these games were being fixed and millions of dollars were being stolen from people, then it really calls into question your ability to be part of the solution and your ability to do the rest of your job, whether it's the LCBO or anything else.

Why don't you do the honourable thing and step down and convince the Premier that he should have an independent investigation of all of this, including your role and what you didn't do, so that we can all be assured, most of all the ticket-buying public—

The Speaker: Thank you. Minister?

Hon. Mr. Caplan: We've had an all-party committee of this Legislature, chaired by a member of your own caucus. We've had a non-partisan, unbiased, independent officer of this Legislature, in the Ombudsman, do a sweeping and broad and excellent job in investigating this matter and coming up with solid recommendations, which are being implemented.

We've had one of Canada's leading audit forms, KPMG—I believe when the leader of the official opposition was in business, they were your auditors; I believe they are currently the auditors for the Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario—also provide insight and be able to make recommendations how it can be improved.

I'm sure that after we've put the regulatory framework in place, Mr. Tory will be up on his feet commenting, complaining that it's just more red tape and more government waste, as he likes to do. I don't agree with that kind of settlement. I believe that this is important to ensure the public trust and the confidence that the public has—

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

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora—Rainy River): My question is to the minister responsible for lotteries. Minister, yesterday you tried to make a big deal out of your words that the lottery corporation should turn over their records to the police. But, as the Ombudsman said in his report, there aren't many records, there's a dearth of records, and there's a reason for that. Scam artists and fraudsters don't usually leave records around.

But the question is this, Minister: When are you going to turn over your briefing notes, your records and your e-mails pertaining to the lottery rip-off so that people can see what you knew and why you didn't act?

Hon. Mr. Caplan: The Ombudsman does comment and commends me as minister and the government for our openness, for our transparency. He does commend us for our responsiveness to the report and the recommendations, and he does acknowledge that we have an immediate and resolute commitment to ensuring the changes that are necessary, he says, in order to ensure the public trust and confidence.

I would encourage all members—the member from Erie—Lincoln, the member from Lanark—Carleton, the member from Kenora—Rainy River or anyone else—who might have information to share with the Ontario Provincial Police. I would hope that the member would co-operate. I know that I certainly have in the past and will in the future co-operate in any way that I can. I've instructed Ontario Lottery and Gaming to do the same. I believe it is important that Ontarians have an understanding that I will be relentless in making sure that public trust and confidence—

Interjections.

The Speaker: Thank you. Supplementary.

Mr. Hampton: You see, Minister, your words of yesterday were empty in another sense, because we know that the police, as part of a criminal investigation, could walk into the lottery corporation and get the records in their own right any time.

But the question is this, Minister: You were the minister in charge of a $6.5-billion operation. We know from the media reports, from the court cases and from police investigations that people were being cheated. Your own staff knew that people were being cheated. The question that innocent people out there want to know is, where are your briefing notes? Where are your records? Where are your e-mails pertaining to what happened from the time you became minister in June 2005 up until the release of the Ombudsman's report? If the OLG should release their records, when is the McGuinty cabinet minister who was supposed to be protecting the public going to release—

The Speaker: The question has been asked. Minister?

Hon. Mr. Caplan: I want this member to know that I will take all steps that are necessary, as I undertook to this House back in October of last year, to make sure that the public interest is protected, to make sure that we have transparency, openness and accountability at Ontario Lottery and Gaming in the Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal. In fact, that is the commitment of a Premier who holds those values and ensures that we shine the light, whether it's through our independent officers like the Ombudsman or the Auditor General or whether it's through our police and proper legal authorities taking the appropriate actions to make sure the public trust and confidence is upheld.

The Ombudsman in fact has commented on the role that I have played and the government has played as far as what we've done. He says, "I commend the minister and the government for its openness and responsiveness to my report and recommendations and for their immediate and resolute commitment to ensuring change." That's the Ombudsman—not a partisan member opposite but a non-partisan, unbiased, independent officer of this Legislature.

PROPERTY TAXATION

Mr. Kevin Daniel Flynn (Oakville): I've got a question for the Minister of Finance today. As MPP for my community, I want to ensure that homeowners in Oakville will benefit from a property tax system that's fair, transparent and predictable. The previous government, and definitely the one before, introduced our current property tax system, and they simply failed to fix it.

Our government has made significant improvements to the system but, despite those improvements, I was still hearing from constituents that annual reassessments were causing sudden and very unpredictable changes, especially in areas like Oakville that have a strong real estate market.

In last week's budget, you proposed a new system that will strengthen the current property tax system in Ontario. Can you please tell us more about that new system and what exactly it's going to mean to the constituents both of my riding and throughout Ontario?

Hon. Greg Sorbara (Minister of Finance, Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet): I want to say to my friend from Oakville and to all property owners in Ontario that what this new system will deliver is a more reliable, fairer and more predictable property tax assessment system.

What we were trying to do when we cancelled assessments for 2007 and 2008 was give ourselves time to re-examine the system, and particularly to take the volatility out of the system. The four-year cycle will provide a much less volatile system, particularly for homeowners like those in Oakville, who might see increases in value. If those increases in value are identified, they will be smoothed in over the course of four years. The other thing to point out is it that if there is a decrease in value, the homeowner will be able to take advantage of that decrease right away.

It's going to be more predictable, less volatile, fairer and more transparent, and we're very proud of it.

Mr. Flynn: Previous attempts at that reform by previous governments were a complete disaster; certainly in Oakville they were. The people in Oakville and Ontario want a property tax system that's going to ensure predictability and stability for all homeowners and for the hard-working taxpayers of our communities.

Minister, I'd like to ask just how you came to the decision to go with this particular system. As you know, some groups and other political parties have called for a 5% cap on assessment increases. Could you please tell us why you chose the option you did, how other proposals, such as capping, would impact the average taxpayer, and whether the capping proposal that is being put forward by other groups and other parties in this House today would truly benefit the majority of taxpayers or perhaps only an affluent few?

Hon. Mr. Sorbara: Let's put our cards right on the table. My dear friend the Conservative member from Erie—Lincoln likes a capping system—a 5% cap—and he sold it to his friend the Leader of the Opposition. We did a very careful analysis of it. Had it been a good system, we would have adopted it. But we analyzed it in detail. The fact is that a capping system tends to shift the property tax burden from those who are more affluent, those who have more money and those who have better houses, to those who are relatively less affluent and who have less capacity to pay taxes.

That may be a good principle for the Progressive Conservative Party, but it is not a good principle for this government and the vast majority of the taxpayers in this province.

ONTARIO LOTTERY

AND GAMING CORP.

Mr. Jim Wilson (Simcoe—Grey): To the minister responsible for lotteries: The minister is expecting us to take him at his word that where once he was blind, now he sees. The problem is that he should have seen a long time ago, and when he saw, he should have acted. But he didn't. He wants to us to believe he didn't see because he doesn't talk to his chief of staff. Well, that's just wrong and incredibly unbelievable to anyone in this House and anyone in Ontario.

We believe that he did see, and his failure to act is a simple, wilful act of negligence. For that, he should resign. Minister, will you do the honourable thing and step aside until this matter is totally cleared up?

Hon. David Caplan (Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal, Deputy Government House Leader): I find it interesting: The member could turn to his left and ask the gentleman seated beside him, the member from Lanark—Carleton, who was in fact the minister between 2002 and 2003 when the Ombudsman identified a litany of problems. He could ask his colleague from Erie—Lincoln, Mr. Hudak, who was the minister for this corporation from 2000 to 2001, why they nurtured this culture of an organization—what actions they took or didn't take. The Ombudsman is incredibly critical during those years, and many others, of the actions which have ensued.

By contrast, the Ombudsman is quite complimentary—and I want to the member to know, because I'm sure he has not yet had a chance to read the Ombudsman's report. He says, "I commend the minister and the government for its openness and responsiveness to my report and recommendations and for their immediate and resolute commitment to ensuring change."

There is a marked contrast between this member, his colleagues and the way they have treated these matters in the past, and myself, my colleagues in this government and the openness, transparency and action that we have taken.

Mr. Wilson: There certainly is a stark contrast. When ministers were under any type of suspicion on this side of the House, we did the honourable thing under the Mike Harris and Ernie Eves government and we stepped aside. Every single one of us—and I was the first one to step aside as Minister of Health—did the honourable thing, went to the penalty box until things were cleared up. All of us were found to be not guilty of anything at all. It was your rat pack and you horrible Liberals, who have two standards in this House, who absolutely insisted that we step aside. So we respected parliamentary tradition, and we did so.

Now you've been caught by the Ombudsman; you've done nothing in your portfolio. The people of Ontario expect you to know what's going on, especially when millions and millions of dollars are at stake. You've done nothing. Will you at least do the honourable thing and step aside and resign your portfolio? Because obviously you have no honour in you.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order, Attorney General. Member for Renfrew, order.

The Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal.

Hon. Mr. Caplan: The "rat pack," "horrible Liberals"—I understood that the leader of the official opposition was going to bring a new civility back to this House. Clearly, it is not in evidence here today.

I think we all understand the partisan nature of the member from Simcoe—Grey and the comments that he makes. Listen, I understand that; I am as partisan as the next member here, but the Ombudsman is not. The Ombudsman is unbiased. The Ombudsman is an independent officer of this Legislature, appointed by us all to render opinions and to make recommendations. In fact, he does not share the opinion of the member from Simcoe—Grey. He has quite a different outlook and understanding. He commends the actions of myself, the minister, and of the government in accepting and embracing his report.

He commends us for the action which has ensued, for the "immediate and resolute commitment to ensuring change."

I know that the people of Ontario will see the comments that the member opposite makes for what they are—

The Speaker: Thank you. New question.

Mr. Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): A question to the minister responsible for lottery and gaming: Sir, you were responsible for, amongst other things, Ontario lottery and gaming. And under your watch, the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corp. suffers cultural decay, it engages in massive rip-offs to the tune of millions of dollars of innocent Ontarians. Under your watch, what are we to believe—that it was a matter of wilful blindness on your part, mere laziness, or outright incompetence, Minister?

Hon. Mr. Caplan: I understand the partisan nature of comments here, and I understand that the member from Niagara left of centre would never see things my way, but I do know that the member has a great deal of respect for André Marin, the Ombudsman of this Legislature. I do know that the member would want to reflect the comments of the Ombudsman, as delivered in his report yesterday. I know that the member opposite would want to be fair in his assessment.

The Ombudsman says in a letter to me, "I am satisfied with the positive commitments made by the corporation and by the Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal to implement my recommendations," but Mr. Marin went further. He said, "I commend the minister and the government for its openness and responsiveness to my report and recommendations and for their immediate and resolute commitment to ensuring change." I know that member from Niagara Centre would want to reflect that.

NOTICE OF DISSATISFACTION

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Pursuant to standing order 37(a), the member for Barrie—Simcoe—Bradford has given notice of his dissatisfaction with the answer given by the Minister of Government Services last Thursday to his question concerning slots and horse racing. This matter will be debated at 6 p.m. today.

PETITIONS

SMITHS FALLS ECONOMY

Mr. Norman W. Sterling (Lanark—Carleton): This is a petition with regard to the Hershey chocolate plant closing in Smiths Falls and putting 500 people out of work. It recognizes that, as well, the McGuinty government has accelerated the closing of the Rideau Regional Centre, putting another 800 people out of work. These job losses total about 1,300.

The petitioners, some of the 6,000 people who have signed this petition, ask the Legislature this:

They want the government to continue with work with Hershey to reverse the decision;

They want the government to immediately fund infrastructure projects in Smiths Falls in order to attract new investment;

They want the government to complete the four-laning of Highway 7 and the reconstruction of Highway 15 at an accelerated pace;

They want the government to postpone the closure of Rideau Regional Centre at least until it has replaced the 800 jobs with an equal number of public sector jobs; and

They want the government of Ontario to create an equivalent to the northern Ontario heritage fund for eastern Ontario, which is suffering depopulation and economic hard times.

I have signed that petition.

LONG-TERM CARE

Ms. Cheri DiNovo (Parkdale—High Park): I am pleased to present this petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. It reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas Ontario will not meet the needs of its aging population and ensure access to hospital services unless long-term-care homes can provide the care and services that residents need; and

"Whereas staff are now run off their feet trying to keep up and homes are unable to provide the full range of care and programs that residents need or the menu choices that meet their expectations; and

"Whereas dietary, housekeeping and other services that residents and their families value are being put at risk by increasing operating costs; and

"Whereas some 35,000 residents still live in older homes, many with three- and four-bed ward rooms and wheelchair-inaccessible washrooms; and

"Whereas, on November 23, 2006, this Legislature unanimously passed a private member's motion asking the government to introduce a capital renewal program for B and C homes; and

"Whereas such a program is required to support the limited-term licensing provisions in the proposed new Long-Term Care Homes Act;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to increase long-term-care operating funding by $390 million in 2007 and $214 million in 2008 to provide an additional 30 minutes of resident care, enhance programs and meal menus and address other operating cost pressures, and introduce a capital renewal and retrofit program for all B and C homes, beginning with committing to provide $9.5 million this year to renew the first 2,500 beds."

I agree with this petition and affix my signature hereto.

GTA POOLING

Mr. Bob Delaney (Mississauga West): I have a petition appropriately entitled "End GTA Pooling: Pass Ontario Budget." It reads as follows:

"Whereas the city of Mississauga faces a long-term labour shortage, resulting in some 60,000 more people commuting into the city of Mississauga than leave Mississauga to earn their living and support their families each and every day; and

"Whereas 10 years ago the Ontario government of that day introduced the concept of GTA pooling, whereby funds are taken from the municipalities surrounding the city of Toronto and channelled into the city of Toronto without benefit or accountability to the taxpayers of those fast-growing cities, which face big-city needs and issues of their own; and

"Whereas GTA pooling places an additional tax burden on the municipal property tax bases of some $40 million each and every year to the city of Mississauga; and

"Whereas the government of Ontario in its 2007-08 budget proposes to completely eliminate GTA pooling during a seven-year span beginning in fiscal year 2007-08, and that as pooling is phased out, Ontario will take responsibility for social assistance and social housing costs currently funded by GTA pooling;

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

"That all parties within the government of Ontario support the swift passage of the 2007-08 Ontario budget and ensure that its provisions ending GTA pooling are implemented."

I'm pleased to affix my signature to this petition and ask page Alex to carry it for me.

LONG-TERM CARE

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound—Muskoka): I have a petition to do with Muskoka Algonquin Healthcare, and it reads:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas demand for health services is expected to continue to rise with the growing retirement population in Muskoka-East Parry Sound; and

"Whereas studies indicate that overcrowded emergency rooms result in higher mortality rates; and

"Whereas growing demand and lack of availability of long-term-care beds place increased pressure on acute care beds; and

"Whereas the operating budget for Muskoka Algonquin Healthcare must reflect the growing demand for service in the communities of Muskoka-East Parry Sound;

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

"That the McGuinty government and the Minister of Health provide adequate increases in the operating budget of Muskoka Algonquin Healthcare to maintain current health services for the people of Muskoka-East Parry Sound and allocate more long-term-care beds for Muskoka-East Parry Sound."

I support this petition.

LAKERIDGE HEALTH

Mr. Michael Prue (Beaches—East York): I have a petition, a very short one. It reads as follows:

"Whereas we, the undersigned, believe that Lakeridge Health should have full funding and not be facing an $8-million shortfall;

"Whereas this would affect many programs, including the mental health program at Lakeridge Health;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, respectfully petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to fully fund the $8-million shortfall for Lakeridge Health."

It is signed by a number of people, including the originator, Paul Taylor. I am in agreement with this and would sign my name thereto.

LONG-TERM CARE

Mr. Jean-Marc Lalonde (Glengarry—Prescott—Russell): I have two petitions here that are identical to the one read by the member for Parkdale—High Park. They come from Chateau Gardens in Lancaster and Foyer St. Jacques in Embrun. I don't have to read it again, so I will give it to Emma to take to the Clerk.

STEVENSON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL

Mr. Jim Wilson (Simcoe—Grey): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas Stevenson Memorial Hospital needs $1.4 million in new funding over the next three years to get its birthing unit reopened and to ensure that they can recruit enough obstetricians and health care providers to supply a stable and ongoing service for expectant mothers in our area; and

"Whereas forcing expectant mothers to drive to Newmarket, Barrie or Orangeville to give birth is not only unacceptable, it is a potential safety hazard; and

"Whereas Stevenson Memorial Hospital cannot reopen the unit under its current budget and the McGuinty government has been unresponsive to repeated requests for new funding;

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

"That the McGuinty Liberal government immediately provide the required $1.4 million in new funding to Stevenson Memorial Hospital so that the local birthing unit can reopen and so that mothers can give birth in Alliston."

Of course, I agree with that petition and I've signed it.

LAKERIDGE HEALTH

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. It reads:

"Whereas we, the undersigned, believe that Lakeridge Health should have full funding and not be facing an $8-million shortfall;

"Whereas this would affect many programs, including the mental health program at Lakeridge Health;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, respectfully petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to fully fund the $8-million shortfall for Lakeridge Health."

I'll sign this and send it down to the Clerk's table by way of page Carolyn.

GRAVESITES OF FORMER PREMIERS

Mr. Jim Brownell (Stormont—Dundas—Charlottenburgh): I have a petition here from members of the Elementary Teachers' Federation of Ontario, and it reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Premiers of Ontario have made enormous contributions over the years in shaping the Ontario of today; and

"Whereas, as a result, the final resting places of the 18 deceased Premiers are among the most historically significant sites in the province, but have yet to be officially recognized; and

"Whereas, were these gravesites to be properly maintained and marked with an historical plaque and a flag of Ontario, these locations would be a source of pride to the communities where these former Premiers lie buried, and provide potential points of interest for visitors;

"Now therefore, we, the undersigned, petition the Legislature Assembly of Ontario as follows:

"Enact Bill 25,

an act that will preserve the gravesites of the former Premiers of Ontario."

As I agree with this petition, I shall affix my name and send it to the Clerk's table.

LAKERIDGE HEALTH

Mr. Jerry J. Ouellette (Oshawa): I have a petition that reads:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas we, the undersigned, believe that Lakeridge Health should have full funding and not be facing an $8-million shortfall;

"Whereas this would affect many programs, including the mental health program at Lakeridge Health;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, respectfully petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to fully fund the $8-million shortfall for Lakeridge Health."

I affix my name and invite all to the meeting tonight to deal with this issue at Lakeridge.

Ms. Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I also have a petition regarding Lakeridge Health that reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas we, the undersigned, believe that Lakeridge Health should have full funding and not be facing an $8-million shortfall;

"Whereas this would affect many programs, including the mental health program at Lakeridge Health;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, respectfully petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to fully fund the $8-million shortfall for Lakeridge Health."

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

IDENTITY THEFT

Mr. Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): I keep getting petitions from the Consumer Federation of Canada to the Parliament of Ontario and the Minister of Government Services that read as follows:

"Whereas identity theft is the fastest-growing crime in North America;

"Whereas confidential and private information is being stolen on a regular basis, affecting literally thousands of people;

"Whereas the cost of this crime exceeds billions of dollars;

"Whereas countless hours are wasted to restore one's good credit rating;

"We, the undersigned, demand that Bill 38, which passed the second reading unanimously in the Ontario Legislature, be brought before committee and that the following issues be included for consideration and debate:

"

(1) All consumer reports should be provided in a truncated (masked-out) form, protecting our vital private information such as SIN and credit card numbers.

"

(2) Should a credit bureau discover that there has been a breach of consumer information, the agency should immediately inform the victimized consumer.

"

(3) Credit bureaus should only report inquiries resulting out of actual applications for credit and for no other reasons.

"

(4) Credit bureaus should investigate any complaints within 30 days and correct or automatically delete any information found unconfirmed or inaccurate."

Since I agree, I'm delighted to sign my name to this petition.

LABORATORY SERVICES

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound—Muskoka): I have a petition to do with lab services. It reads:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the residents of the communities served by Muskoka Algonquin Healthcare (MAHC) wish to maintain current community lab services; and

"Whereas maintaining community lab services promotes physician retention and benefits family health teams; and

"Whereas the funding for community lab services is currently a strain on the operating budget of MAHC; and

"Whereas demand for health services is expected to continue to rise with the growing retirement population in Muskoka-East Parry Sound; and

"Whereas the operating budget for MAHC needs to reflect the growing demand for services in the communities of Muskoka-East Parry Sound;

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

"That the McGuinty government and the Minister of Health increase the operating budget of Muskoka Algonquin Healthcare to permit continued operation of community laboratory services."

I support this petition.

LAKERIDGE HEALTH

Ms. Cheri DiNovo (Parkdale—High Park): I have a petition to present.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas we, the undersigned, believe that Lakeridge Health should have full funding and not be facing an $8-million shortfall;

"Whereas this would affect many programs, including the mental health program at Lakeridge Health;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, respectfully petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to fully fund the $8-million shortfall for Lakeridge Health."

I agree with this petition and do affix my signature hereto.

GTA POOLING

Mr. Kevin Daniel Flynn (Oakville): I have a petition here entitled "End Greater Toronto Area Pooling: Pass Ontario Budget." It reads as follows:

"Whereas the city of Mississauga faces a long-term labour shortage, resulting in some 60,000 more people commuting into the city of Mississauga than leave Mississauga to earn their living and support their families each and every day; and

"Whereas 10 years ago, the Ontario government of that day introduced the concept of" greater Toronto area pooling "whereby, funds are taken from the municipalities surrounding the city of Toronto and channelled into the city of Toronto without benefit or accountability to the taxpayers of those fast-growing cities, which face big-city needs and issues of their own; and

"Whereas" greater Toronto area "pooling places an additional tax burden on the municipal property tax bases of some $40 million each and every year to the city of Mississauga; and

"Whereas the government of Ontario in its 2007-08 budget proposes to completely eliminate GTA pooling during a seven-year span beginning in the fiscal year 2007-08, and that as pooling is phased out Ontario will take responsibility for social assistance and social housing costs currently funded by greater Toronto area pooling.

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

"That all parties within the government of Ontario support the swift passage of the 2007-08 Ontario budget and ensure that its provisions ending" greater Toronto area pooling "are implemented."

ORDERS OF THE DAY

2007 ONTARIO BUDGET /

BUDGET DE L'ONTARIO DE 2007

Resuming the debate adjourned on March 26, 2007, on the amendment to the motion that this House approves in general the budgetary policy of the government.

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora—Rainy River): I'm pleased to be able to speak to the budget on behalf of New Democrats because New Democrats have much to say about this latest McGuinty government "Don't believe it" budget, a budget which has or ought to have a stamp on it, "Best before October 11," a budget which many of us know will no longer have any validity after the next election because, what is this? After four years of Dalton McGuinty's breaking promise after promise after promise, what do we see in this budget? Dalton McGuinty once again making promise after promise after promise.

But I suspect that people across Ontario know that Mr. McGuinty cannot be trusted to keep his promises, that this budget is essentially post-dated promises from a chronic promise breaker and that the promises that are there should be taken with huge dollops of salt.

C'est le grand budget incroyable de Dalton McGuinty. Après quatre années de promesses brisées par M. McGuinty, qu'est-ce qu'on voit aujourd'hui? On voit encore plus de promesses, mais maintenant les Ontariens et Ontariennes savent qu'ils ne devraient pas croire les promesses de M. McGuinty.

Even as these promises are made, it is very clear that they fail the majority of working families across this province. It's interesting that Tom Parkinson gets $5 million in punishment money from the McGuinty government for ripping off the customers of Hydro One. Dalton McGuinty gets an immediate $40,000 pay raise. We just saw Duncan Brown get almost a million dollars in quiet money from the McGuinty government for his ill-gotten activities at the lottery corporation. But what are working people across Ontario told? They're told, "You wait. You wait three years. You wait four years.

You wait five years." In fact, Premier McGuinty is telling today's working families—women, young people, new Canadians—"If you want fairness, if you want to see some action under the McGuinty government, you'll have to wait another three or five years." Who got the swift action? The Premier got a $40,000 pay increase in a special extended session of the Legislature just before Christmas.

Before addressing the specifics of the budget, I'd like to take a moment to reflect a bit on what this budget says about the current political situation here in Ontario in the spring of 2007. On the one hand, today we have the McGuinty Liberals who are completely out of touch with ordinary working families, a government that breaks promises time and time again to ordinary folks who, by and large, are working longer and harder than ever and, at the end of the month when they add up the bills, often find themselves under more pressure.

This is the history of this government, breaking promise after promise to hard-working people.

The promise to freeze hydro rates: Instead, you go across this province and most people will tell you that their hydro bill has doubled.

The promise to end the clawback, to stop taking $1,500 a year away from the poorest kids in this province: Here we are, four years later, and the McGuinty government is still taking $1,500 a year away from the poorest kids in the province, and next year, the McGuinty government will continue to take money away from those kids. And the year after that, the McGuinty government will continue to take money away from those, the poorest kids, and the year after that and the year after that. As I said, this is a government that is very out of touch with the economic reality that so many people are struggling with in Ontario today.

New Democrats know this is wrong. I know, having been from one end of Ontario to the other, how difficult life has become under the McGuinty government for ordinary working families. I also know the values of fairness, decency and, most importantly, people's sense that a fair day's work deserves a fair day's pay. I know from talking to people how much they want to see policies, strategies implemented which address those values and those needs.

Over the past few days, I've read and reread the budget and listened to quite a few of the budget-related remarks of the Minister of Finance and the Premier. When you read the headlines of this budget, it is again oh, so clear that the McGuinty government's budget fails working families and that its promises fail working families.

As I said, the McGuinty government gives a $5-million payment to Tom Parkinson at Hydro One after he takes advantage of Hydro One consumers. It gives almost a $1-million payment to Duncan Brown at the lottery corporation after he presides over fraudulent activities, where innocent people are cheated out of millions of dollars in winnings. The Premier himself gives himself a $40,000 pay increase, but working families are told that they should wait and they should wait. As I say, this is not a budget that reflects the everyday concerns of Ontario's hard-working families, and it is certainly not a budget that New Democrats can support.

I want to talk now about some specifics: minimum wage. You see, here is the irony, the contrast: The Premier gives himself a $40,000-a-year instant pay increase, but says to the 1.2 million working people across this province who work for under $10 an hour, "You wait three years for a $10 minimum wage." What's going to happen in those three years? Well, I can tell you. The hydro bill is going to go up again. The natural gas bill is going to go up. The rent bill is going to go up. Transit fees are going to go up. Property taxes are going to go up. Tuition fees are going to go up.

People who are struggling now on $8, $9 or $9.50 an hour are going to find themselves even more behind the eight ball. They're going to find themselves struggling more than ever. The McGuinty government that wants to keep the lowest-paid workers in poverty now is going to ensure that three years from now, they're still living in poverty, but instant action for the Premier, an instant $5 million for the Premier's friend Tom Parkinson, and Duncan Brown, who presided over fraud after fraud after fraud at the Ontario lottery corporation under the McGuinty government, an instant millionaire.

Let me be clear. The 1.2 million people who work for under $10 an hour now can't wait three years to pay their hydro bill. Nobody says to them, "Oh, we're going to wait three years before you pay your hydro bill." They can't wait three years before they pay their heating bill. They can't wait three years before they pay their rent. They can't wait three years before they pay the dental bill for their kids. They can't wait three years before they pay the tuition fee bill. They can't do any of those things.

They can't go to the grocery store and purchase groceries and say, "I'll be back to pay you when the McGuinty government raises the minimum wage to $10 an hour three years from now." They have to live today. They have to struggle today. They have to try to make ends meet today. Many of these families are working one job during the day, one job during the evening, and another job on the weekend trying to make ends meet. And you know what the McGuinty government says? The McGuinty government says, "You wait three years before we have anything approaching a decent minimum wage in the province of Ontario."

The McGuinty government wants to go out and cheer about this. The McGuinty government wants people to believe that forcing the lowest-paid workers in this province, 1.2 million of them, to wait three years before there's anything approaching a decent minimum wage. They want people to think that somehow the McGuinty government has given them a great gift.

Forcing people to continue to struggle in poverty when they get up every day and go to work and make their contribution to society—they work hard, not just once a day but in many cases, as I say, at three different jobs. Forcing them to continue to live in poverty, as the McGuinty government is doing, is disgraceful—disgraceful.

The fact of the matter is that many of these parents have to support kids. They're trying to, as I say, put food on the table, pay the rent and put clothing on their children. In fact, there are many other parents across this province who struggle. Some of them may have to rely on Ontario Works part of the time, or they rely on part-time jobs—minimum wage in combination with Ontario Works. For the last four years, the McGuinty government has been taking $1,500 a year per child away from those. It's $1,500 that the federal government, under the national child benefit supplement, provides to those kids.

The federal government recognizes that there's a problem with child poverty. They recognize that there are literally tens of thousands of kids in this province growing up in poverty, so the federal government says, "Here is the national child benefit supplement," $1,500 a year per child to help these kids and their families rise above poverty. And what has the McGuinty government been doing? They've been clawing that money back. Imagine, clawing back—and it amounts to $250 million. This government has been taking $250 million a year for the last four years away from the poorest kids in the province.

It amounts to $1,500 a year.

Now, what was the big announcement in the budget that the McGuinty government is applauding themselves on the shoulder for? The big announcement in the budget is that next year, instead of taking $1,500 dollars a year away from these kids, they're only going to take $1,250 a year away from these kids. It's like an extortionist. It's like Tony Soprano taking your money one day and then the next week he comes and takes a little less and says, "You should thank me. I'm your best friend. I'm only stealing this amount of money from you now instead of the full amount."

That is the travesty here. The McGuinty government wants to be applauded, because instead of taking $1,500 a year away from the poorest kids, they said, "Hey, we're going to be nice to you. We're only going to take $1,250 a year away from you, the poorest kids in the province."

And under the McGuinty government this passes for good social policy? The McGuinty government wants you to believe that this is progressive, positive, forward-looking social policy, that it is somehow going to alleviate poverty when the McGuinty government takes $1,250 a year away from the poorest kids? Disgraceful.

I think any reasonable person would look at this and say, "Disgraceful." People would say, "Why is the McGuinty government, which can afford to shower the chief executive officer of Hydro One with $5 million after he ripped off Hydro One customers, which gives the head of the Ontario lottery corporation almost $1 million after he presided over millions of dollars of fraud, applauding itself because now it is only going to take $1,250 a year away from the poorest kids in the province?" I think any rational, reasonable person would look at this and say, "This is deplorable.

When so many kids are living in poverty, this is deplorable."

I want to also talk about some of the things that are happening to our municipalities. One of the promises Dalton McGuinty made was that he was going to stop the downloading, that the McGuinty government was going to reverse the downloading, that municipalities would not be forced to use what is, we all admit, a negative and regressive tax, the property tax, to cover provincial responsibilities like health care, social assistance, seniors' housing and social housing. Dalton McGuinty said he was going to end that downloading to municipalities.

Well, what did we see on the day of the budget? We saw the mayor of Toronto, David Miller, not alone but with many other mayors in the province, saying, "The province is a delinquent debtor. The province isn't paying for their responsibilities. The province isn't paying for Ontario disability support. The province isn't paying for Ontario Works. The province is forcing municipalities to pay."

Here's what I think is the really nasty part of this: These are people who are forced to rely upon Ontario disability support benefits, people who cannot work. They are people who cannot work. They are forced to live on a benefit that is far below the poverty line, and similarly with Ontario Works. Go to any community in Ontario and talk with one of the social workers who works in the Ontario Works system or the Ontario disability support plan, and they will tell you, "Here's what an apartment costs to rent. Here's what it costs for food. Here's what it costs to pay the hydro bill.

Here's what it costs to pay the heating bill. There is no way that someone can survive on Ontario disability support plan benefits or Ontario Works benefits." But what does the McGuinty government do? Besides enforcing benefits that are so meagre, that fall far below the poverty line, they don't even pay the bill themselves. They force municipalities to pay the bill.

That will continue under this budget. In fact, under this budget, that will continue not just this year but years into the future.

I also want to talk about the issue of jobs—work—because wherever I go across Ontario, the vast majority of people say, "I want to work." Even people who cannot work, if you engage them in a conversation, they'll say, "I'd like to be able to work." People want to be able to work. People want to be able to find a job so they can sustain themselves, sustain their family and make a contribution to their community. But what has happened over the last three years under the McGuinty government? What we've seen is the destruction of 140,000 good-paying jobs in the manufacturing sector and in the forest sector.

I'll tell you, no part of the province has been hit harder than northern Ontario. It's not as if forest sector communities in northern Ontario suddenly don't have a product the world is interested in. We're going to continue, as far as I can tell, to use lumber to build homes. In fact, we continue to have a chronic housing shortage in much of North America. We're going to continue to use paper. There are more books being printed than ever before.

If you consider there are 1.4 billion people living in China and 1.1 billion in India, and their literacy rates are getting higher and higher, more people are going to read books, newspapers and magazines. Forest sector jobs in northern Ontario aren't being lost because somehow the world stopped using wood or paper; no. Forest sector jobs are being destroyed there because the McGuinty government has decided to drive the industrial hydro rate through the roof.

What is really sad about this is that the forest sector came here to Queen's Park almost three years ago during the Bill 100 hearings and they said to the McGuinty government, "We have looked at your Bill 100 proposal and we have looked at what it means. We can tell you that it's going to drive the industrial hydro rate through the roof. We can tell you that if you do this, you are going to close literally dozens of paper mills, pulp mills, derivative saw mills, OSB mills and plywood mills, and you're going to destroy tens of thousands of jobs." They laid it out.

They actually said, "This is what will go first; this is what will be destroyed second; this is what will be destroyed third," and they said that in the end, it will be tens of thousands of jobs. They were pleading with the McGuinty government, "Don't do this at a time when we face other kinds of cost pressures. Don't do this, because it will destroy tens of thousands of jobs." Did the McGuinty government listen? Did the McGuinty government pay any attention? Did the McGuinty government show any sensitivity to these workers, to these communities? No.

The McGuinty government, as part of policy, drove the industrial hydro rate through the roof.

Do you know what the real travesty is? Many of these mills are located on rivers in northern Ontario where there's a hydro dam that produces some of the lowest-cost electricity—not just the lowest-cost electricity in Ontario, not just the lowest-cost electricity in Canada, not just the lowest-cost electricity in North America, but some of the these mills are located on rivers immediately adjacent to hydro dams where they produce some of the lowest-cost electricity in the world. Some of these mills are located directly beside hydro dams that produce electricity for about one cent a kilowatt hour.

But the McGuinty government forces these mills to pay in the range of seven cents a kilowatt hour for that electricity.

Meanwhile, mills that are located in Quebec, Manitoba, British Columbia or now even in the Carolinas pay three, three and a half or four cents a kilowatt hour. So companies are saying, "We're going to close our operation in Ontario and we're going to move the production to Quebec. We'll move it to British Columbia, we'll move it to Manitoba, we'll move it to Minnesota, or we'll move it to North Carolina or South Carolina." That is how tens of thousands of jobs are being destroyed.

Here's just one example from my constituency. Kenora was a newsprint mill that had a dedicated market. The Minneapolis Star Tribune said, "We want to purchase this newsprint." They had experienced workers, very knowledgeable workers. They're located in the middle of the forest that they use to produce the paper, so their timber, their wood fibre, was economical: a good workforce, a good market that they can rely on.

You know what else? The Kenora mill was surrounded by no less than five hydro dams—five of them. The Kenora mill was literally drowning in the lowest-cost electricity in the world. But do you know what the McGuinty government said? They said, "If you want that electricity," which can be produced for one cent a kilowatt hour, "you have to pay seven cents a kilowatt hour." Do you know what the company that owned the mill said? They said, "We're out of here." They closed the mill—over 400 jobs gone. Four hundred jobs gone as a result of wrong-headed policy on the part of the McGuinty government.

Mr. Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay—Superior North): Tell the whole story, Howard.

Mr. Hampton: I notice that one of the members for Thunder Bay has a lot to say here. Maybe he can go back to Thunder Bay and tell the workers at Cascades why they're out of work, tell the workers at Abitibi why they're out of work, tell the workers in Red Rock why they're out of work, and tell the workers in Longlac why they're out of work, instead of apologizing for the McGuinty government. Maybe you can tell the thousands of workers in your riding why you're defending the McGuinty government policy of driving hydro rates through the roof and destroying thousands of forest sector jobs in your own riding.

While you're at it, maybe you can tell those workers what they should do now when their homes are worth a fraction of what they used to be worth. These are workers who paid their taxes. Some of them have worked 25 or 30 years. They've made solid contributions to the community. They know that the reason they are losing their jobs is because there's a McGuinty government at Queen's Park here that frankly doesn't care about them and that should have known from the representations of the forest sector three years ago that driving industrial hydro rates through the roof was going to kill thousands of jobs.

I want you to know what New Democrats think. New Democrats believe that if you're located immediately beside a hydro dam that produces electricity for some of the lowest costs in the world, that's a natural advantage that you should be able to take advantage of. That's something nature has given your part of Ontario, and you should be able to take advantage of it to sustain jobs and sustain communities.

But that's just beyond the grasp of the McGuinty government, far beyond the grasp of the McGuinty government, that a paper mill that is located right beside a hydro dam that produces some of the lowest-cost electricity in the world should be able to take advantage of that natural condition in order to sustain jobs.

I know you know what I'm speaking about, Speaker, because Espanola is in your riding, and Nairn Centre, which has lost a sawmill, part of the derivative loss, is in your riding, and sawmills in Chapleau. So you know from your own constituency exactly what I'm speaking about.

But it's not just the forest sector; it's also the manufacturing sector. We have watched as literally tens of thousands of jobs are being destroyed in the auto parts sector, and the response of the McGuinty government is to say, "Well, maybe in 2009 or 2010, some of these jobs are going to be replaced." It's the old McGuinty promise again: "Sorry you lost your job today. I feel bad that you lost your job today. I feel your pain tha