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

April 1, 2008

39th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2008-Apr-01 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Tuesday 1 April 2008 Mardi 1 er avril 2008

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

ENVIRONMENTAL CLUB OF CAMERON STREET PUBLIC SCHOOL

RIDING OF OAKVILLE

ASSISTANCE TO FARMERS

COMMUNITIES IN ACTION FUND

ONTARIO ECONOMY

CLIMATE CHANGE

BLUEBERRY PICKERS

ONTARIO BUDGET

ONTARIO BUDGET

ROYAL ASSENT /

SANCTION ROYALE

LEGISLATIVE INTERNS

VISITOR

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

EMPLOYMENT STANDARDS

AMENDMENT ACT (RAISING

THE MINIMUM WAGE), 2008 /

LOI DE 2008 MODIFIANT

LA

LOI SUR LES NORMES D'EMPLOI

(AUGMENTATION

DU SALAIRE MINIMUM)

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

FIRST NATIONS TECHNICAL INSTITUTE

FIRST NATIONS TECHNICAL INSTITUTE

GOVERNMENT INVESTMENTS

GOVERNMENT INVESTMENTS

FIRST NATIONS TECHNICAL INSTITUTE

FIRST NATIONS TECHNICAL INSTITUTE

GOVERNMENT INVESTMENTS

ADJOURNMENT DEBATE

VISITORS

MEMBERS' HOCKEY GAME

ORAL QUESTIONS

TIRE DISPOSAL

TIRE DISPOSAL

MANUFACTURING JOBS

NATIONAL CHILD BENEFIT SUPPLEMENT

GOVERNMENT SPENDING

MINIMUM WAGE

YOUTH EMPLOYMENT

GYPSY MOTH INFESTATION

SCHOOL BOARDS

MINIMUM WAGE

ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE

ABORIGINAL RIGHTS

NORTHERN ECONOMY

CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES

CONSERVATION

VISITORS

PETITIONS

LORD'S PRAYER

HOME CARE

ANTI-SMOKING LEGISLATION

LORD'S PRAYER

HOME HEALTH CARE SUPPLIES

ROUTE 17

LORD'S PRAYER

DAVID DUNLAP OBSERVATORY

LORD'S PRAYER

EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE

LORD'S PRAYER

EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE

WYE MARSH WILDLIFE CENTRE

HOSPITAL FUNDING

EMERALD ASH BORER

NOTICE OF DISSATISFACTION

ORDER OF BUSINESS

ORDERS OF THE DAY

2008 ONTARIO BUDGET

ADJOURNMENT DEBATE

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

ENVIRONMENTAL CLUB OF CAMERON STREET PUBLIC SCHOOL

Mr. Jim Wilson: I rise today to pay tribute to the environmental club of Cameron Street Public School in Collingwood for receiving the Lieutenant Governor's Ontario Heritage Award for Youth Achievement in natural heritage.

Made up of 15 students from grades 3 to 8, the club has taken a leadership role at the school and in the community, organizing a variety of activities to not only raise awareness, but also help the environment. Among other things, the club holds a litterless lunch once a week, walk-to-school Wednesdays and a school-wide recycling program. They also provide mentoring services to younger grades by leading initiatives such as a kindergarten class composting program.

Environmental awareness and action can never begin at too early an age. The work the club has done thus far is representative of the students' incredible dedication to the environment and indicative of a sense of civic duty that is well beyond their years.

On behalf of all of the residents of Simcoe–Grey, I want to congratulate the Cameron Street Public School environmental club for receiving this very prestigious award; it's the first time it's ever been received in my riding. I want to thank their principal, Mike Giffen—who, by the way, used to work for me—their teacher, Ruth Hall, and all of the club members for improving our environment and for setting an excellent example for all of us to follow.

Congratulations, too, to their parents and to each and every student. May all schools adopt this program.

RIDING OF OAKVILLE

Mr. Kevin Daniel Flynn: This past weekend, I had the pleasure of being a part of two great events in Oakville.

On Friday, I hosted the Kevin Flynn 10-pin Challenge as part of the Big Brothers and Big Sisters Bowl for Kids Sake campaign. It's the biggest fundraiser of the year. This fun event not only raised awareness, but also raised over $16,000 for Halton Big Brothers and Big Sisters.

I want to highlight that Big Brothers and Big Sisters are people just like you and me. They're regular people who volunteer to share a little time with a child or with a young person in need. I want to encourage all members of this House to think about getting involved as Big Brothers or Big Sisters themselves.

On Saturday, I attended and served as the MC for the second annual Sydney Clark Fundraiser for Sick Kids Foundation. Two years ago, young Sydney fell into a coma. Later, she was diagnosed with Reye's syndrome, which is a very uncommon and deadly disease. She was transferred to Sick Kids, where, under great care and after significant work, she made a full recovery.

The event was called Do You Believe in Magic? It was a great evening. It was attended by the president of the Sick Kids Foundation and Sydney's doctors and nurses. This year's event raised over $43,000 for the Sick Kids hospital foundation. As the event coincided with Earth Hour, the Clark family made sure that their event would celebrate that as well.

I congratulate all those who made these events possible and who work so tirelessly to strengthen the great community of Oakville.

ASSISTANCE TO FARMERS

Mr. Tim Hudak: Sadly, the closure of the CanGro Foods canning facility in St. Davids, in Niagara, which was to be effective yesterday, has jeopardized the livelihoods of some 150 pear and peach growers in the region and will soon, sadly, put more than 100 plant employees out of work once the final canning projects have been completed. This facility had been a leader in North America—in fact, the only canning facility in Canada this side of the Rocky Mountains—one of the latest victims of Dalton McGuinty's high taxes and high energy policies.

This, I remind members, is an industry still reeling from the closure of the Cadbury Schweppes plant in St. Catharines in June 2007, and the closing of a local processor's sweet cherry operation this past year. As a result of these three lost businesses, farmers are now being forced to pull out or find a new market for as much as 3,700 acres of peaches, pears, sweet cherries and grapes.

The Premier has become an absentee landlord when it comes to the greenbelt. If the Premier wants to freeze the farmers' land under the Greenbelt Act, then he must make every effort to help farmers find a profitable market for their product. The federal government recently came forward with over $20 million to help with a transition program. Sadly, the province has not brought forward their share of that funding program. Anyone can draw a line on a map and call it a greenbelt. It takes real leadership to make the investments to make it a success and support our local farmers.

COMMUNITIES IN ACTION FUND

Mrs. Laura Albanese: On Sunday, March 30, I had the pleasure of attending a championship awards ceremony for a basketball tournament in our riding of York South—Weston. I was delighted to witness over 180 young athletes participate in the basketball tournament, and thrilled that our government had a part to play in making this event a success by providing funding to the tournament organizers, the Ogaden Somali Community Association of Ontario, through the communities in action fund. This fund, from the Ministry of Health Promotion, enables community associations to provide programs and remove barriers to participation in organized physical activities.

Organized sports bolster confidence and provide alternatives for young people who are looking for things to do outside the home and outside of school hours. Competitive sports like basketball and soccer give young people a great opportunity to work together as a team and to build their self-esteem.

The communities in action fund promotes healthy lifestyle choices. In the case of the young people participating in the Ogaden basketball tournament, instead of being sedentary and playing video games or watching TV, or being on the street, the youth were in a safe, social and community setting. I want to commend the tireless dedication of parents, coaches and volunteers, who create and run these programs and help remove the barriers that prevent or discourage youth from participating in physical activities.

ONTARIO ECONOMY

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: As you know, Mr. Speaker, we've just finished having our 2008-09 budget introduced in this House. One of the things that I found incredible, when you review some of the things that happened in the past, was that from the year 1867 to 2003—136 years—we got the budget from zero to $67 billion. But do you know what? In the last five years, from 2003 to 2008, we've raised the budget another $29 billion. It's now at $96 billion, an increase of 41%.

I say to you, is the environment clean, for the 41% increase? I don't think so. Are there enough family physicians? It's worse than ever. Are our farmers prospering? Absolutely not.

I know we have kids being shot in our schools, but are there enough police officers? Likely not.

Is our economy strong? Absolutely not. We've lost 200,000 manufacturing jobs in the last three years.

This government has to rethink everything they're doing. They're an overspending, Liberal free-spending government—overtaxing the general public in this province. Start spending your money wisely.

CLIMATE CHANGE

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Last summer, the Premier announced the climate plan but in fact provided none. The government has not been open about its lack of a climate plan. Thus, we on this side of the House are forced to look for clues, to paw through the entrails to find out what's going on.

On March 7, the total of eight months since the Premier's campaign statement of a climate plan, the Toronto Star reported that the Liberals will set up a climate secretariat in April, "'a small guerrilla outfit with strong vision that can drive through ministries,' a source said."

The announcement was bizarre on two counts: first of all, the strange image of a group of bureaucrats rumbling through the halls here, late at night, checking to see whether deputy ministers have been good boys and good girls, delivering on climate events, and retreating during the day to their forest redoubt on Philosopher's Walk. It just doesn't give us a sense of someone really running things. The second point about this that's bizarre is that there would be no climate change plan for that secretariat to work with. None has been announced.

The Minister of the Environment was asked by the Globe and Mail last week when the climate plan would come out, and he said, "Two or three months from now."

On top of all that, there's no indication in the budget of actual forward motion on climate change, no indication that the funds will be there to meet the targets that were set, as inadequate as they were.

The Premier has now had the promise of a climate plan hanging around for nine months. He has to treat the issue with the moral urgency he claims it has.

BLUEBERRY PICKERS

Mr. David Ramsay: As many in this House would know, for years, many hard-working families in northern Ontario have been supplementing their incomes by picking blueberries in the summer.

In the summer, all along the major highways of northern Ontario—Highways 11 and 17 in particular—these families set up stands or just sell out of their cars their harvests for a six- or seven-week period. Some sellers-brokers are also bringing these berries down to Muskoka berry stands, and from time to time there have been attempts to bring these down to the Toronto market.

Four years ago I was approached with the idea of creating a co-op that would bring order and certainty to selling the blueberries by providing a consistent supply to the Toronto market over the busy berry season. Today at 4 a.m. I toured the Ontario Food Terminal with Dan Spiegelman, who approached me with this idea. Dan—for 40 years—has experience there at the Food Terminal, and everyone I met down there knew him. Ontario's premier fruit and vegetable market woke up this morning and began its day that early.

The wonderful work that goes on there distributes our fruits and vegetables to all our retailers right across this province. I talked to some of the brokers, who were very interested in featuring this natural product from northern Ontario into the south.

In the coming weeks, there will be local meetings occurring throughout the area of northeastern Ontario to see if the pickers want to adopt this sort of system. I'd just like to say that I support this idea and I hope that this goes ahead. I think it would be another economic opportunity for a lot of our hard-working families.

ONTARIO BUDGET

Mr. Dave Levac: I'm happy to have the opportunity to speak today about the good news the recent provincial budget and various other programs have provided to the riding of Brant.

Since I was elected, I've worked very hard to improve the quality of life for the residents of my riding. I'm very proud to have announced last week that our government is coming through and keeping its word.

Our government will be investing $1.5 million in Brantford and $3 million in Brant on repairs to roads and bridges through the Ontario highway program. I've spoken often about this issue, and now the riding will have the much-needed funds so that local officials can start to fix up the downloaded roads and bridges that connect our communities in a way that is safe and efficient.

In addition, the municipal infrastructure investment initiative—MIII—brought to Brantford and Brant valuable funding to work on water and sewers, roads and bridges and libraries, just to name a few. To highlight, my riding will be receiving $3.5 million towards improvements on Henry Street, a very important road in Brantford, and nearly $3.5 million to rehabilitate the downloaded Highway 54 in the county of Brant to help families and goods get to where they're going safely and efficiently.

Also, in terms of community and social services and of children and youth services, the riding of Brant will be receiving over $250,000. Together, Brantford and Brant received nearly $100,000, the Six Nations received $85,000, and the Mississaugas of New Credit received $68,000, to help these communities maintain a good quality of life.

I'm particularly proud to be part of this government during this time when the riding remains healthy and strong. Premier, ministers, I thank you and the residents thank you. We appreciate it.

ONTARIO BUDGET

Ms. Leeanna Pendergast: I rise today to thank the McGuinty government for its investment and continued support for students in the riding of Kitchener—Conestoga. I've committed 20 years of my life as a vocation to students in school.

Despite all adversity in their lives, students come to school, and when students come to school hungry, it's heartbreaking. This government's $32-million commitment to student nutrition, doubling over three years, and its partnering with educators, parents and school boards continues to move us forward toward a goal of increased student achievement.

The third party has called this budget an "Oliver Twist budget." As a teacher of literature, let me remind you that Oliver Twist ended up with everything in the end, and he left his society a better place to be. I quote Charles Dickens directly from

chapter 53: "Oliver's warm and earnest heart ... linked together a ... society whose condition approached ... one of perfect happiness as can ... be known" in this ever-changing world.

ROYAL ASSENT /

SANCTION ROYALE

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): I beg to inform the House that in the name of Her Majesty the Queen, His Honour the Lieutenant Governor has been pleased to assent to a certain bill in his office.

The Deputy Clerk (Mr. Todd Decker): The following is the title of the bill to which His Honour did assent:

Bill 45,

An Act to authorize the expenditure of certain amounts for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2008 / Projet de loi 45, Loi autorisant l'utilisation de certaines sommes pour l'exercice se terminant le 31 mars 2008.

LEGISLATIVE INTERNS

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): I'd just like to introduce our new group of interns. With us today in the Speaker's gallery are the 2007-08 legislative interns. They are Ryan Cookson, Sabrina Hoque, David Michon, Kayla Monteiro, Aamir Taiyeb, Matthew Thornton and Judith Wong. Would all members please join me in welcoming our interns to the Legislature.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): My apologies to intern Katie Robb.

VISITOR

Hon. Sandra Pupatello: It's really my pleasure to introduce Tyler Wiles, who is sitting in the gallery today, the president of the college student alliance from St. Clair College in the great riding of Windsor West. I'd appreciate if we would all help welcome him here today.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

EMPLOYMENT STANDARDS

AMENDMENT ACT (RAISING

THE MINIMUM WAGE), 2008 /

LOI DE 2008 MODIFIANT

LA

LOI SUR LES NORMES D'EMPLOI

(AUGMENTATION

DU SALAIRE MINIMUM)

Ms. DiNovo moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 49,

An Act to amend the Employment Standards Act, 2000 / Projet de loi 49, Loi modifiant la Loi de 2000 sur les normes d'emploi.

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

First reading agreed to.

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

Ms. Cheri DiNovo: This bill would raise the minimum wage above the poverty line, unlike the government's moves. Therefore, it would raise over a million Ontarians out of poverty by introducing a minimum wage of $10.25 immediately.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

FIRST NATIONS TECHNICAL INSTITUTE

Hon. John Milloy: Today, along with my colleagues the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Minister Dombrowsky, the Minister of Agriculture, I had the opportunity to visit a very special place of learning in Ontario. The First Nations Technical Institute is the longest-standing aboriginal post-secondary institute in our province.

For 22 years it has provided aboriginal students with the training and skills they need to succeed through college, university and community programs. It has also welcomed them into a strong, caring community that offers a holistic approach to learning opportunities for aboriginal people. That's why it was so troubling to learn from Minister Dombrowsky, in her role as the local MPP, that because of federal cuts the institute was in danger of closing its doors.

Our government wanted to make sure that didn't happen. Together with Minister Dombrowsky, we worked with the institute to forge a new partnership. This year we'll make a one-time $1.5-million investment in the school and, working together, we're going to develop a financial plan to make sure the institute can succeed in the years ahead.

I'm proud of the work our government has done with the First Nations Technical Institute and the work we've done on aboriginal education generally. In 2007-08, our government invested $24 million in aboriginal post-secondary education and training. Of that amount, $1 million went to the institute's programs, including the school's highly regarded aviation program; an additional $671,000 funded other institute programs. This is all part of our commitment to making sure that aboriginal students in Ontario can reach their full potential.

But we are missing an important partner in the federal government. From 1985 to 2007, the federal government funded the First Nations Technical Institute. Recently, they made a decision to cut funding to aboriginal post-secondary education. I've written to my federal counterpart and asked him to join me in helping to find a secure, long-term answer to the post-secondary challenges faced by our aboriginal partners.

We're going to continue to work with our education partners in the year ahead to make sure aboriginal students get the support they need to succeed. And I'm going to continue to ask the federal government to come to the table and work with us.

I want to again thank my colleague the member for Prince Edward—Hastings for her hard work on behalf of the institute. It's because of her advocacy that the people of Ontario recognize the importance of the institute and the critical role it plays in the community.

In closing, I'd like to bring to this Legislature the greetings and appreciation of Chief R. Donald Maracle, Chief of the Mohawks of the Bay of Quinte, who was at the announcement this morning and wanted me to pass them on to this Legislature and to our government.

FIRST NATIONS TECHNICAL INSTITUTE

Hon. Michael Bryant: It is with great pleasure that I rise today to echo the comments of the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities, along with the great member for Prince Edward—Hastings. It was a truly special morning to meet with students and facility members of the great First Nations Technical Institute of the Tyendinaga Mohawk Territory. We were all inspired by the passion of the faculty to teach, by the desire of the students to learn and by the drive and leadership of their president, Tim Thompson.

With today's announcement of increased support, the McGuinty government is doing its part to ensure that the success of the First Nations Technical Institute is secured and continues to grow now and in the future. Our focus is training, education and, most of all, jobs. Jobs increase respect and choices for First Nations, Metis and Inuit people, and respect preserves dignity. Increasing and preserving that for First Nations in Ontario, Metis in Ontario and Inuit in this province is a main focus of this government.

The First Nations Technical Institute is the launch pad for more jobs and a stronger economy and, most of all, a brighter future for Ontario First Nations.

I congratulate the president of FNTI, Tim Thompson, and all of the faculty, staff and students at the institute for its many academic and community accomplishments; so, too, to Chief Maracle and council and to that community. I look forward to many more years of success for this institute and its students.

GOVERNMENT INVESTMENTS

Hon. Sandra Pupatello: I rise in the Legislature today to speak about how our government is partnering with industry to create jobs and opportunity for Ontario families. Recently, we announced two examples of this strategy in action: our most recent investment with Ford, and the Next Generation of Jobs Fund.

It was a very, very proud day when we had Premier McGuinty in Windsor to announce this partnership with Ford Motor Co.

Yesterday I joined the Premier, Minister of Finance Dwight Duncan, our own MPP Bruce Crozier, and Ford executives at the Essex engine plant in Windsor to announce a $170-million investment by Ford to retool this facility and put roughly 300 previously laid-off people back on the job.

We believe there's a strong possibility that the number of jobs returning to the Essex engine plant will increase with the implementation of further phases and with additional and constructive dialogue between both levels of government and Ford Motor Co. We are committed to working with Ford and the federal government—and let me say that clearly—to bring even more investment to this facility. The Ontario government has made commitments under the Ontario automotive investment strategy allowing us to fund up to 10% of total program costs, and in this case, $17 million.

This strategic investment represents a big win for the workers of the Essex engine plant, for Windsor and for Ontario's automotive sector.

On March 4, the McGuinty government announced its $1.15-billion Next Generation of Jobs Fund to deliver good jobs for Ontario families by making Ontario the best place to develop and make products for tomorrow. NextGen is a different type of fund for a different type of economy; at $1.15 billion, we're putting major resources behind this. The fund targets areas where Ontario has the greatest potential: green auto research, parts production and vehicle assembly; clean fuels, clean industries and environmental technologies; health technologies and pharmaceutical research and manufacturing; and digital media and information and communications technology.

NextGen will position Ontario to win leading-edge global investments, it will make Ontario a centre of excellence for innovation and commercialization, and it will place Ontario ahead of the curve in green technologies, making products that reduce greenhouse gases, help our environment and make Ontario more competitive.

We know that opportunity doesn't hang around, and that's why companies submitting a completed proposal for their project will get a decision in 45 days. Our service guarantee is a first for the Ontario government business program and means that a managing director of an Ontario subsidiary can phone the global CEO of their company and say, "If you want this project done quickly, choose Ontario."

Ontario has the highest percentage of people with a post-secondary education in the world. We're building on this advantage through our investments in education and training. NextGen is the next stage, creating the rewarding high-value jobs that will live up to our talented and skilled workforce. This is how we will make Ontario a leader in the knowledge economy.

Today's economy is too complicated and too competitive for governments to simply cut taxes and hope for the best. Of course, creating a competitive business environment is at the core of any prudent economic plan. That's why our budget proposed new tax relief today totalling $750 million over four years. That's on top of the further $1.1 billion over three years in targeted, strategic tax reductions proposed in the 2007 fall economic update.

But governments need to do more. They need to show leadership and vision. They need to be at the table, partnering with industry to create jobs and win investment. Make no mistake: If Ontario doesn't step up, somebody else will.

We know what we can accomplish when the government and business work together. By coming forward with our $500-million automotive investment strategy, we managed to leverage that into $7 billion of new investments, safeguarding thousands of jobs—and this during very tough times for our car companies.

Yesterday's announcement with Ford is just the latest in a series of success stories from our government's partnerships with industry, and these accomplishments will continue with the Next Generation of Jobs Fund. We are sending a message to companies around the world: If you've got a project that will grow your business and create jobs, Ontario wants to partner with you to make it happen.

We will continue to do this as our part of our government's five-point economic plan: partnering with industry, investing in skills and education, rebuilding infrastructure, boosting innovation and cutting business costs.

I'm proud to be part of a government that is prepared to step up to the plate and be part of the solution. That's what Ontarians expect and deserve, and that's what Ontarians will continue to get from this side of the House.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Responses?

GOVERNMENT INVESTMENTS

Mr. Ted Chudleigh: My friend from Durham, who shares a bench with me and spent 30 years in the automotive industry, says this plan is wrong-headed. Wrong-headed—it's headed in the wrong direction. It is a classic example of anti-free trade policy. This plan is government-driven; it's not industry-driven. It is a plan that would feel comfortable in the 1960s and 1970s, when the government used to guide industry in these ways, until we found out that government had an unholy ability to judge industries that were about to fail and pour Ontario taxpayers' money into industries that were not doing well.

The other thing this plan does is benefit Ford, which is fine in Windsor and fine in Oakville, it's a wonderful thing, but it injects itself into the free market. It hasn't put any money into Chrysler. It hasn't put any money into General Motors. It makes it uncompetitive in those other industries when government supports only one industry in a town like this.

This industry is suffering from high taxes and the high cost of doing business in Ontario. If you reduced the taxes of the industry, if you made Ontario a more competitive playing field in North America, instead of having the highest taxes in North America, the highest taxes in Canada, if you made it—

Hon. Sandra Pupatello: Nonsense, nonsense.

Mr. Ted Chudleigh: I'm sorry, Speaker. She had her time and apparently she wants my time too. That would make her a Liberal.

If you levelled the playing field for all businesses, then all businesses would succeed, instead of looking for some other place to do business. I read a very nice poem about that in the Legislature last week; I would recommend it to you. It's in Hansard.

Interjection.

Mr. Ted Chudleigh: Apparently the member from St. Catharines also wants some of my time.

The $1.5 billion would be better spent creating a business-friendly atmosphere for all Ontario businesses, one that would level the playing field and let everyone participate in it. After all, 82% of Ontario employment is in small and medium-sized businesses. Those businesses are not going to benefit one iota from these kinds of expenditures. Those are the businesses that are going bankrupt and leaving this province for lower-cost jurisdictions, and those are the businesses that employ, as I said, 82% of Ontarians, and you're doing nothing for those businesses. It doesn't apply to small businesses and they are the ones suffering.

You put $17 million into Windsor—$17 million, $57,000 per job. But how much did you put into Kitchener? How about Kitchener, where there were 2,934 jobs gone missing? Where is $17 million for Kitchener? They should get the same thing in Kitchener. What about Hamilton? Hamilton has lost 1,840 jobs. Whereabouts is the $10,000,488 for Hamilton? Whereabouts is Guelph's money? Guelph lost a tremendous number of jobs, as did Collingwood, as did Cambridge, Thunder Bay, Smiths Falls. Whereabouts is their money? No, they don't have two cabinet ministers in their towns.

This is patronage, that's what this is: a bunch of patronage to make you look good in your towns, using Ontario taxpayers' dollars to do it.

You shouldn't be proud of this. You should be ashamed.

FIRST NATIONS TECHNICAL INSTITUTE

Mr. Norm Miller: In the short minute I have left, I'll comment on the statement by the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs. As usual, the provincial government initially just argued that the problem belonged to the federal government in terms of the First Nations Technical Institute. We all recognize that education and training opportunities are of paramount importance if we are going to see improvement in the conditions in our aboriginal communities.

This government has a new aboriginal policy framework. Let me explain what that means. That means the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs, when he deals with the situation in Caledonia, shows up there—he doesn't actually talk to anybody. He just shows up in Caledonia. He goes around and films himself and posts it on YouTube. That's the new aboriginal policy framework in action. He doesn't have to talk to people.

From where I'm standing, this government really needs to roll up its sleeves and has a lot more work to do. Look at Kashechewan, where they're waiting for a new school to serve a community that hasn't produced a high school graduate on its own soil for more than two years. And read the Lieutenant Governor's recent speech that he made in Sudbury, if you want to see all the work that needs to be done on the aboriginal file.

FIRST NATIONS TECHNICAL INSTITUTE

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Well, here we go again, the Liberal government engaging themselves in their favourite pursuit, and that is to blame the federal government every time something happens and to try to put everything on their doorstep. I would remind the government that the province of Ontario, for every citizen in the province, is responsible for education both at the post-secondary level and at the primary and secondary levels. Why should First Nations people be treated any different?

Today, the government announced they're going to put forward $1.5 million to the First Nations Technical Institute, an institute that is in place that allows First Nations people to get the skills that they need to bring back to the communities to build a capacity that is so necessary to run their institutions and run government in their own communities.

What does the government do? The federal government has cut the funding by over $2 million. The provincial government should have come in and basically said, "We are going to make sure that people who want to get an education at the post-secondary level are able to get it." What do they do? It's a half measure. They bring forward $1.5 million. Why? Because this provincial government is no different than the federal government. The policy is, you underfund it and you make it fail. That's what this government is up to.

I am upset with this government on behalf of the communities that we represent. My colleague Michael Prue on the finance committee brought a motion before the finance committee that was clear. That motion proposed that we bring forward the necessary funding to make sure that FNTI gets the dollars that are necessary so that they can survive beyond the spring, they can survive beyond next fall, so they can flourish and become the organization they need to be so communities can build capacity.

This is no different than what the federal government always does: Underfund it, let it fail and let's see what happens.

GOVERNMENT INVESTMENTS

Mr. Paul Miller: I'd like to address the engine plant. I want to be clear that the NDP supports direct investment in companies if there is a clear link between the investment and the creation of good, paying jobs. I notice that no date has been given for the reopening of this plant. I await the release of funding details. However, if this investment results in the creation of 300 good, quality jobs for workers who would otherwise be out of work, then this investment is worth making. But it doesn't go far enough; 40% of the people in that area are out of work. Three hundred jobs? Not enough.

That said, it is our belief that the McGuinty record has been completely inadequate, and there is no excuse for the loss of 200,000 jobs. We in the NDP have been clear that the job crisis in the manufacturing and resource sectors is the number one challenge of this House. Since Dalton McGuinty came to power, we've lost 18% of our high-paying manufacturing jobs. That is $6.6 billion in wages out of the Ontario economy.

That very scary number of 18% sounds good compared to the absolute devastation of the manufacturing sectors that communities such as Hamilton have endured, where 30% of the manufacturing jobs have been lost—a disgrace. But all this pales in comparison to the hit that Windsor—the minister's home riding—has taken, where close to 40% of the manufacturing jobs have disappeared, and which now has the second-highest unemployment rate in Canada.

Recently, the NDP have proposed two ideas that won wide support from business, labour and economists: a manufacturing investment tax credit and an aggressive Buy Ontario program for all transit vehicles—which our member brought forward and which was shot down. These ideas were rejected by the McGuinty government.

The credit would be 10% of the investments in new machinery, buildings and equipment. An added incentive of 20% credit would be available for investments in green industry jobs. This is an idea that has been widely endorsed by economists and has been implemented with impressive results, I might add, in Manitoba and Saskatchewan, and now Quebec is on board. What's wrong with Ontario? Why haven't we joined in?

The federal government also provides just this sort of credit in the Maritime provinces as well. And in its budget two weeks ago, Quebec became the third province to endorse the idea and will offer a provincial credit shortly. Apparently Mr. Ramsay, in his interim report on manufacturing, also endorses the concept. It's right there on page 28 of the budget.

Unfortunately, rather than simply introducing a provincial manufacturing credit in its budget, the government has reverted to its unfortunate habit of pointing fingers at Ottawa, and merely recommends that the federal government offer a credit for Ontario now.

ADJOURNMENT DEBATE

Mr. Bill Murdoch: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I seek unanimous consent to withdraw my request filed yesterday for a late show addressed to the Minister of Public Infrastructure and Renewal.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The member seeks unanimous consent. Agreed? I heard a "no."

All those in favour will say "aye."

All those opposed will say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

Agreed to.

VISITORS

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): I want to ask the table—I was just a little confused. I looked at the calendar today and it had a number of different dates: It's July, it's January, it's April; all say the first, though.

On behalf of the member from Mississauga—Streetsville and the member from Erindale, we'd like to welcome Heather Sinclair and her students from John Fraser Secondary School in Mississauga, who are visiting in the west visitors' gallery. Welcome today.

On behalf of the member from London—Fanshawe, we'd like to welcome the grade 12 political science class from Clarke Road Secondary School in London today in the east gallery. Welcome to Queen's Park.

On behalf of the member from Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, we'd like to welcome Mr. Azm Hoque, the father of her legislative intern. Mr. Hoque is a former senior United Nations officer in Asia and Africa, and he's in the east members' gallery. Welcome today, sir.

On behalf of the member from Parkdale—High Park, we'd like to welcome her guests: Fahma Ali, Joan Taylor, Michael Taylor and Crystal Taylor in the east gallery. Welcome.

On behalf of the members from Kitchener Centre and Richmond Hill and all members in the House, we want to acknowledge the student representatives from the Ontario Undergraduate Student Alliance and the college student association, who are here for their annual Queen's Park conference. Welcome to Queen's Park today.

On behalf of the members from Hamilton Centre and Timmins—James Bay, we would like to welcome, in the east members' gallery, Willamina McGrimmond, Nancy Coaster, Max Havin, Allison McReady and George Sorger. Welcome to Queen's Park today.

MEMBERS' HOCKEY GAME

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): As Speaker, I would like to recognize those members who played last night for the Ontario Legiskaters—it's a hockey team—in a tune-up hockey game against the legislative staff and security. I want to thank them, and I will be naming the members by name: Jean-Marc Lalonde, the coach; Bob Delaney; Norm Miller; George Smitherman; John O'Toole; and Paul Miller. The staff won the game, 9-6. We want to congratulate both Norm Miller and Paul Miller for each scoring two goals last night as well.

To everyone who has not been recognized, welcome to Queen's Park today.

ORAL QUESTIONS

TIRE DISPOSAL

Mr. Robert W. Runciman: My question is for the Premier. I'm going to ask him if he can remember a promise and commitment. In 2005, you very adamantly said to members of the media, and I'm quoting from the Toronto Star: "There'll be no tire tax." Got it?

I know the Premier has a hazy memory when it comes to many of his promises, and this may be a case in point because, Premier, you've now indicated you will be bringing in a tire tax. You made the announcement effectively under the cover of darkness when the Legislature wasn't sitting, three days after the budget was tabled.

Premier, will you stand up today and admit that this is a new tax on hard-working Ontarians and that you have once again broken a promise?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: There's an important issue before us as a province. The fact of the matter is, we are the only province in Canada that does not have a formal tire recycling plan in place.

We are stockpiling them by the millions. They are wonderful breeding grounds for mosquitoes during the season, including the danger of West Nile virus. They tell me it takes about 100 years for a tire to begin to decompose, and we all understand the dangers associated with fires and tires.

I think the time has come for us to act responsibly and to put in place a formal tire recycling plan.

Mr. Robert W. Runciman: I didn't hear anything in reference to the promise that the Premier made in 2005. Perhaps he could have stood up and said it was an ill-thought-out slip of the tongue. No; he just declined to even comment on it.

This is the proposal that was talked about last Friday. It's the same proposal that was put forward in 2005. That's when the Premier responded with the words that I used earlier. We're talking about a $60-million tab that hard-working Ontarians are going to have to pick up.

Once again, a broken promise, trying to slip it by Ontarians. I will ask the Premier, once again: Will you stand up today, admit this is a new tax on hard-working Ontarians and that you have once again broken a promise?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: Is the leader of the official opposition suggesting that we should not put in place a formal tire recycling plan in the province of Ontario? If that is his position, then obviously I take issue with that and he should just admit to that.

I think the responsible thing for us to do, given the information that we have, the knowledge at hand, our understanding of the damage that tires are causing to our natural environment—it's time for us to do something.

Is there going to be a cost associated with this? Yes, there's going to be a cost associated with it. It would be nice to pretend that there was no such cost going to be associated with it, but I think it's important for us to get on with this, to put in place a formal tire recycling plan and to assume our full responsibility as knowledgeable global citizens at the beginning of the 21st century.

We know the damage that tires are causing to our environment. It's time for us to own up to that and to do something about it.

Mr. Robert W. Runciman: The Premier talks about "admitting." Why doesn't he admit that he has once again flip-flopped after an election on a very significant promise to Ontarians?

I want to read, for the Premier's benefit, the definition of the word "tax" as it appears in Webster's dictionary. Your minister declined to describe this as a tax: "Exact a contribution to the cost of government. A charge imposed. A burden."

Your proposed tire tax clearly fits that definition. You felt that way in 2005 when you described it as a tax. Premier, why was this $60-million tax grab not included in your budget? Why did you try to sneak it by hard-working Ontarians?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: A few facts. Those are always of some modest benefit in this Legislature, I've always thought.

First of all, there is no proposal that we have yet received from Waste Diversion Ontario. We will be seeking a proposal from them.

Secondly, what we will do, if we receive a proposal that we think is workable, is put in place a program. There will be a cost associated with this. All of the costs—any monies received from Ontarians—will be exclusively devoted to the tire recycling plan.

In terms of the amount of that fee, somewhere between $3 and $6 per tire has been suggested in the past. We want to ensure that we are getting all the money we need, and no more money than we need, to have a formal tire recycling plan in place. We know the danger that tires in stockpiles present to our natural environment and to our health. We think it's time for us to do something about that. We think it's time to move on with this, and we will.

TIRE DISPOSAL

Mr. Robert W. Runciman: To the Premier: Again, this sounds like an old, Bob Nixon, "This is not a tax grab," speech.

I want to go back to the Premier and his government's attempts to lowball a tax increase, to minimize public awareness of a new tax, and yet another McGuinty broken promise. This is really a tax hike by stealth, a calculated effort, I believe, to reduce public awareness, and again, a breach of parliamentary tradition. I'm giving you notice, Mr. Speaker, that tomorrow I will be filing a question of privilege with you on this issue.

Will the Premier please explain to Ontarians and to members of this House why this $60-million cost to Ontarians was not even referenced in his budget?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: First of all, it's a proposal, which we have even yet to receive from Waste Diversion Ontario. We are doing this in a very public way, and I invite Ontarians to reflect on this issue. What do they think we should do with our used tires? Do they think we should continue to stockpile those? Do they think we should allow a danger to present itself? We had a fire in this province in the past, when it came to tires, and it took us a long time to put that fire out. There were tremendous toxic emissions that emanated from that fire.

We're aware of the dangers constituted by stockpiling tires indefinitely. We think it's time for us to do something about that. We think that's in keeping with the values of Ontarians, and we want to give expression to that through our new plan.

Mr. Robert W. Runciman: The Premier is asking us to reflect, and I would ask him to reflect on his promises. We had many promises broken in the last mandate after an election, especially on taxes, that have impacted Ontarians in a very negative way. I think many could argue that we, in this place, live something of a sheltered existence. Perhaps we're not aware of the many challenges that Ontarians are facing. We know we're going into an economic slowdown—the Minister of Finance has acknowledged that—perhaps even into a recession.

People are facing higher energy costs, higher grocery costs and electricity prices, and outstanding mortgages. Personal bankruptcies set a record last year. These are real challenges facing real people outside the Queen's Park precinct. How can you have the nerve, the gall, to break yet another promise and put another burden on the backs of hard-working Ontarians?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: It's been said that the responsibility of leadership is to represent the future to the present.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Member from Oxford, would you please withdraw the comment you just made.

Mr. Ernie Hardeman: Withdrawn.

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

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: I see a bright and promising future for Ontarians as we, among other things, assume our responsibility as global citizens. In fact, I'm convinced that we can create jobs, when it comes to recycling tires in the province of Ontario. I'm convinced that, with the benefit of our $1.15-billion Next Generation of Jobs Fund, we can find new opportunities as we take responsibility for being more responsible in the face of the environment and our understanding of the damage we're causing to it. It's not all doom and gloom. I think there's a way we can actually benefit the economy.

We can grow this economy and create good, new, green jobs at the same time that we reduce toxic emissions into our environment. I think that's what Ontarians want us to pursue.

Mr. Robert W. Runciman: This is no April Fool's joke on Ontarians. A tax is a tax when the Liberals want to call it a tax. Regrettably, this is what's happening in this situation: You're once again breaking your promise in the aftermath of a provincial election. You've got no scapegoat to blame this time, but only semantics and the hope that Ontarians will not notice or not care—cynicism, I would suggest, at its finest.

I would ask the Premier, based on their actions here, their actions in the past and more specifically, yet again breaking another unequivocal promise to the people of Ontario, how does he define "honesty and integrity"?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: The honourable member mentioned that he hoped Ontarians notice and care, and I hope the same thing. I hope they notice what's happening with respect to stockpiling our used tires, and I hope they care about that. And I hope they will take the opportunity to reflect and to understand.

Given that we are certainly the most privileged generation in our history, in terms of being armed with information about the impact our activities are having on our natural environment, it's a sad reality that one in three Ontarians is now being diagnosed with cancer and one in four Ontarians is dying of cancer. We are having an impact on the quality of our environment, and it's affecting our health.

I know that what I'm asking families to do is not easy. This will impose additional costs on them. But at the same time, if we get this right, we can keep that cost minimal, we can keep it affordable, we can assume our responsibility as privileged global citizens and we can create new, green jobs. I think our times demand of us that we take on this challenge, that we grapple with it and that we get it right. We'll have a good conversation with Ontarians, but we will move forward.

MANUFACTURING JOBS

Mr. Howard Hampton: I have a question of the Premier. This morning, we learned that another 124 working families in Kitchener are losing their paycheques because Gencor Foods has closed its doors. It's the latest in a lengthy list of plant closures, factory closures and loss of manufacturing jobs in the Kitchener-Cambridge area.

My question is: Will the McGuinty government admit that, even after your much-ballyhooed budget of last week, manufacturing jobs continue to be lost in Ontario at an alarming rate?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: First of all, our hearts go out to anybody who finds himself in a difficult position at this point in our history when they're losing a job. We understand that's really tough on the individuals and especially hard on their families. If I had a magic wand—perhaps the leader of the NDP has possession of such an instrument—that could ensure that we lost no more jobs at any time, I would gladly wave it and we wouldn't have to worry about that anymore. But I don't.

So what we've done is the best job we can in the circumstances. The fact is, we have cut taxes in a way that benefits manufacturers who find themselves in distress, and we have launched an unprecedented program, investing in new skills and education for our workers so they can get better jobs. We are eager to continue to work with the manufacturing sector. But we think investing in infrastructure creates jobs in the short term, investing in the skills and education of our workers improves their chances of getting a better job in the near future, and we also continue to believe that the tax cuts we made will stand our manufacturers in good stead.

Mr. Howard Hampton: The fact is, the budget didn't have a jobs plan, and that's part of the problem. I've outlined what other provinces are doing in terms of a jobs plan: bringing in buy-domestic policies that are greater than 25% content; bringing in a refundable manufacturing investment tax credit—things that are working in Manitoba and Saskatchewan, and in the province of Quebec.

But it's not just in Kitchener. The closure of the CanGro food processing facility in Niagara will throw 250 workers out of their livelihood, not to mention 150 fruit growers. How many numbers do there have to be—how many factories have to close, and how many workers have to lose their jobs in Ontario—before the McGuinty government actually comes forward with a jobs plan?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: I know the leader of the NDP understands the consequences, on the ground here in Ontario, of the high dollar; he understands the impact of the high cost of oil; he understands the impact of a struggling US economy; and he understands the impact that the struggling US economy is having by way of reverberations on emerging economies. He understands all of that, and what it means to the people of Ontario.

But what he doesn't understand is the wisdom of the approach we are taking. It is thoughtful, it is progressive, it is compassionate and it's in keeping with the aspirations and values of the people of Ontario. That is why we are cutting business taxes in an effective way. That is why we will continue to invest in infrastructure.

We've got a 10-year, $60-billion plan that's creating all kinds of jobs immediately, when we need them, and enhancing our productivity in the long term. We are investing heavily in innovation, helping Ontarians turn those great ideas that they have into products and services for sale to the world. And, just as the Minister of Economic Development and Trade announced a few moments ago, we had a great day yesterday in Windsor, partnering with Ford yet again to create still more jobs.

Mr. Howard Hampton: The Premier might want to know that two thirds of the people who used to work in that plant are still out of a job; they're no longer working.

But the fact of the matter is this: Other provinces also face challenges, but they've brought in measures. Quebec adopted a manufacturing investment tax credit; Manitoba adopted a manufacturing investment tax credit, made it refundable and, in making it refundable, has helped to sustain manufacturing jobs there. Other jurisdictions have a buy-domestic policy, which creates and sustains manufacturing jobs in their jurisdiction. What do we see in Ontario? None of these measures.

So I ask the Premier again: How many tens of thousands of hard-working Ontario families have to lose their jobs before the McGuinty government actually comes forward with a jobs plan to do something about the problem?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: I know the leader of the NDP champions this refundable tax credit approach. It has some merits and we have given it some thought, but we're doing something that's even better. In this budget, we are refunding capital taxes for our manufacturers and resource sector to the tune of $190 million. As soon as the budget is passed, we want to get these cheques out the door. That's immediate. Beyond that, we have in place a new buy-Canada policy. It's not 25%; 82% of all the money that we're putting into public transit, for example, is going into the Ontario economy to create Ontario jobs.

We have carefully considered just how far we can go in that regard. We're proud of these initiatives. There's always more to be done. We look forward to more suggestions from the leader of the NDP. But I think it is simply inaccurate for him to suggest that we don't have the kind of plan in place that Ontario businesses and Ontario families have been looking for.

NATIONAL CHILD BENEFIT SUPPLEMENT

Mr. Howard Hampton: To the Premier: I think the only plan that people see out of the McGuinty government is more unemployment.

I want to ask the Premier about the Minister of Children and Youth Services, who yesterday tried to tell Ontarians that the clawback of the national child benefit supplement will end this July. The fact of the matter is, the national child benefit supplement provides about $100 per month to the lowest-income children. When you do the math, in July your government will only allow those children to keep about $50 of that $100, which means you'll still be taking $50 a month away from those lowest-income kids.

My question to the Premier is this: Since you're still going to be taking $50 a month from the lowest-income kids, how is that not a clawback?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: To the Minister of Children and Youth Services.

Hon. Deborah Matthews: I'm delighted to have the opportunity again to explain what the Ontario child benefit will do for low-income Ontarians. Starting this July, parents in low-income families will receive up to $50 per child, per month. That is in addition to the full NCBS, and those on social assistance will receive their social assistance cheque. There will not be a clawback of the NCBS.

As I explained yesterday, the beauty of the Ontario child benefit is that it speaks to the aspirations of people on social assistance who look to moving on, who look to entering the workforce. They will be able to take the full Ontario child benefit with them when they leave social assistance for employment.

Mr. Howard Hampton: I think we've seen another exercise in McGuinty government doublespeak. The lowest-income kids are supposed to receive $100 a month from the federal government to help them escape poverty. Instead, the McGuinty government is going to swim them through mounds of paperwork, and at the end of the mounds of paperwork those lowest-income kids are only going to get $50 a month—and the McGuinty government is going to say, "You're better off."

Tell me, Minister, when is a low-income child, struggling in poverty, better off after you've taken $50 a month off their kitchen table?

Hon. Deborah Matthews: This question gives me an opportunity to say that we are spending another $150 million this year on the Ontario child benefit. This is part of a very large investment and commitment.

The member opposite has asked about the application process. It's a good reminder. Parents must fill in their income tax, they must file their income taxes, to be eligible for the Ontario child benefit. It's a good reminder for parents to file their income taxes, to check off the appropriate box for the NCBS, and they will automatically receive the Ontario child benefit.

Mr. Howard Hampton: More words to try to make it seem as if the McGuinty government isn't taking $50 a month from the lowest-income kids. But it doesn't end there. The McGuinty government is also going to take away the back-to-school clothing benefit and the winter clothing benefit from those lowest-income kids. I don't know about members of the McGuinty government, but we had lots of days this winter of 20 below zero, 30 below zero. Can you tell me how those lowest-income kids are going to have winter clothing when you're taking $50 a month away from them off the top and then you're going to take their winter clothing allowance away from them as well?

Hon. Deborah Matthews: The Ontario child benefit goes way beyond simply ending the clawback. It goes way beyond the winter coat and back to school. This is a benefit that goes to all low-income families, regardless of the source of income; people on social assistance receive it and the working poor receive it. This is a very important policy shift for Ontario. It's an important component of our poverty-reduction platform.

I would ask that members opposite stand up and support the Ontario child benefit. It's an important benefit, and I do not understand their opposition to this very important piece of legislation.

GOVERNMENT SPENDING

Mr. Tim Hudak: The question is to the Premier. Premier, members don't often get to use the word "gargantuan" in the Ontario Legislature, but the growth of government workers making more than $100,000 per year under the McGuinty government has been nothing short of gargantuan. Your tax-and-spending policies have brought Ontario to the brink of recession. At a time when some 200,000 families have lost jobs in the manufacturing sector, including CanGro in Niagara, they see an extraordinary bloat, not in front-line workers, but in high-priced spin doctors making more than $100,000 per year.

Premier, what direction have you given your ministries to control this excessive growth in those making more than $100,000 per year?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: To the Minister of Finance.

Hon. Dwight Duncan: To respond to the question, this government has managed the affairs of the province prudently. That's why we've balanced our budget for the last three years. That's why we're paying down debt.

Unlike the member opposite, we don't want to dump on teachers, we don't want to make fun of public servants, we don't want to criticize our nurses, and we don't want to criticize public servants within the Ontario public service. Just last year, we found a billion dollars in savings with the help of those very public servants.

We believe in investing in health care. We believe in investing in public education. We have a balanced approach to the challenges that face our economy today. We look to our partners, our partners in the public service, our partners in the broader public service, to deliver, in an efficient way, the goods and services that the people of Ontario have come to expect.

Mr. Tim Hudak: I say to the minister, I don't know what circles he travels in, but I don't see many teachers, nurses or personal support care workers from long-term-care homes making $100,000 per year. In fact, you're completely distorting what is on this list.

Let me put this in perspective. At this time, when Ontario's private sector job growth is dead last in all of Canada, you have added some 200,000 positions to government payrolls—approximately the size of the city of Kitchener.

When it comes to the $100,000-plus club, some 42,000—approximately the size of the city of the Welland—have been added of government workers making more than $100,000 a year. By way of example, the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corp. has added some 92 more people to the $100,000 club.

At a time when front-line workers are being laid off and revenue has gone down, what direction has this minister given to crown agencies to control this runaway spending?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: In fact, there were 875 nurses on that list yesterday, and there are doctors on that list and there are others who are delivering important front-line services.

I should also remind the member that with the 1996 threshold, if you apply the simple consumer price index between then and now, we would have reduced the list by two thirds. So in fact, we've seen average salaries on the list over $100,000 increase by 1%. This government has managed its resources in a prudent and appropriate fashion. It is investing in education; it is investing in public health care. It is balancing the budget—something that member knows very little about. It is paying down debt and continuing to provide the public with the services they've come to expect by a very high-quality, high-calibre Ontario public service.

MINIMUM WAGE

Ms. Cheri DiNovo: My question is for the Premier. It's on behalf of Fauma and Joan and women like them who've lived in shelters and struggled to survive on minimum wage. My question is a simple one. It's this: Why won't the government raise the minimum wage to the poverty line?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: We're proud to announce that the minimum wage just went up, effective midnight last night. It went up 9.3% overnight, in fact. It's up to $8.75 an hour today. We started at $6.85; before we formed the government, it was frozen for nine straight years. I think this is the fifth consecutive increase we've put in place. We hear regularly from the NDP that it's not enough; we hear regularly from the Conservatives that it's too much. We think we've got it just right.

Ms. Cheri DiNovo: Actually, it's less than the poor were making in 1973 in real dollars. You can't survive on $8.75. My question to the Premier is this one: Why won't this government raise the minimum wage to the poverty line? It's disgusting.

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: I think it's important for us to look at the minimum wage as an important issue for our working poor, but we also have to look beyond that. That's why we're proud of the fact that in this budget, for the first time, we're putting in place a new Ontario dental program for children in low-income families. We're proud of our Ontario child benefit. We're proud of the investments that we've made in newborn screening, free vaccines for children, our school-based nutrition program, and the investments we're making in improving affordable housing in the province. All of those are dimensions to the quality of life for people who are growing up in Ontario in poverty.

I welcome the member's attention that she devotes to the minimum wage, but I'd ask her to look beyond that and to recognize some of the other efforts we're making in improving the quality of life for the poor in Ontario.

YOUTH EMPLOYMENT

Mr. Bas Balkissoon: My question is for the Minister of Children and Youth Services. In my riding of Scarborough—Rouge River, as in other areas of Toronto and across the province, some youth face a lack of opportunity to become engaged in their community and find employment that offers them a future. Because of this, I was pleased to hear today about our government's initiative to provide over 800 youth in high-needs Toronto neighbourhoods with summer job opportunities.

Could the minister please elaborate on this program and explain how it will help strengthen communities such as mine and help young people achieve their full potential?

Hon. Deborah Matthews: I'm very pleased to have this opportunity to talk about some of our investments in young people in this province. I'd like to start by commending the member for Scarborough—Rouge River for his tireless advocacy for youth in his community.

Yes, today I announced, with Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair, the continued investments in the youth opportunity strategy. It will see 850 youth in Toronto—2000 province-wide—gain valuable work experience this summer. One hundred of those job opportunities are with the Toronto Police Service. These opportunities build strong relationships between communities, the youth taking

part in the program and police services. I welcome this opportunity to talk about it and look forward to the supplementary.

Mr. Bas Balkissoon: I'm proud that we're reaching out to these youth to provide them with opportunities. While I think this program will go a long way, it's important to recognize that youth face challenges for many different reasons, and thus the solution isn't always the same.

Could the minister please outline what our government is doing to get at the root causes of why some youth are not able to achieve their potential and how we will move forward to tackle this difficult issue?

Hon. Deborah Matthews: You're right: It is a difficult issue. As a first step, we've now got 35 youth outreach workers in Toronto—62 across the province—advocating for young people, helping them get involved in programs and services that exist, and promoting engagement in their communities.

We know it's important to get to the root causes. We have to understand why some youth are unengaged and turning to violence or gangs. That's why the Premier has appointed Alvin Curling and Roy McMurtry to conduct a review of the roots of violence, to identify those root causes, and to provide recommendations to this government on how to continue building safer and stronger communities and schools. We look forward to receiving their review.

Finally, we know that poverty leads to wasted potential. That's why for the first time in Ontario we're developing a comprehensive poverty reduction strategy to provide more youth with the opportunity they need to achieve their full potential.

GYPSY MOTH INFESTATION

Mr. Toby Barrett: To the Minister of Natural Resources: The emerald ash borer has invaded Norfolk county, Canada's forest capital with 30% forest cover, and 25% of that is ash. The gypsy moth is chewing its way through the proud oak of Haldimand county, as well as Six Nations in Norfolk. The Norfolk Woodlot Owners Association are desperate to mitigate this destruction, but they're on their own.

The mayor of Norfolk county, Canada's forest capital, has written letters and met with you to request funding. I've written to you, and I have hundreds of names on petitions requesting financial aid to deal with these infestations—but yet again, nothing.

Minister, when can Haldimand, Norfolk and other areas expect you to step up with some money to stem the devastation of emerald ash and gypsy moth?

Hon. Donna H. Cansfield: I'd like to remind the member that in fact spraying has not been happening in this province for some 19 years, which included the time that his government was involved.

We're more than prepared to offer the technical support, and we have done that, to the different municipalities. In fact, there are some pilot projects under way with gypsy moth, which is a new type of spray. All we're doing is actually doing the monitoring on this process, which will happen in three major areas in the province. Once we have an understanding of whether there's been some effectiveness of this particular new spray, then we'll be able to work even more closely with the municipalities as they determine what direction they wish to take with our technical support.

Mr. Toby Barrett: That's simply not quite good enough. You've inherited a proud ministry, the former department of lands and forests; it used to be known as the department of lands and forests. You're right, there is a precedent: Your ministry did fund the gypsy moth, up until 1992.

The BC Forest Service is actively fighting the mountain pine beetle. Your tax-and-spend government had an additional $4.9 billion in unplanned revenue this past year, yet you have allowed your ministry to be slashed by $20 million. Minister, when will you redirect some of that unplanned revenue to fight both gypsy moths and emerald ash borers?

Hon. Donna H. Cansfield: I say quite clearly that if the federal government would like to give me $200 million, which is what they have given to the British Columbia government for the pine beetle, I would be more than happy to spray. They have not. As a matter of fact, they actually abdicate their responsibility, because once an invasive species becomes resident, they say, "Excuse me. It's not our problem anymore; it's yours." We're actually trying to change that strategy with the federal government.

Secondly, in terms of my budget, I would be more than happy to take that member through my budget so that he, in fact, does understand that it has increased, not decreased. The difference, of course, is firefighting, which is exactly what your government did and this government did and what we do: We put the money in when we need it.

SCHOOL BOARDS

Mr. Rosario Marchese: My question is to the Minister of Education. Yesterday you ordered the Toronto District School Board to rearrange itself, or else. Tell us, Minister, how will the lobbing of this political hand grenade save any money or help reduce the board's deficit?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: A year ago, Joan Green and Brian Cain went in to the Toronto District School Board and wrote a report in which they said there were issues around the size of the board and the governance. I have served on this board. For a decade, people within the board and outside of it have talked about the size of the board being a problem.

Our fundamental concern is student achievement. We want to make sure that every board in this province has the resources and is able to focus on student achievement. I've been working with the board for the last year. I met with them on January 30; I met with the governance committee on March 6. All I've done is ask for some recommendations that they might make on how to align the board so it can be the most nimble, agile system possible to focus on student achievement.

Mr. Rosario Marchese: Ordering the Toronto District School Board to reorganize itself will do nothing for the child being denied ESL programs, for the children on the waiting list for special education, for the parents whose children in French programs are fighting for scarce resources or for children who are in schools that are crumbling because capital dollars had to be spent to cover your deficit. Your announcement would be okay as an April Fool's joke, but you're not proposing this political hand grenade as a serious solution to our underfunding problems, are you?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Since we came into office, this board has received $359 million more. This year alone, this board is getting $26 million more—2,423 school repairs have been undertaken; 1,175 new teachers since 2003.

The issue here is that this board itself has recognized that there needs to be governance changes. They are struggling with this, and it is beyond outrageous that the member opposite hasn't spoken to people within the board, who know that if the principals can't talk to each other, if there are too many layers of bureaucracy, if the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing, then students suffer.

I will continue working with this board. We will put children at the centre of this circle of care, and we will make sure, in a collaborative way, that we come up with an answer that is best for the kids in Toronto.

MINIMUM WAGE

Mr. Bruce Crozier: My question is for the Minister of Labour. Our government is working on behalf of vulnerable workers in Ontario, and the government is following up on its commitment to increase the minimum wage so that all Ontarians have a living wage. The recent increase marks the fifth increase to the minimum wage since we were elected in 2003. Not as much can be said for the previous government's shameful record of freezing the minimum wage for nine years. Would the minister please tell this House how this government will be increasing the minimum wage in future years?

Hon. Brad Duguid: I want to thank the member for Essex for the question. I also want to thank him for his consistent advocacy on behalf of vulnerable workers in his riding and across the province.

I'm proud of what this government is doing and what this government has done since 2003 to make a difference in the lives of Ontario's lower-paid and most vulnerable workers. This week, as the Premier said earlier, workers across this province are going to wake up to a minimum wage that's now 9.3% higher; we've moved it from $8 an hour to $8.75. That's the highest minimum wage now in this country, something that we're very, very proud of. We're doing this in an aggressive but gradual manner, making sure that we're putting money back into the pockets of low-income workers, and at the same time protecting their jobs and ensuring that businesses have time to adjust.

Mr. Bruce Crozier: I know that workers in my riding appreciate what this government is doing and applaud the increases to the minimum wage. Workers I've spoken to feel that the government is listening and does care about the contribution these workers make on a daily basis to our economy. I understand, however, that some people have expressed concerns about how the minimum wage is increased. I would like the Minister of Labour to tell this House how the government is dealing with these concerns.

Hon. Brad Duguid: I want to thank the member again for the question. He is correct: There has been a considerable amount of commentary about this particular issue. I just want to share with the Legislature some of the comments made by others on the issue.

Lindsay Boyd, chair-elect of the Windsor-Essex Regional Chamber of Commerce, said that the organization supported the gradual increase because it gives businesses time to adjust.

Len Crispino, president and CEO of the Ontario Chamber of Commerce, said that a staged approach is the fairest and most effective way to raise the minimum wage.

But most importantly of all, I read this morning in the Windsor Star a comment by a single mother working at a local Tim Hortons in Windsor. This is what she said: "Now I can afford a decent apartment."

That's what this policy is all about.

ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE

Mrs. Elizabeth Witmer: My question is for the Minister of Health. Despite the widespread use of PET scans throughout the world—the United States, Australia, Europe—and certainly other provinces in Canada, there is a tremendous amount of frustration for both patients and doctors in Ontario at the lack of access to PET scans here.

In fact, Dr. Jean-Luc Urbain has said, "We know that we could save lives, avoid unnecessary surgery and optimize treatment by performing PET/CT scans on patients." He's the chief of nuclear medicine in London, and he goes on to say, "We used to say Ontario was on the cutting edge of the past. It is not even on the cutting edge of the past. Ontario right now is prehistory."

I ask you, Minister, when will you finally stand up for patients and provide access to PET scans?

Hon. George Smitherman: Well, it's very rich, very rich indeed, for the honourable member whose party today calls for a $3-billion cut to health care to stand up and ask such a question, especially considering the record of treachery that was associated with their handling of the health file over those number of years. The longest-serving Minister of Health in the Harris government questions these things. I'm very proud of our cancer system in the province of Ontario and about the expansion which is ongoing.

With respect to PET scans, we have a clinical trial which is well complemented by many international experts and we have an access mechanism that is allowing Ontario patients today to access PET technology. Before we offer widespread access to PET scans, it's critically important that we know exactly those indications for which this is the most desirable form of diagnostic test to be utilized.

Mrs. Elizabeth Witmer: The minister knows full well that we are not going to cut health care. What a preposterous statement he continues to make. This is the same minister who is out there bullying stakeholders and telling them to be quiet when they're not happy with the health care dollars that they receive.

I would say to you, Minister, we have Deborah Maskens, a Guelph resident and mother. Today, she has been able to use her own money—thankfully, she has money—and she has gone to the United States to get a PET scan, which her oncologist said was medically necessary to treat her ongoing kidney cancer. If you didn't have the money, you wouldn't be able to go. Here is a woman who is frustrated because she goes past a PET scanner every day at Princess Margaret when she gets treatment, but she can't use it.

So I say to you today: The research has been done, the trials have been done; they're being used everywhere else in the world and in Canada. When are you finally going to—

The Speaker: Thank you. Minister of Health.

Hon. George Smitherman: The member's credibility is restricted on two points. Firstly, this issue that they don't intend to cut health care spending: No; they only intend to eliminate $5 billion in revenue and not show anybody that there are implications. But people remember Mike Harris's commitment not to close hospitals, and they know the after-effect of that as well.

Here's a quote from Dr. Bill Evans, the chair of the Ontario PET steering committee. He's an oncologist. He's the president of Hamilton's Juravinski Cancer Centre. From the Globe and Mail: "There's been a criticism in Ontario in its seeming tardiness to adopt, but it's a decision taken by cancer specialists of the province, various surgeons and medical and radiation oncologists. In cancer we have to figure out how best to use it.

When the clinical trials are completed, there will be a lot of people to thank us." We are not in a position to offer a technology without strict guidelines about its most appropriate use. This is the honourable member who led, as Minister of Health, an effort that saw people not even gaining access to MRIs in our province.

ABORIGINAL RIGHTS

Mr. Howard Hampton: My question is for the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs. Minister, on January 17 you were given a good-faith proposal by Chief Donny Morris of Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug to help resolve the dispute between Ontario and Platinex Incorporated mining exploration company on one hand, and the First Nation on the other. It was a detailed proposal given to you on January 17. At no time have you or anyone else in the McGuinty government responded to that proposal. Why has there been a failure to respond to a good-faith proposal put forward by the chief of the KI First Nation?

Hon. Michael Bryant: It was the first time, as the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs, that I had been to that community on that date. I was there with Grand Chief Stan Beardy. The community was incredibly welcoming, and we had an excellent meeting where a good-faith proposal was put together. Then what happened is, every single day—literally, every single day—either myself or a member of my office was on the phone with either Chief Morris or Councillor Sam McKay drafting and exchanging drafts of the government's response.

Eventually the best-effort draft that the government had put together, which in my view responds to 95% of the KI proposal, was filed in court. So, in fact, the member has his facts wrong again.

Mr. Howard Hampton: I met with Chief Donny Morris just a few days ago at the jail in Thunder Bay, and he continues to dispute your version of events. He says you made one trip to the First Nation where you spent about an hour with some of the elders and had supper with them, but there was no discussion. You made another public relations visit on an entirely different issue, when there was no discussion about the proposal put forward by Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug.

So my question is this: It is certainly not consultation to go in for a one-hour public relations visit. It's certainly not consultation to meet with elders in the community but fail to respond. When is the McGuinty government finally going to respond to the good-faith proposal put forward by Chief Donny Morris on January 17 of this year?

Hon. Michael Bryant: I think it's important for the Legislature to know that in addition to the letter of intent and the changes to the memorandum of understanding that were filed in court and were exchanged with Chief Morris and council several times by way of e-mail, by way of fax and by way of telephone conversation, there was an additional update to that response, and, in an effort to try and be helpful, we had it translated. So, in addition to the three versions that were eventually filed in the court, we also translated the response to the KI proposal that was put forward.

I do in fact look forward to visiting that community again in the future, and I also look forward to continuing to work with that community, because we will find a solution.

NORTHERN ECONOMY

Mr. Bill Mauro: My question is to the Minister of Northern Development and Mines. In the McGuinty government's 2007 budget, we appointed Dr. Bob Rosehart, a former president of Lakehead University in Thunder Bay, as the northwestern Ontario economic facilitator. His mandate was to work with local people and businesses to help inspire a new generation of growth in the northwest. As we know, he delivered his report on March 20.

Some of the louder naysayers across the aisle complained, as is their style, that it was too little too late, or that we were somehow trying to bury it in the lead-up to our budget. We simply won't share in their pessimism. But I do have to ask the minister: Now that the Rosehart report is in your hands, what specific actions are you going to take to address the recommendations in it?

Hon. Michael Gravelle: Thank you very much for the question, and I want to compliment my colleague as well for the hard work that I see he does every day on behalf of economic revitalization in northern Ontario.

I'm very pleased to inform the House that our government has already begun work on several initiatives that directly respond to Dr. Rosehart's recommendations, some of which were included in our budget last week, including the acceleration of the business education tax reduction for northern municipalities, which will result in millions of dollars in savings for Thunder Bay businesses alone and over $70 million for northern Ontario businesses across the north.

A $25-million investment was announced towards the creation of a bio-economy research centre in Thunder Bay, creating great excitement in Thunder Bay, and one of the key recommendations of Dr. Rosehart related to investment in the research economy;

Also, a $20-million, four-year investment in geological mapping, a tremendous investment in terms of future exploration. Dr. Rosehart focused on that, and certainly we're committed to following up and doing more in terms of Dr. Rosehart's recommendations.

Mr. Bill Mauro: These are important investments in the knowledge and resource economies in the northwest. I know that over the course of Dr. Rosehart's work, he conducted in excess of 120 meetings, including 16 municipalities and over 20 First Nations leaders.

I recall that Dr. Rosehart delivered another report to government in the late 1980s, and some of those recommendations helped in the development of the northern Ontario heritage fund, which I'm happy to see we will be increasing to $100 million by 2011, as well as the Northern Ontario School of Medicine.

I know there are some short-term and long-term recommendations in this current report. In that regard, Minister, what are your future intentions with the report, since we are already on the way to accomplishing some of those recommendations?

Hon. Michael Gravelle: Certainly we're all very excited about the work that Dr. Rosehart has done. He was absolutely the right person to ask to do the job.

I want to assure my colleague and all members of the House that initiatives such as the northern Ontario growth plan, and our record investments—again, a new record of investments—in northern highways will also respond to Dr. Rosehart's recommendations.

My ministry has also been working on a strategy to implement other aspects of the report. In that regard, I was pleased to officially open my satellite minister's office in Thunder Bay yesterday, which is also in keeping with Dr. Rosehart's recommendation to increase our government's presence in the north. The opening of that office speaks to the McGuinty government's continued commitment to work closely with northerners. It also provides the people of northwestern Ontario easier access to their Minister of Northern Development and Mines, which I believe will foster an even greater positive relationship.

Last week's budget clearly showed the McGuinty government's commitment to the north. Dr. Rosehart's work is another reflection of that commitment, as we are eager to move forward on developing a long-term vision for northern Ontario's economic growth—

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

CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES

Ms. Laurie Scott: My question is for the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services. Are you aware that the Central East Correctional Centre in Lindsay has continued to accept new inmates, knowing that the facility has been in lockdown as a result of a contagious virus that has swept through the facility? Further, are you aware that since the facility is in lockdown, the inmates are not being transported to the courts to have their bail hearings?

Minister, could you explain to this House why healthy people are being exposed to a contagious virus, and why accused persons are being denied their constitutional right to have a bail hearing forthwith?

Hon. Rick Bartolucci: I look forward to answering the question. Certainly, there is a process in place to isolate those inmates who have come in contact with the illness. Ministry policy is designed to ensure that inmates are treated in a responsible way, and that those new inmates coming into the facility are not put in contact with those inmates with viruses. We are using modern technology, such as video recording, to ensure that the processes are maintained as normally as possible as we work through this virus, which we hope will only last between 24 and 48 hours.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: To the minister: The outbreak has been going on for five days, and as far as we know, you cannot do a bail-hearing-by-video remand. This complete disregard for public health and constitutional rights speaks to the government's complete disregard for Ontarians and the fact that they are completely unprepared to deal with a public health pandemic. What are you doing about this, Mr. Minister? What is your plan? Why are you still accepting inmates, as we speak, into a locked-down facility?

Hon. Rick Bartolucci: In fact, the member isn't correct. With consent, you can have video bail hearings.

I want to congratulate the staff at the centre. They're doing a remarkable job. They're ensuring that any new inmates who come in are screened. I have to be perfectly honest with you, Speaker, and to the member: The staff at that facility are handling this outbreak in a very, very professional way. I would suggest he should get on his feet and thank those people who are working very, very hard to keep the system as normal as possible as we work through this virus, which we hope will be done within the next 24 to 48 hours.

CONSERVATION

Mr. Paul Miller: My question is to the Premier. Premier, I've been asking earlier in the week—I didn't get an answer from the one minister for a health reason and I didn't get one from the other minister when he took over. I've been asking you about the Eramosa Karst, and I'm not getting any direct answers once again. Why is the McGuinty government, through its ORC public consultation, leaning toward selling these 80 acres for development, instead of doing what's right and donating it now to the Hamilton Conservation Authority to ensure long-term protection of this wonder, the karst?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: To the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal.

Hon. David Caplan: The member has left out some critical information. The first is that the lands are already designated under the city of Hamilton. I believe the former municipal councillor in the city of Hamilton should know that the city of Hamilton official plan, Hamilton Conservation Authority and the province have established strict environmental criteria for permitting development in this area. The member knows this full well.

In fact, the Ontario Realty Corp. is currently studying the lands from a number of perspectives—certainly, environmental, archaeological, geological, hydrogeological—and trying to determine what, if any, provincial lands need to be protected and what the best use of those lands would be. Once the Ontario Realty Corp. has completed those studies, it will be working with the city, as we always do, and with the conservation authority and with the community to continue to ensure that, through the review of the ORC studies—to best decide the use of the provincial property, taking into account community concerns—

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

Mr. Paul Miller: Unfortunately, the information is incorrect that the minister is telling us. Processes like the current ORC public consultation will allow well-financed developers' interests to overshadow those of the people who live near, support the designation and enjoy the unique features of this karst. When their interests are fully supported by experts in the environment, they should be paramount, not those of developers who do not live in the neighbourhood, do not seem to care about this unique geological feature and are driven only by money to be made at any cost.

Will you do the right thing for the Hamilton environment, forgo the money the government would get from the developers of this land, effectively putting the money back into the community, and announce now, Minister, that these lands are being transferred to the Hamilton Conservation Authority? Will you do this?

Hon. David Caplan: The member is quite woefully misinformed. In fact, the Ontario Realty Corp. is working very closely with the city, with the Hamilton Conservation Authority and, in fact, with the local residents. As I have indicated, once the studies are completed we'll be working with those groups to ensure the thorough review of ORC studies to discuss the best use for this property, taking into account the community's concerns.

I know that, as I indicated earlier, the lands are currently designated in Hamilton's official plan for urban development. The member should know this, and—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Question period has expired.

VISITORS

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): I'd just like to take this opportunity, on behalf of the member from York—Simcoe, to welcome the grade 11 class from Keswick High School to Queen's Park today. Welcome to Queen's Park.

PETITIONS

LORD'S PRAYER

Mr. Bill Murdoch: I have a petition from Full Gospel Temple in Wiarton. It's to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas the current Liberal government is proposing to eliminate the Lord's Prayer from daily proceedings in the Ontario Legislature; and

"Whereas the recitation of the Lord's Prayer has opened the Legislature every day since the 19th century; and

"Whereas the Lord's Prayer's message of forgiveness and the avoidance of evil is universal to the human condition; it is a valuable guide and lesson for a chamber that is too often an arena of conflict; and

"Whereas recognizing the diversity of the people of Ontario should be an inclusive process, not one which excludes traditions such as the Lord's Prayer;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, ask the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to preserve the daily recitation of the Lord's Prayer by the Speaker in the Legislature."

I have signed this and I will give it to Alex to take for me.

HOME CARE

M me France Gélinas: I have a petition from SEIU and from the people of Clinton, Seaforth, Goderich and Brucefield.

"Whereas the Ontario government has continued the practice of competitive bidding for home care services; and

"Whereas the competitive bidding process has increased the privatization of Ontario's health care delivery, in direct violation of the Commitment to the Future of Medicare Act, 2004; and

"Whereas competitive bidding for home care services has decreased both the continuity and quality of care available to home care clients; and

"Whereas home care workers do not enjoy the same employment rights, such as successor rights, as all other Ontario workers have, which deprives them of termination rights, seniority rights and the right to move with their work when their employer agency loses a contract; ...

"We call on the government of Ontario:

"(1) to immediately stop the competitive bidding for home care services so home care clients can receive the continuity and quality of care they deserve; and

"(2) to extend successor rights under the Labour Relations Act to home care workers to ensure the home care sector is able to retain a workforce that is responsive to clients' needs."

I support that petition and will affix my name to it.

ANTI-SMOKING LEGISLATION

Mr. Charles Sousa: This is a petition in support of private Bill 11.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas children exposed to second-hand smoke are at a higher risk for respiratory illnesses including asthma, bronchitis and pneumonia, as well as sudden infant death syndrome ... and increased incidences of cancer and heart disease in adulthood; and

"Whereas the Ontario Medical Association supports a ban on smoking in vehicles when children are present, as they have concluded that levels of second-hand smoke can be 23 times more concentrated in a vehicle than in a house because circulation is restricted within a small space; and

"Whereas the Ipsos Reid poll conducted on behalf of the Ontario Tobacco-Free Network indicates that eight in 10 (80%) of Ontarians support 'legislation that would ban smoking in cars and other private vehicles where a child or adolescent under 16 years of age is present'; and

"Whereas Nova Scotia, California, Puerto Rico, and South Australia recently joined several jurisdictions of the United States of America in banning smoking in vehicles carrying children;

"We, the undersigned, respectfully petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to approve Bill 11 and amend the Smoke-Free Ontario Act to ban smoking in vehicles carrying children 16 years of age and under."

I sign my name.

LORD'S PRAYER

Ms. Lisa MacLeod: One thousand, five hundred and forty-five people from the city of Ottawa have signed a petition calling on the McGuinty Liberals to retain the Lord's Prayer.

"Whereas Premier Dalton McGuinty has called on the Ontario Legislature to consider removing the Lord's Prayer from its daily proceedings; and

"Whereas the Lord's Prayer has been an integral part of our parliamentary heritage that was ... established in 1793 under Lieutenant Governor John Graves Simcoe; and

"Whereas the Lord's Prayer is today a significant part of the religious heritage of millions of Ontarians of culturally diverse backgrounds;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Parliament of Ontario to continue its long-standing practice of using the Lord's Prayer as part of its daily proceedings."

I will affix my signature with the other 1,545 people from the city of Ottawa and present it to page Samuel.

HOME HEALTH CARE SUPPLIES

Ms. Andrea Horwath: I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the WSIB has changed their policies and now requires injured workers to purchase their health care equipment and supplies from one of only three suppliers; and

"Whereas none of these mandated suppliers can possibly provide the expertise, care, experience and personal knowledge that my current supplier offers;

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

"Rescind the WSIB purchasing policy that forces injured workers to leave their current health care supplier and purchase their health care supplies and equipment from only a list of three suppliers."

I support this petition. I've signed it and send it to the table by way of page Michael.

ROUTE 17

M. Jean-Marc Lalonde: J'ai une pétition provenant de citoyens de Hawkesbury, Rockland, Vankleek Hill et L'Original.

« À l'Assemblée législative de l'Ontario :

« Attendu que l'ancien gouvernement de l'Ontario a transféré la responsabilité de la route 17 aux municipalités, la ville d'Ottawa et des comtés unis de Prescott et Russell;

« Attendu que les municipalités n'ont pas les fonds suffisants pour l'entretien, la réfection de la route ou des ponts, sans mentionner d'élargissement;

« Attendu qu'en 2001, l'administration des comtés unis de Prescott et Russell a estimé à 21 000 véhicules par jour la circulation en semaine sur la 17 à l'entrée de la cité Clarence-Rockland et que depuis, ce chiffre a augmenté » à plus de 25 000;

« Attendu que cette artère principale transférée aux municipalités est une route transcanadienne dans un état lamentable et continue à souffrir du temps et de l'achalandage de plus en plus important;

« Attendu que les membres du personnel du MTO régional avaient recommandé et accepté tel que présenté par la commission de révision régionale en date du 27 avril 1992 que la route 17 soit retenue comme une route collectrice provinciale suivant l'achèvement de la route 417;

« Attendu que la ville d'Ottawa continue à émettre des permis de construire, ce qui devient une question de sécurité;

« Attendu que la population de l'est de l'Ontario exige les mêmes services de sécurité routière;

« Nous, soussignés, adressons à l'Assemblée législative de l'Ontario la pétition suivante :

« Nous demandons au ministère des Transports de l'Ontario de reprendre immédiatement la responsabilité de la route 17/174 et de procéder à son élargissement de la cité Clarence-Rockland à la ville d'Ottawa ».

J'y ajoute ma signature avec fierté.

LORD'S PRAYER

Mr. Frank Klees: I present this petition, which was delivered to me by the Reverend Mary E. Bowes of the Wexford Presbyterian Church and the Ghori family, including University of Toronto students Monica Ghori and Anita Ghori. The petition reads as follows:

"Petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas Premier Dalton McGuinty has called on the Ontario Legislature to consider removing the Lord's Prayer from its daily proceedings; and

"Whereas the Lord's Prayer has been an integral part of our parliamentary heritage that was first established in 1793 under Lieutenant Governor John Graves Simcoe; and

"Whereas the Lord's Prayer is today a significant part of the religious heritage of millions of Ontarians of culturally diverse backgrounds;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Parliament of Ontario to continue its long-standing practice of using the Lord's Prayer as part of its daily proceedings."

I'm pleased to affix my signature in support of this petition.

DAVID DUNLAP OBSERVATORY

Mr. Reza Moridi: I present to you today about 700 signatures which were presented to me during the rally held at Queen's Park on January 16.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the David Dunlap Observatory in Richmond Hill is of historical and heritage significance;

"Whereas the land was donated in trust by the Dunlap family to the University of Toronto in 1935, and the pre-Confederation farmhouse is still standing;

"Whereas the observatory, featuring the largest optical telescope in Canada, has been the site of scientific discoveries; it has been a place of learning not only for students of the University of Toronto, but for the general public as well;

"Whereas the observatory has been recently declared by the University of Toronto as 'surplus' to its academic needs, and subject to sale for development;

"Whereas the observatory sits in an incredibly unique and beautiful 180 acres of green space, the largest such space in the town of Richmond Hill, with trees, birds, animals, plants, insects and butterflies in the middle of a rapidly urbanized area;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to support the protection of this property of such historical, scientific and natural significance" from being used as commercial development.

I'll sign it.

LORD'S PRAYER

Ms. Laurie Scott: "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the current Liberal government is proposing to eliminate the Lord's Prayer from its place at the beginning of daily proceedings in the Legislature; and

"Whereas the recitation of the Lord's Prayer has opened the Legislature every day since the 19th century; and

"Whereas the Lord's Prayer's message is one of forgiveness, of providing for those in need of their 'daily bread' and of preserving us from the evils we may fall into; it is a valuable guide and lesson for a chamber that is too often an arena of conflict; and

"Whereas recognizing the diversity of the people of Ontario should be an inclusive process, not one which excludes traditions such as the Lord's Prayer;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, ask the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to preserve the daily recitation of the Lord's Prayer by the Speaker in the Legislature."

It's been signed by hundreds of people from my riding, and I'll hand it over to page Adam.

EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE

Mr. Lorenzo Berardinetti: I have a petition here with several signatures on it. It was presented to me by Sonny Sansone, a community activist in my community. It's addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas the federal government's employment insurance surplus now stands at $54 billion; and

"Whereas over 60% of Ontario's unemployed are not eligible for employment insurance because of Ottawa's unfair eligibility rules; and

"Whereas an Ontario worker has to work more weeks to qualify and receives fewer weeks of benefits than other Canadian unemployed workers; and

"Whereas the average Ontario unemployed worker gets $4,000 less in EI benefits than unemployed workers in other provinces and thus not qualifying for many retraining programs;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to press the federal government to reform the employment insurance program and to end the discrimination and unfairness towards Ontario's unemployed workers."

I agree with this petition, affix my signature to it and give it page Charat, who is here with me today, also from Scarborough Southwest.

LORD'S PRAYER

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

"Whereas the current Liberal government is proposing to eliminate the Lord's Prayer from its place at the beginning of daily proceedings in the Legislature; and

"Whereas the recitation of the Lord's Prayer has opened the Legislature every day since the 19th century; and

"Whereas the Lord's Prayer's message is one of forgiveness, of providing for those in need of their 'daily bread' and of preserving us from the evils we may fall into; it is a valuable guide and lesson for a chamber that is too often an arena of conflict; and

"Whereas recognizing the diversity of the people of Ontario should be an inclusive process, not one which excludes traditions such as the Lord's Prayer;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, ask the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to preserve the daily recitation of the Lord's Prayer by the Speaker in the Legislature."

I would like to add my signature to this and also thank those people from the communities of Keewatin and Kenora for bringing this to the House.

EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE

Mr. Lou Rinaldi: I have a petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas the federal government's employment insurance surplus now stands at $54 billion; and

"Whereas over 75% of Ontario's unemployed are not eligible for employment insurance because of Ottawa's unfair eligibility rules; and

"Whereas an Ontario worker has to work more weeks to qualify and receives fewer weeks of benefits than other Canadian unemployed workers; and

"Whereas the average Ontario unemployed worker gets $4,000 less in EI benefits than unemployed workers in other provinces and thus not qualifying for many retraining programs;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to press the federal government to reform the employment insurance program and to end this discrimination and unfairness towards Ontario's unemployed workers."

I add my signature, and I'll have Alex deliver it to the table.

WYE MARSH WILDLIFE CENTRE

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: This is a petition from the Wye Marsh Wildlife Centre to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Wye Marsh Wildlife Centre, located in the township of Tay, manages approximately 3,000 acres of environmentally sensitive land which is owned by the province of Ontario; and

"Whereas over 50,000 people visit the Wye Marsh Wildlife Centre each year; and

"Whereas over 20,000 students from across Ontario visit the Wye Marsh Wildlife Centre each year, receiving curriculum-based environmental education not available in schools; and

"Whereas the Wye Marsh Wildlife Centre receives no stable funding from any level of government;

"We, the undersigned, petition the province of Ontario to establish a reasonable and stable long-term funding formula so that the Wye Marsh Wildlife Centre can continue to operate and exist into the future."

I'm pleased to sign this and hand it to Daniel to present to the table.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Mr. Bob Delaney: I have a petition to the Ontario Legislative Assembly that was mailed to me recently by the Westland family of Trelawny Circle in western Mississauga. I want to thank them for their efforts on behalf of our community. It reads as follows:

"Whereas wait times for access to surgical procedures in the western GTA area served by the Mississauga Halton LHIN are growing despite the vigorous capital project activity at the hospitals within the Mississauga Halton LHIN boundaries; and

"Whereas 'day surgery' procedures could be performed in an off-site facility, thus greatly increasing the ability of surgeons to perform more procedures, alleviating wait times for patients, and freeing up operating theatre space in hospitals for more complex procedures that may require post-operative intensive care unit support and a longer length of stay in hospital;

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

"That the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care allocate funds in its 2008-09 capital budget to begin planning and construction of an ambulatory surgery centre located in western Mississauga to serve the Mississauga-Halton area and enable greater access to 'day surgery' procedures that comprise about four fifths of all surgical procedures performed."

It's an excellent petition. I'm pleased to support it, to affix my signature and to ask page Christopher to carry it.

EMERALD ASH BORER

Mr. Toby Barrett: The petition is entitled, "Stop the Emerald Ash Borer Invasion," and signatures have come in from Canfield, Port Rowan, Cayuga, Hagersville, Charlotteville, Windham and Simcoe.

"Whereas the emerald ash borer poses a dangerous threat to our forests in Norfolk county and across the province of Ontario; and

"Whereas if the emerald ash borer is not effectively controlled, it is expected to spread across the entire range of ash, causing widespread tree mortality; and

"Whereas the Canadian Food Inspection Agency has not yet determined a quarantine site; and

"Whereas there have not been any promises of financial aid to the municipalities dealing with the emerald ash borer;

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

I sign this petition.

NOTICE OF DISSATISFACTION

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Pursuant to standing order 37(a), the member for Parkdale—High Park has given notice of her dissatisfaction with the answer given by the Premier in last Thursday's question period to her question concerning affordable housing. This matter will be debated today at 6:10 p.m.

ORDER OF BUSINESS

Hon. Michael Bryant: Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent with respect to an agreement in regard to a deferred vote.

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

Hon. Michael Bryant: I move, in language that I'm sure will soon be corrected and formalized by the table, that the vote on the budget bill be deferred until tomorrow at deferred votes.

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

ORDERS OF THE DAY

2008 ONTARIO BUDGET

Resuming the debate adjourned on March 27, 2008, on the motion that this House approves in general the budgetary policy of the government.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The member for Thunder Bay—Atikokan.

Mr. Bill Mauro: It's indeed my pleasure to rise today and offer my comments on our government's budget, introduced just last week in this Legislature. I should advise the Chair at the beginning that I will be sharing my 20 minutes with the—

Mr. Gilles Bisson: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: There was an agreement that the time be divided equally between the three parties, and I would ask that that be respected.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): I am not aware of any such agreement. In order for that to happen, we would need the unanimous consent of the House.

I recognize the government House leader on this.

Hon. Michael Bryant: I'll speak to the whip for the third party. We can bring the motion whenever, right, Speaker?

Mr. Gilles Bisson: No, we have to do it now.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): If you wish to do it, you can seek unanimous consent of the House to divide the time.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Okay, I'll do it.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): I recognize the member for Timmins—James Bay on his point of order.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Mr. Speaker, I ask for unanimous consent that we split the time amongst the three parties in the rest of this debate this afternoon.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): The member for Timmins—James Bay has sought the unanimous consent of the House to split the time equally amongst the three parties. Is there agreement in the House?

I hear a dissenting voice. I return to the member for Thunder Bay—Atikokan, who has the floor.

Mr. Bill Mauro: Again, I will be sharing my time with the member from Mississauga—Erindale.

I do rise today to offer my support for our government's budget, tabled here just last week. We on this side of the House are looking forward to the support of the two opposition parties opposite as we move forward.

At their core, these budgets are an allocation of resources that are provided to us by the taxpayers in the province of Ontario. As such, our budget particularly is a great reflection of the priorities of most of the people in the province of Ontario.

I want to highlight some of the broader themes that were in the budget that especially resonate for me in Thunder Bay—Atikokan, my riding, but I think also for most of the people across northwestern Ontario.

The business community, I must say, is extremely pleased with what we've done in this budget, especially on two components of it, one being the acceleration of the elimination of the business education tax, and I'll speak a little bit more broadly on that in a little while; and the capital tax piece, which is primarily focused on the resource and manufacturing sector and is going to put $190 million back into the pockets of those companies should this budget bill get passed. We look forward to the support of the opposition members in that regard.

Support for seniors: always something that we attempt to do in our budgets, a reflection of how we feel about the contribution that seniors have made to this province over the past number of years. I'll speak a bit more to the specifics in that regard as well.

Major investments in infrastructure: I think many of us have had the opportunity to discuss these investments with our mayors and our reeves, and I know that those whom I've discussed this with in northwestern Ontario are especially pleased with us finding the fiscal capacity and the fiscal room to ensure that we continue to invest in these much-needed projects. I have to tell you, coming from a large geographic riding where we have small municipalities with low assessments and low tax bases, that these investments in infrastructure are greatly appreciated.

Economic development was a theme in the budget as well.

MMRC in Thunder Bay—the Molecular Medicine Research Centre—and the Centre for Research and Innovation: great moves to try to diversify the economy of northwestern Ontario. I'll talk a bit more broadly about those as well.

I'm thrilled to see the increase and the commitment from our government to move the northern Ontario heritage fund from $60 million up to $100 million. I'm very happy to see that program growing. It's something that I had a hand in redesigning during our first mandate to engage and involve more private sector people in their ability to access the money that's in that fund.

Initiatives in our poverty reduction strategy: dental, food, nutrition and things like that.

These are some of the broad themes that we've addressed.

Of course, to do that, we had to have the fiscal capacity to allow us to make those investments in services, in infrastructure and economic development, and in our poverty reduction strategy. I contrast that with the landscape that we found when we came to government in October 2003 after eight or nine years of Conservative government. During that time, as many of us will remember, the American economy was very strong and Ontario was following right along as primarily an export-driven economy. The Conservatives made a decision to follow their ideological agenda of tax cuts.

Most of us won't disagree that where we can, tax cuts are not a bad idea, but we have to pay for them somehow. They always come with a cost, and in that eight- or nine-year period, the cost associated with their tax cuts was a serious and severe reduction in services.

What did we see during those eight or nine years? We saw a significant downloading of the services onto the backs of municipalities. I was a municipal councillor. In October 2003—I think fully 38 of us came into this place as first-timers—many of us were municipal councillors who were prompted to run provincially for the first time directly as a result of our experience of the downloading exercise conducted by the Conservatives during those eight or nine years, that supposed revenue-neutral exercise that left Thunder Bay holding the bag on about $7 million annually.

I remember a specific experience when I visited Timmins in my capacity as the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Northern Development and Mines, where he told me about the 30 miles of road that had been downloaded to a municipality the size of Timmins—just drastic.

MNR offices: 70 of them closed, a 30% to 40% reduction in staff. Ministry of the Environment: 50%, 40% reduction in staff, and we saw the results of what happens when you're not careful with what you do at the Ministry of the Environment. That report drew a direct link between what happened in that ministry and Walkerton.

We saw a government that was selling off assets. They found it necessary to sell off assets at a time when the economy was doing well. Highway 407, of course, is the obvious example. It was sold for $3 billion. Many people estimate the value at about $8 billion, maybe as high as $12 billion, but for some good reason, when all that news was going on, they found it necessary to sell off that asset.

This is the backdrop that we found when we came to government: a strong economy, with a low currency of a 62-cent Canadian dollar, cheap oil and a strong American economy—still downloading services, still selling off assets, still cutting public services while they downloaded services onto the backs of municipalities. And what did we end up with? A $5.6-billion deficit.

And as we all remember, we found out afterwards why they didn't want to present that budget in this Legislature—history will show it to be called the Magna budget—$5.6 billion, as was documented for us by the former Provincial Auditor six months after the election. That was the big promise leading into the 2003 election. We found out exactly what that meant.

Of course, we know we had the backdrop of what was left to us by the NDP as well. Once in a while, it's funny to look across the room when they try to give us a bit of a lesson on how to manage an economy when they left us with about a $50-billion or $55-billion debt in their five years of governing in the province of Ontario.

I want to read into the record, in the last two or three minutes that I have, some of the great investments that we made in infrastructure in my riding of Thunder Bay—Atikokan. Two programs—the $400 million that was announced in the budget—led directly to these investments: in the city of Thunder Bay, $2 million; in the community of Atikokan, $146,000; in the community of Neebing, $198,000; O'Connor, $45,000; Oliver Paipoonge, $476,000; Gillies, $35,000; and for Conmee, $52,000. That was the budgeted allocation of $400 million.

On the MIII program, the municipal infrastructure investment initiative, the city of Thunder Bay received an additional $1 million for the Harbour Expressway bridge; the township of Atikokan received $1.6 million for downtown revitalization; the township of Gillies received $40,000 for a community recycling centre; the municipality of Neebing received $1.6 million for the realignment of Sturgeon Bay Road; and the municipality of Oliver Paipoonge received $1.4 million for the Nor-West rec centre.

I can tell you, in discussion with my northern mayors and reeves—Mayor Brown in Atikokan, Harasen in Neebing, Nelson in O'Connor, Kloosterhuis in Oliver Paipoonge, Vanlenthe in Gillies and Rydholm in Conmee—they expressed