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

October 12, 2004

38th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2004-Oct-12 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Tuesday 12 October 2004 Mardi 12 octobre 2004

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

UNEMPLOYMENT

LIBERAL CAMPAIGN PROMISES

OPP AWARDS

LESLIE M. FROST CENTRE

AGRICULTURE 101

LIBERAL CAMPAIGN PROMISES

OKTOBERFEST

ONTARIO ECONOMY

GOVERNMENT'S RECORD

LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION

REPORT, INTEGRITY COMMISSIONER

REPORT OF CHIEF ELECTION OFFICER

REPORTS, INTEGRITY COMMISSIONER

ROYAL ASSENT /

SANCTION ROYALE

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

GENERAL GOVERNMENT

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

SOCIAL POLICY

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

VISITORS

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

DISABILITIES ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004 SUR L'ACCESSIBILITÉ

POUR LES PERSONNES HANDICAPÉES

DE L'ONTARIO

ARCHIVES AWARENESS

WEEK ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004 SUR LA SEMAINE DE

SENSIBILISATION AUX ARCHIVES

CITY OF TORONTO

AMENDMENT ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LA CITÉ DE TORONTO

MOTIONS

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES LEGISLATION /

LOI SUR LES PERSONNES HANDICAPÉES DE L'ONTARIO

ORAL QUESTIONS

MINISTERS' INTEGRITY

GOVERNMENT APPOINTMENTS

HEPATITIS C

LIBERAL CAMPAIGN PROMISES

OMA AGREEMENT

ELECTRICITY RESTRUCTURING /

RESTRUCTURATION DU SECTEUR

DE L'ÉLECTRICITÉ

GOVERNMENT APPOINTMENTS

LONG-TERM CARE

ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES LEGISLATION

MINISTERS' INTEGRITY

HOME CARE

PETITIONS

WATERLOO-WELLINGTON TRANSPORTATION ACTION PLAN

OPTOMETRISTS

EYE EXAMINATIONS

KINGSTON STOCKYARDS

HEALTH CARE SERVICES

GO TRANSIT SERVICE

CHIROPRACTIC SERVICES

LANDFILL

OPTOMETRISTS

GOVERNMENT DEFICITS

LESLIE M. FROST CENTRE

HEALTH CARE SERVICES

IMMIGRANTS' SKILLS

ORDERS OF THE DAY

BUDGET MEASURES ACT, 2004 (NO. 2) /

LOI DE 2004

SUR LES MESURES BUDGÉTAIRES (N O 2)

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

UNEMPLOYMENT

Mr Jim Wilson (Simcoe-Grey): I rise to strongly urge the Ontario government to intervene in all possible ways to stop the erosion of jobs and to

provide immediate assistance to the town of Collingwood and to the employees of Nacan starch products, Backyard Products, Blue Mountain Pottery and Keller Electric. With the announcement of the

closure of these plants, nearly 500 local residents will be put out of work two months before Christmas.

The town has been working with the Ministries of Agriculture and Food and Economic Development and Trade to secure an ethanol plant for the Nacan site and to

find new business opportunities that help secure Collingwood's place in the global economy, but last week's announcement that Backyard Products has closed its doors hasn't helped. Some 160

full-time employees, along with 200 seasonal employees, have been laid off.

The government needs to assist the town to put a sustainable economic strategy in place to attract new businesses and jobs; provide all assistance necessary to

laid-off workers and their families, with particular attention to older workers who may have difficulty with finding new jobs or training opportunities; immediately give a share of the provincial

gas tax to municipalities like Collingwood so the town can afford the infrastructure and services needed to attract new industry; and put in place a workforce labour adjustment program for the

laid-off employees at Backyard Products.

I want to thank Mayor Terry Geddes and council, Catherine Durrant, and the economic development staff for their diligent efforts in promoting Collingwood as one

of the best places to live, work and raise a family. In spite of the 500 jobs lost in recent times, Collingwood remains an excellent place to do business, and any businesses wishing to locate there

can call 1-888-265-9663.

LIBERAL CAMPAIGN PROMISES

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): Here we are on the first day of the new legislative session, and it looks like another session of Liberal

excuses and broken promises. In the last year, Ontarians have learned the hard way that when it comes to weak leadership and reneging on promises, Dalton McGuinty takes the cake.

Dalton has been breaking promises almost since the first day on the job: the Oak Ridges moraine, Highway 407 tolls, private hospitals, the hydro rate cap,

keeping hydro public, lower auto insurance rates, treatment for autistic kids, health delistings, and the unfair, regressive health tax. After one year of Dalton, it is clear: McGuinty's election

promise book is nothing but a fictionary of broken promises, and ordinary Ontarians are worse off. They aren't seeing the better health care and education the Liberals promised, and they have less

money in their wallets and purses.

That is where Howard Hampton and the New Democrats come in. You can count on us to fight for ordinary people on the issues that matter most: health care,

education, the environment, and fair taxes for everyone. We'll provide the strong, effective opposition Ontarians have come to expect which the Liberals promised, and we'll make sure that the

Liberals start delivering results. No more excuses, and no more broken promises.

OPP AWARDS

Mr Jim Brownell (Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh): I'm happy to rise today to speak about an extraordinary awards ceremony that took place on

October 6 in north Glengarry, honouring the citizens of two great eastern Ontario ridings: my own riding of Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh and the riding of my neighbour, Mr Jean-Marc Lalonde,

Glengarry-Prescott-Russell.

Let me also take the opportunity to congratulate Mr Lalonde on his new duties as the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Transportation.

The annual Ontario Provincial Police awards ceremony celebrates dedication, acts of bravery and community service -- three great pillars of our society. Fourteen

officers were honoured for 20 to 30 years of service, including Constable Paul Deveau, who was honoured for 40 years in law enforcement. Craig Smith from St Andrews West, Shelley Vaillancourt from

Cornwall, and Constable John Hatch from the OPP were all presented with awards for their community service.

Two special award recipients were local residents who were awarded commissioner citations for risking their lives to save others. Mr Richard Arcand from

Hawkesbury selflessly saved three neighbours after their house caught fire in February 2003. The second recipient, Mr Charles Carriere from Moose Creek, saved a woman from her burning car on the

401 near Kingston after witnessing the woman's car lose control and hit a tree.

All the award recipients at the OPP annual awards ceremony are exemplary examples of community service, selflessness and pillars of the law enforcement

community. I commend them all for their community service, and I know that all Ontarians are proud of their efforts.

LESLIE M. FROST CENTRE

Ms Laurie Scott (Haliburton-Victoria-Brock): This past summer, while the Legislature was not sitting, the Liberal government made a decision to

close one of the most valued outdoor centres in the province.

The Leslie M. Frost Centre has provided the surrounding community, and indeed the province, with irreplaceable education and stewardship programs for decades.

The Frost Centre was closed with one week's notice. I was astonished that a government that purports to care about the environment and education would move so quickly to close the Frost Centre with

no public consultation and no concern for its employees or the public it serves, including the 5,000 children who were scheduled for programs at the Frost Centre this year.

Over the past several months, I have received nearly 15,000 names on petitions and countless letters and calls from concerned constituents. I am sure that many

members on both sides of the aisle have heard from their constituents as well. Later today, I'm going to start tabling some of those petitions.

It's not just individuals who are very concerned about the Frost closure. A group of concerned Ontarians, Perma-Frost, presented a letter to the Premier after

the closure. Over 60 groups and individuals signed it. Educators, environmentalists, unions and businesses all joined together, calling upon Dalton McGuinty to reconsider.

Later this week will be the first meeting of the local working group that was formed as a result of the pressure brought to bear in the wake of this government's

short-sighted, arrogant and rash decision. I am grateful to the government for finally realizing that they needed to act, but I'm concerned about the fact that, since the closure, the

decommissioning of the Front Centre's assets has continued. No matter what the working group concludes, their jobs will be harder, because it will have to rebuild many programs from scratch.

I wish the working group well, and I know that they will listen to the voices of the people who have benefited and developed a strong attachment to the Frost

Centre over the years. I hope the government provides the working group with the resources they need to do their job well.

AGRICULTURE 101

Mr John Wilkinson (Perth-Middlesex): Last spring, my colleague the member for Peterborough tabled a resolution that all members spend a day at

the farm each year. This resolution led me to issue a challenge to my local Perth County Federation of Agriculture. Working together, we were able, in August, to welcome my urban caucus colleagues

from both the GTA and southwest Ontario to Perth-Middlesex.

The purpose of this day was to give members the opportunity to experience first-hand the daily lives of my agricultural constituents. The day was a family

affair. Agriculture is a family business in Ontario, and so it was important to me that we made the invitation open to spouses, children, parents and grandparents. All were welcome.

The day offered tours of three local facilities: a dairy, a pork, and an egg-laying operation. Each MPP family was partnered up for the day with a local family

to allow one-on-one discussions of the challenges that face the agricultural industry.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank Tim Shute, Paul Nairn and Burnell Kuepfer of the Perth County Federation of Agriculture for jointly hosting our

inaugural Agriculture 101 event. Special thanks also go out to the commodity groups; the Best Little Pork Shoppe; the West, Anderson and Groenestege host families; and the many buddy families for

their warm hospitality.

Importantly, I would like to thank my colleagues and their families for taking time out of their busy schedules to visit my riding and get a first-hand look at

the unique issues facing our rural communities. The day was a complete success. Finally, I want to thank my colleague the member for Don Valley West for agreeing to co-host next year's event.

LIBERAL CAMPAIGN PROMISES

Mrs Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener-Waterloo): One year ago, this government came to power with a commitment to implement 231 promises, many of

which they knew full well they could not keep or afford. Not only have they broken about 37 of these promises, they have tried to hide the true cost of these promises for a year. In doing so, they

have betrayed the trust of the people in Ontario.

Let's take a quick look at a few of the Liberal broken promises.

The punitive and regressive health tax was implemented despite a public pledge by the Premier during the election campaign to not raise taxes. Not only did they

introduce this health tax, but they are also making Ontarians pay more for less by delisting eye exams, physiotherapy and chiropractic services. This breaks their promise to increase access to

care.

By underfunding hospitals, the Liberal government is now on track to break another promise of reducing wait times. Ontario hospitals are over $600 million short

and they will soon have to make the difficult decision of determining what services and staff to cut.

This government, with its track record of broken promises and mismanagement, is creating hardship and anxiety for the people of our province who trusted them to

keep their word. Now they see that trust betrayed and their pocketbooks slightly less full.

OKTOBERFEST

Mr John Milloy (Kitchener Centre): Last Friday, I joined thousands of residents from Waterloo region as well as visitors from across the

continent at the official keg-tapping ceremony that marked the beginning of Kitchener-Waterloo's 36th Oktoberfest.

Oktoberfest is our area's celebration of its strong local German-Canadian heritage. Officially started in 1969, this eight-day event has become the largest

Bavarian festival in North America, with the best Thanksgiving Day parade in all of Canada. Hundreds of thousands of people lined the streets yesterday morning to watch a spectacular parade that

included this year's Grand Marshal, Wendel Clark, former captain of the Toronto Maple Leafs.

Over the life of the festival, thousands will enjoy the hospitality at our Festhallen and be able to attend 45 family and cultural events. Beyond the

celebrating, the spirit of Gemuetlichkeit helps enrich the local economy and benefits over 70 charities and not-for-profit organizations.

I would like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to the hard work of the president, Don Willcox, the executive director, Larry Blundell, the volunteer board

of directors and the hundreds of other volunteers who make this festival such a tremendous success, year after year.

As Oktoberfest is still going on, I would also like to invite all of my colleagues in the Legislature as well as all citizens of Ontario to come to

Kitchener-Waterloo and help celebrate Canada's great Bavarian festival.

ONTARIO ECONOMY

Mr Bob Delaney (Mississauga West): The place where Ontario's legislative rubber meets our province's road is its economy, and our province is

voting on this government's performance with a robust economy.

Ontario's unemployment rate has fallen to its lowest level in more than three years. Ontario businesses have responded to our province's economic climate and how

it is improving by creating a net 80,000 new jobs. That's like an entire medium-sized Ontario city all finding work within the last year. And according to the Conference Board of Canada, Ontario

can expect this strong GDP performance to continue in the years to come.

Ontario is becoming more attractive to businesses. The management consulting firm KPMG reports that Ontario is now one of the most cost-competitive jurisdictions

in the world. This has been done even as Ontario continues to invest in the health care of all of its citizens and in the education of the young minds whose intellectual capital will drive

prosperity in the years to come.

One year ago, Ontarians voted for change. Change is what Ontario has received, and Ontario's businesses and its workers like what they see.

GOVERNMENT'S RECORD

Ms Monique M. Smith (Nipissing): Nearly one year ago, Ontarians chose change. Looking back over the past year, we have seen a lot of challenges

and a few surprises, including a $5.6-billion deficit left by Ernie Eves and his Tories.

Through it all, our government has been working hard. We are cleaning up the mess left behind by the previous government, and we are building a better province

in which to work, live and raise a family.

What Ontarians care about is how well their children are served by the education system, how well they are cared for by our health care system, and that the

economy is strong.

After one year, class sizes in the early grades are down in more than 1,300 schools. We also have more teachers in our schools, including in Nipissing alone,

where we have 16 new teachers. This will help improve student test scores in reading, writing and math.

We are also making investments in health, ensuring that another 2,400 nurses are on the job, new MRIs are being put in place, and $191 million in new funding is

being invested in long-term care across the province, including $1.2 million annually in my riding of Nipissing.

And the economy is enjoying steady growth.

We are delivering change that is making Ontario better. We have stopped the decline in public services and we are now working to improve our services for the

people we are privileged to serve. We remain the only party that can deliver the change Ontarians want and need. We look forward to working with Ontarians on three more years of real positive

change.

LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): I know that many of you are quite excited seeing that your members are back, but I would much rather we have a

bit of quiet here. I know you would like to hear this.

I beg to inform the House that Mr Runciman, the member for the electoral district of Leeds-Grenville, is recognized as the leader of Her Majesty's loyal

opposition.

There are also other interesting things to listen to.

REPORT, INTEGRITY COMMISSIONER

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): I beg to inform the House that on August 19, 2004, the report of the Honourable Coulter A. Osborne, Integrity

Commissioner for Ontario, responding to the complaint of John Baird, MPP for Nepean-Carleton, regarding the Honourable Greg Sorbara, Minister of Finance, was tabled. An addendum to this report was

tabled on September 8, 2004.

REPORT OF CHIEF ELECTION OFFICER

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): I beg to inform the House that on September 2, 2004, the report of the Chief Election Officer on the

preparation and delivery of the 2003 provincial general election was tabled.

REPORTS, INTEGRITY COMMISSIONER

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): I also want to say that I beg to inform the House that on September 23, 2004, the report of the Honourable

Coulter A. Osborne, Integrity Commissioner for Ontario, responding to the complaint of Jim Flaherty, MPP for Whitby-Ajax, regarding the Honourable Greg Sorbara, Minister of Finance, was tabled.

Also, I beg to inform the House that on September 23, 2004, the report of the Honourable Coulter A. Osborne, Integrity Commissioner for Ontario, responding to

the complaint of Bob Runciman, MPP for Leeds-Grenville, regarding the Honourable Dalton McGuinty, Premier of Ontario, was tabled.

ROYAL ASSENT /

SANCTION ROYALE

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): I beg to inform the House that on June 29, 2004, His Honour the Lieutenant Governor was pleased to assent to a

certain bill in his office.

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

Bill 56,

An Act to amend the Employment Standards Act, 2000 in respect of family medical leave and other matters / Projet de loi 56, Loi modifiant la Loi de 2000

sur les normes d'emploi en ce qui concerne le congé familial pour raison médicale et d'autres questions.

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

Mr Norman W. Sterling (Lanark-Carleton): I beg leave to present a report on drug programs activity from the standing committee on public

accounts and move the adoption of its recommendations.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Does the member wish to make a brief statement?

Mr Sterling: First of all, I would like to thank all members of the public accounts committee for working in tandem with each other to present

these reports that I'm presenting today.

The committee held hearings on a follow-up to the audit that appeared in the Provincial Auditor's 2001 annual report. Members focused their attention and

recommendations on six areas: the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care's drug strategy review; timely updates of the Ontario drug benefit formula; prices paid by the ODB; written agreements with

brand name drug manufacturers; the ministry's Health Network System, which links it to pharmacies; and pharmacy inspection coverage.

I move adjournment of the debate.

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

Mr Sterling: I beg leave to present a report on children's mental health services from the standing committee on public accounts and move the

adoption of its recommendations.

The Speaker: Does the member wish to make a statement?

Mr Sterling: The committee met with the staff of the newly created Ministry of Children and Youth Services. The areas covered by the

committee's report and recommendations include quality of service, waiting lists and related capacity issues, performance measurement, and the control of transfer payments to agencies.

I would like to move adjournment of the debate.

The Speaker: Mr Sterling moves adjournment of the debate. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

Mr Sterling: I beg leave to present a report on court services from the standing committee on public accounts and move the adoption of its

recommendations.

The Speaker: Does the member wish to make a brief statement?

Mr Sterling: The committee addressed operational and management aspects of the court services division, namely the administrative structure of

the courts, case backlogs, information systems and the use of new technologies, capital projects, and performance reporting as these relate to providing a fair and accessible justice system.

The committee prepared recommendations to address the new administration governing structure; delays in the system; compliance with Management Board directives

as they relate to capital projects; property portfolio management matters; and the processing of cases.

I move adjournment of the debate.

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

Mr Sterling: I beg leave to present a report on the policy and consumer protection services division from the standing committee on public

accounts and move the adoption of its recommendations.

The Speaker: Does the member wish to make a brief statement?

Mr Sterling: The audit objectives were to determine whether the division had adequate procedures and systems to ensure compliance with the

relevant legislation and ministry policies, and secondly, to review the ministry's monitoring of delegated administrative authorities, or DAAs. The areas addressed during the hearings and

subsequently in the committee's report included following up on consumer complaints, monitoring of cemetery trust accounts, and the overall performance of the delegated administrative

authorities.

The committee's recommendations addressed the ministry's enforcement regime, the cemetery database project, the administration of trust funds, and DAA

accountability and governance matters.

I would like to move adjournment of this debate.

The Speaker: Mr Sterling has moved the adjournment of the debate. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

Mr Sterling: Lastly, I beg leave to present a report on the Family Responsibility Office from the standing committee on public accounts and

move the adoption of its recommendations.

The Speaker: Does the member wish to make a brief statement?

Mr Sterling: The committee reported on the Family Responsibility Office in 2000 and again in 2004. In 2003, the Provincial Auditor

concentrated on the policies and procedures in place to enforce support orders and the level of service delivery achieved by the office. The discussion during the hearings concentrated on

enforcement, staff resources and performance measurement.

The committee's recommendations covered such areas as the delivery of client services; the proposed case management model; enforcement strategy; impact of new

technology; staffing requirements; and assessment through performance measures, benchmarking and client services.

I move adjournment of the debate.

The Speaker: Mr Sterling has moved the adjournment of the debate. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

GENERAL GOVERNMENT

Mr Jean-Marc Lalonde (Glengarry-Prescott-Russell): I beg leave to present a report from the standing committee on general government and move

its adoption.

The Clerk-at-the-Table (Mr Todd Decker): Your committee begs to report the following bill as amended:

Bill 26,

An Act to amend the Planning Act / Projet de loi 26, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur l'aménagement du territoire.

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

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

SOCIAL POLICY

Mr Jeff Leal (Peterborough): I beg leave to present a report from the standing committee on social policy and move its adoption.

The Clerk-at-the-Table (Mr Todd Decker): Your committee begs to report the following bill as amended:

Bill 100,

An Act to amend the Electricity Act, 1998 and the Ontario Energy Board Act, 1998 and to make consequential amendments to other Acts / Projet de

loi 100, Loi modifiant la Loi de 1998 sur l'électricité, la Loi de 1998 sur la Commission de l'énergie de l'Ontario et apportant des modifications corrélatives à d'autres

lois.

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

All those in favour of the motion, please say "aye."

All those against, say "nay."

I think the ayes have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1359 to 1404.

The Speaker: All those in favour, please rise.

Ayes

Arthurs, Wayne

Bartolucci, Rick

Bentley, Christopher

Berardinetti, Lorenzo

Bountrogianni, Marie

Bradley, James J.

Broten, Laurel C.

Brown, Michael A.

Brownell, Jim

Bryant, Michael

Cansfield, Donna H.

Caplan, David

Chambers, Mary Anne V.

Colle, Mike

Cordiano, Joseph

Craitor, Kim

Crozier, Bruce

Delaney, Bob

Dhillon, Vic

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duguid, Brad

Duncan, Dwight

Flynn, Kevin Daniel

Fonseca, Peter

Gerretsen, John

Gravelle, Michael

Hoy, Pat

Jeffrey, Linda

Kennedy, Gerard

Kular, Kuldip

Kwinter, Monte

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Leal, Jeff

Levac, Dave

Marsales, Judy

Matthews, Deborah

Mauro, Bill

McGuinty, Dalton

McMeekin, Ted

McNeely, Phil

Meilleur, Madeleine

Milloy, John

Mitchell, Carol

Mossop, Jennifer F.

Orazietti, David

Parsons, Ernie

Patten, Richard

Peters, Steve

Peterson, Tim

Phillips, Gerry

Pupatello, Sandra

Qaadri, Shafiq

Racco, Mario G.

Ramal, Khalil

Ramsay, David

Rinaldi, Lou

Sandals, Liz

Sergio, Mario

Smith, Monique

Smitherman, George

Sorbara, Greg

Takhar, Harinder S.

Van Bommel, Maria

Watson, Jim

Wilkinson, John

Wong, Tony C.

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Zimmer, David

The Speaker: All those against, please rise.

Nays

Arnott, Ted

Baird, John R.

Bisson, Gilles

Chudleigh, Ted

Churley, Marilyn

Dunlop, Garfield

Flaherty, Jim

Hampton, Howard

Hardeman, Ernie

Horwath, Andrea

Hudak, Tim

Jackson, Cameron

Klees, Frank

Kormos, Peter

Martel, Shelley

Martiniuk, Gerry

Miller, Norm

Murdoch, Bill

O'Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Prue, Michael

Runciman, Robert W.

Scott, Laurie

Sterling, Norman W.

Tascona, Joseph N.

Wilson, Jim

Witmer, Elizabeth

Yakabuski, John

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 69; the nays are 28.

The Speaker: The bill is therefore ordered for second reading.

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): I beg to inform the House that during the adjournment, the Clerk of the House received reports from the

standing committee on government agencies dated August 24 and September 29, 2004.

Pursuant to standing order 106(e)9, these reports are deemed to be adopted by the House.

VISITORS

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): May I at this moment call your attention to, in the Speaker's gallery, Gary Malkowski, a former member for

York East from the 35th Parliament. Correction: He is in the east gallery.

I also want to draw your attention to, in the public gallery, Herb Epp from Waterloo North in the 32nd, 33rd and 34th Parliaments.

Welcome.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

DISABILITIES ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004 SUR L'ACCESSIBILITÉ

POUR LES PERSONNES HANDICAPÉES

DE L'ONTARIO

Mrs Bountrogianni moved first reading of the following bill:

employment, accommodation, buildings and all other things specified in the Act for persons with disabilities / Projet de loi 118, Loi traitant de l'élaboration, de la mise en oeuvre et de

l'application de normes concernant l'accessibilité pour les personnes handicapées en ce qui concerne les biens, les services, les installations, l'emploi, le logement, les bâtiments

et toutes les autres choses qu'elle précise.

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

Minister?

Hon Marie Bountrogianni (Minister of Children and Youth Services, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration): Not at this time, Speaker; during

ministerial statements.

ARCHIVES AWARENESS

WEEK ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004 SUR LA SEMAINE DE

SENSIBILISATION AUX ARCHIVES

Mr O'Toole moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 119,

An Act to proclaim Archives Awareness Week / Projet de loi 119, Loi proclamant la Semaine de sensibilisation aux archives.

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

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): Ontario has a rich, colourful and recorded history. Archives play an essential role in the preservation, use and

restoration of available documents so that we never lose sight of our collective memory as citizens of Ontario.

CITY OF TORONTO

AMENDMENT ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LA CITÉ DE TORONTO

Ms Wynne moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 120,

An Act to amend the City of Toronto Act, 1997 / Projet de loi 120, Loi modifiant la Loi de 1997 sur la cité de Toronto.

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

Ms Kathleen O. Wynne (Don Valley West): If passed, this legislation will give the city of Toronto the power to set its own ward boundaries,

determine the number of city councillors, amend the role of community councils and administer its own elections, including setting the length of each term for city councillors, setting the dates of

its municipal elections, setting its election finance rules and controlling its voters list. If passed, this legislation will be a meaningful recognition of the maturity and competence of the city,

and I look forward to a good debate on this issue.

MOTIONS

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

Hon Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): I seek unanimous consent to put forward motions without notice regarding

private members' public business.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Agreed? Agreed.

Hon Mr Duncan: I move, notwithstanding standing order 96(d), that the following changes be made to the ballot list of private members' public

business: Mrs Jeffrey and Mr Kular exchange places in order of precedence such that Mr Kular assumes ballot item 67 and Mrs Jeffrey assumes ballot item 42; Mr Yakabuski and Mr Runciman exchange

places in order of precedence such that Mr Runciman assumes ballot item 60 and Mr Yakabuski assumes ballot item 33.

Further, I move that, notwithstanding standing order 96(g), notice for ballot items 32, 33, 34 and 35 be waived.

The Speaker: Mr Duncan moves, pursuant to standing order 96(d), that the following changes be made to the --

Interjection: Dispense.

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

COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP

Hon Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): I seek unanimous consent to move a motion respecting committee membership and

to have the question on the motion put immediately, without debate or amendment.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): I think we're anticipating a lot today. Do we have consent for Mr Duncan's motion? Agreed.

Hon Mr Duncan: I move that the following changes be made in the membership of the following committees: standing committee on government

agencies, Mr Hudak in place of Mrs Witmer; standing committee on justice policy, Mrs Witmer in place of Mr Hudak.

The Speaker: Mr Duncan moves that the following changes be made in the membership of the following committees: standing committee on

government agencies --

Interjection: Dispense.

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

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES LEGISLATION /

LOI SUR LES PERSONNES HANDICAPÉES DE L'ONTARIO

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Mr Speaker, allow me to welcome you and all members of this Legislature

back to this august chamber on this, a very proud day for Ontario.

access to workplaces and public spaces, employment, customer service, communications and transportation.

L'Ontario devrait être fier de ce projet de loi. Tout le monde mérite la possibilité d'apprendre, de travailler et de jouer dans toute la mesure

de son potentiel. Ce projet de loi devrait rendre l'Ontario plus productif. Ce sont tous les résidents et résidentes de l'Ontario qui bénéficient des possibilités offertes

à chacun et à chacune d'entre eux.

This bill should make Ontario proud. Every person deserves the opportunity to learn, work and play to his or her full potential. This bill will help make

Ontario more productive. All Ontarians benefit when we tap into the potential of each Ontarian. I often say that Ontario succeeds when we all work, dream and build together, and "all" must

certainly include in every way the 1.5 million Ontarians with a disability.

Before the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration tells us more about this bill, I briefly want to acknowledge the work that has gone into it. I especially

want to acknowledge the efforts of several advocates for people with disabilities, and specifically mention one: David Lepofsky.

We've all heard it said that someone is made of Teflon when nothing seems to stick to them. I suspect that David is made of Velcro. In fact, he will virtually

attach himself to you if you have any carriage, in any way whatsoever, over this file. His passion and determination are a testament, I believe, to the desire of Ontarians with disabilities to have

the opportunity to fully contribute to life in this great province of ours.

I want to acknowledge as well the members of the Legislature who have taken a consistent interest in this issue, particularly members of my own caucus who, as

critics for this area while in opposition, and now as government members, have made a real and lasting contribution.

Finally, I want to say directly to our fellow Ontarians with disabilities: We need your work. We need your buying power. We need your contributions to this

economy and this society that we all share. We need you and all Ontarians to realize your full potential so this great province can fulfill its potential as a place with an appreciation of life and

a quality of life that are truly second to none.

Hon Marie Bountrogianni (Minister of Children and Youth Services, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration): Mr Speaker, may I welcome you and

all honourable members back to the Legislature for this first day of our autumn sitting and the first day after Thanksgiving.

Ten years ago, a group of 20 Ontarians with disabilities forged a committee with the sole intent of making Ontario barrier-free for people with disabilities.

They understood that the aisle of a store may be too narrow to accommodate someone with a wheelchair; a playground may have an insurmountable curb around it; an elevator may have no Braille

markings on the buttons; and an on-the-spot job application may be impossible for someone who has dyslexia. An Ontarian who has mental health problems may face stigma in any number of ways,

particularly in the workforce.

Even though there has been progress to eliminate barriers for those with disabilities, there is so much more work to be done. That is why today I'm honoured to

Ontarians with Disabilities Act because we need to allow all Ontarians to participate fully in the life of our province.

Making Ontario truly accessible for the 1.5 million Ontarians with disabilities is a matter of vital importance. We want Ontario to lead, not lag, in

barriers that deprive senior citizens of their integrity.

Ten years ago, those Ontarians with disabilities put together a simple statement of principles for making our province barrier-free. Those principles are at

the heart of the legislation that the government is introducing today. Most significantly, the final principle states that new legislation "must be more than mere window dressing.... It must have

real force and effect." This Legislature unanimously adopted that resolution. The disability community supported this approach.

I happen to believe that the earlier legislation, the Ontarians with Disabilities Act, was introduced with good intent and good faith, but it was just too

weak. It did not comprehensively cover the private sector. It did not include standards and timelines to eliminate and prevent barriers. The previous legislation did not make a difference in the

way that really matters to people with disabilities, like access to stores, restaurants and medical offices. It was opposed by many in the disability community. It was opposed by the opposition

parties in the Legislature.

Over the past several years, a number of Liberal members have pushed very hard for the new legislation that I am introducing today. They met with Ontarians

with disabilities. They listened to them and they have pushed our government to act. The honourable member for Windsor-St Clair, now the Minister of Energy and House leader, led the way. The now

Minister of Agriculture and Food held hearings in every part of the province, and the honourable member for Prince Edward-Hastings has done invaluable work for the disability community for many

years. The late Dominic Agostino, our party's first critic on disability issues, was a champion of the first order for this legislation.

I must also recognize the honourable member for Burlington and the honourable member for Trinity-Spadina, who care deeply about this issue, and, of course, the

I would like to acknowledge the Premier, who is a forceful advocate for people with disabilities, as was his father before him in this Legislature.

The Premier wrote last year, "We believe that the Harris-Eves government's Ontarians with Disabilities Act does not even begin to adequately address the needs

and rights of countless Ontarians. We will introduce ... a strong and effective ... act."

That is precisely what we are doing today. The legislation is very much crafted and fine-tuned by what we have heard from the disability community and those in

other sectors.

Throughout the first part of this year, my former parliamentary assistant, Dr Kular, and I heard from thousands of Ontarians. I want to thank the member for

Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale for his tireless efforts, and I wish him well in his new responsibilities.

I also want to welcome my new parliamentary assistant, the member from London-Fanshawe, who has already approached this legislation with diligence and

enthusiasm.

Throughout those consultations this spring, we met with disability organizations; individuals with disabilities; the private sector, including business people

of enormous goodwill and determination; leaders from retail businesses, hospitals, colleges and universities, transportation services; and students.

In fact, we had a Webcast that received more than 2,000 hits across the province. Some of those people have joined us today.

I would like to ask my colleagues to acknowledge my friends in the gallery who have so willingly shared their time and knowledge to help us make Ontario

accessible: David Lepofsky, who was already mentioned by the Premier, and the Ontarians with Disabilities Act Committee -- thank you; the Learning Disabilities Association of Ontario; the Ontario

March of Dimes -- thank you very much for your efforts; and many others.

This legislation, if passed, will incorporate all 11 principles enunciated by the disability community and agreed to by the Legislature six years ago.

Of course, the government has already moved forward on complementary fronts: expansion of funding for mental health services, major new investments in

children's health programs, new housing for Ontarians with developmental disabilities, the first increase in Ontario disability support program payments in 11 years, and increased rebates for

vehicles to transport people with physical disabilities.

To make truly comprehensive progress, though, we need legislation that will deliver fundamental changes -- real change -- to the way we think and act as a

society.

The bill would call for strong action by the provincial government, the broader public sector and, for the very first time, the private sector.

Standards to be met every five years or less to achieve measurable long-term goals could be adopted as regulations, requiring all sectors and people with

disabilities to develop them together.

I'm talking about standards in areas that affect people in their day-to-day lives; standards that would address barriers related to physical and mental health,

sensory -- the full range of developmental and learning disabilities, visible and invisible; standards that would be given the force of law through regulation and enforcement and that would require

affected persons and organizations to comply with tough penalties for violators.

Taking tough measures requires people of honour and commitment, and it takes leadership from the business community. Many business leaders have already seen

I thank in particular such business organizations as the Retail Council of Canada, the Greater Toronto Hotel Association, the Ontario Chamber of Commerce, the

Ontario Restaurant Hotel and Motel Association, Dofasco and the Canadian Standards Association.

Every Ontarian should have the opportunity to learn, work, play, participate and contribute to the maximum of their talents, desires and dreams. That is

essential to the social and economic vibrancy of this province.

There was a time in this province's history, Mr Speaker, when I would not have been able to address you because women were denied their democratic rights. I

personally remember a time when, as a student, engineering co-op placements were limited because some companies did not have washrooms for women. They were deemed an unnecessary expense. Today that

is unimaginable.

I want that same inclusive thinking when it comes to disabilities. I want people in this province to say, "Can you imagine there was a time when people

complained about the cost of a ramp? Can you imagine there was a time when menus were not available in alternate formats? What were they thinking?"

Through public education we can change attitudes, one of the biggest barriers people with disabilities face. We need to raise a generation of Ontarians who are

The creation of an accessible Ontario is a vision and a job for all of us. That's our challenge, that is our responsibility and, most importantly, that is our

extraordinary opportunity.

As we return here from Thanksgiving, let us give thanks not just for what we have but for what we can become. In that spirit of reaching out for our potential,

communities and a strong economy.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Responses?

Mr Cameron Jackson (Burlington): It's my pleasure today to rise, on the first day back in the Legislature, to greet this new legislation. I

say in all fairness, like many members of this Legislature who have ever grown up in a house with a disabled member, they know how important this legislation is. So in the true spirit of this

legislation, we can only express our appreciation for anything that advances the cause for disabled people in our province.

This province has a proud reputation. It was the first jurisdiction in North America to have a human rights code and a human rights commission. This province

was the first, with Bill 125 from our government, to have comprehensive disability legislation, the first disability support program on the continent. So it is fitting that this province today

makes an effort to move the yardsticks forward for full citizenship for all of its citizens.

I too would like to acknowledge the presence of a few of the groups who were very supportive and instrumental in advising the former government in terms of

retain this valuable asset of volunteerism for moving forward the agenda, as well as the construction of the disability directorate which was part of that legislation.

As always, these issues are measured in terms of legislation, but they're also measured by financial commitment. Clearly our government was pleased with its

required. Today's announcement and legislation has not been costed; I understand that media questions earlier today were not satisfied. But I recall vividly, during the debate on Bill 125 when it

was tabled by our government, the member for Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Aldershot very clearly saying, "I don't care what it costs. We should just spend all the money necessary." Although that's a

very Liberal view of the world, the member for St Catharines, participating and laying out the official position for the Liberal Party at the time, indicated that any action similar to the

legislation being passed today would amount to downloading and therefore the province should pay for all of these costs. Now, if that still remains the official position of the Liberal Party and

therefore the government of the day now, if that is the case, then we need to have a full costing of the implications of this legislation.

It's interesting to note that about 80% of Bill 125 has been retained in this legislation. It has been modified. You are dismantling the old legislation.

However, what's fascinating to me is that for the first time in my 20 years in this building, you're saying you're going to repeal the bill but you have to repeal it in sections over the next 10

Briefly, Minister, I want you to be aware that the largest single resistance I got as Minister of Citizenship was from AMO and from municipalities. What

occurred in Bill 125 was to empower disabled persons in their own municipalities to literally not allow a building to be built unless it was compliant to the standards set in that community --

minimum standards set by the province, but even better standards. I notice that your legislation confirms that and takes it even further. I notice that your penalty provisions in the act take the

fine for filing false documents,

whereas in the previous legislation those were outright fines of $50,000 for non-compliance.

We will participate in the discussions and the debates. It was frustrating for me as the Minister of Citizenship that the Liberal Party never participated in

amendments or in bringing forward ideas. I want to reassure you that you can count on the Progressive Conservative Party.

Interjection.

Mr Jackson: Not one amendment was tabled by your critic. That is a fact.

You can count on the Progressive Conservative Party, under the leadership of John Tory, to work with you, Minister, to make this the best legislation in the

country. Thank you.

Mr Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): It is indeed a privilege and an honour to be here on this day, the opening of the Legislature, and a

privilege and an honour that the first bill introduced is the Ontarians with Disabilities Act.

It has taken many long years, over three successive governments, over four or five terms of office now, for

an act to come before us. I have to tell you, Gary

Malkowski was introduced earlier to the Legislature. He is sitting there. He was the author of the first Ontarians with Disabilities Act. He was there trying to do what I think was the right thing

all those years ago.

We saw, after his act failed to pass and employment equity failed to pass, that a new government came along and tried their best, I think, to bring in an

Ontarians with Disabilities Act, but it was severely watered down. It was pretty bad, I have to say. Even though Cam Jackson, the member from Burlington, spoke and was very passionate about it, it

was a watered-down bill that did not get the support of the opposition parties and indeed did not pass. It was withdrawn because many, many people, including the opposition parties and the disabled

community, saw that it was not as good as the original bill introduced by then member Malkowski from York East.

I have to say I'm a little disappointed in what we have today. It's sad to see how minimal the commitment to the disabled actually is. It has been reintroduced

today. You know, I go back to that hallowed day, I guess, October 29, 1998, when all parties in this Legislature passed the motion. I want to read just a little bit of what you promised, members on

that side of the House who were here. You promised to "seek to achieve a barrier-free Ontario for persons with disabilities within as short a time as is reasonably possible, with implementation to

begin immediately upon proclamation." That's what was promised six years ago.

Today we have to look at what has actually happened, and I look only to

section 1 of the bill.

Section 1(

a) says,

"The purpose of this act is to benefit all Ontarians by

services, facilities, occupancy of accommodation, employment buildings, structures and premises" -- all of which are good, but then the kicker -- "on or before January 1, 2025" -- 21 years from

now; not as soon as reasonably practicable but 21 years from now.

That is a whole generation of Ontarians who will grow up and not see total equality. Yes, they may see marginal improvements that you're promising, but they

are never going to see total equality until 2025. This whole generation has been waiting 10 years and now they are expected to wait another 21 years.

The reality is that what you are setting up here is little more than a study group. The reality is that the standards you are going to set by regulation -- you

are going to do that only after you consult with the affected businesses and the affected municipalities who have shown in the past that they are often very reluctant to spend money where they need

to spend it.

How are you going to begin immediately? That's the question I have of you. Where are the standards in this bill? I can't find them. Where is the money for

enforcement? There's no money for enforcement. In fact, the minister responsible for the budget has openly mused about laying people off. Where is the funding for churches, for community centres,

for non-profits, for municipalities? Who is going to pay for all this?

This is a big announcement today. In your first budget you promised many things and you have not delivered those for the disabled. You promised to help them

but you eliminated the 8% provincial tax on the vehicles that carried them around. You are fighting in court parents with autistic children. Even though you've given some 3% to ODSP as a payment

increase, that is really quite pitiful in the grand scheme of things.

To reiterate: There is no intervener funding, the regulations are not spelled out, and the 2025 date is certainly not acceptable to us or to the people who are

working on this bill.

ORAL QUESTIONS

MINISTERS' INTEGRITY

Mr Robert W. Runciman (Leader of the Opposition): At the outset, I want to say that I'll treasure the warm reception I received earlier. I'll

treasure it because I suspect that it will be short-lived, starting now on the government benches.

My first question is to the Premier. I'd like to ask you a number of questions that relate to the ethical standards of your government and the behaviour of

your cabinet ministers.

When you were on this side of the House, you had a great deal to say about ministers living up to a high standard of ethical behaviour. You said in June this

year, "I believe the people of Ontario have a right to know ... about the nature of ... ethical standards that you set for your caucus, your cabinet and others who work for you." Premier, in the

spirit of that right-to-know declaration, can you tell us what standards you are setting for your ministers and staff when it comes to approaching stakeholders for contributions to the Liberal

Party of Ontario?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Let me take the opportunity at the outset to congratulate the interim

leader on the assumption of his new responsibilities. I wish him nothing but the very best in the new capacity.

I'm sure he has more information that he's going to provide with respect to that opening question. But let me say that we have been through our first year, and

I am very proud of the standard we have set as a government when it comes to integrity, when it comes to the behaviour of our ministers, the behaviour of our cabinet and the behaviour of our

government generally -- very proud of that, Speaker.

Mr Runciman: The Premier may want to revise that answer as we proceed.

The Premier said in April 2000, "I believe that cabinet ministers should live up to a high standard of responsibility and unquestionable ethical behaviour." In

that vein, Mr Premier, do you think it's appropriate for a minister and/or his staff to be pursuing their stakeholders, people who have a vested interest in the decisions made by your government,

for donations to the Liberal Party of Ontario? Do you think that's appropriate, and if not, what are you going to do about it?

Hon Mr McGuinty: I would expect that all members of the cabinet and indeed all members of the government would respect the rules when it comes

to soliciting donations.

If the member opposite, the Leader of the Opposition, has some specific complaint that he would like to make public or that he would like to refer to the

Integrity Commissioner, then we would only be too pleased to co-operate in any way possible.

Every single complaint that has been lodged with the Integrity Commissioner to date has been rejected by the Integrity Commissioner. Notwithstanding any

overtures, complaints or allegations made by members opposite, the Integrity Commissioner -- an independent, objective third party -- has found in each and every instance that this government is

blameless.

Mr Runciman: We expected a more fulsome explanation from the individual who claimed to be the champion of integrity and accountability.

Premier, as a final supplementary, we've been contacted by a number of officials in the health sector who are quite upset with direct approaches by a key

member of the Minister of Health's staff asking them to purchase tickets or tables for the minister's fundraisers. I have an e-mail that was given to me by a health sector employee.

Mr Todd Ross, who is responsible for appointments in the minister's office, has reached out to touch virtually everyone in the health care community in order

to fatten the Liberal Party's bank account.

If Ontarians want to be considered for a public appointment or want to have their voice heard during the development of public policy, are they required to cut

a cheque to the Liberal Party in order to get their foot in the door? Is this the new McGuinty Ontario?

Hon Mr McGuinty: This is yet another in an endless series of spurious allegations which the Leader of the Opposition seems to luxuriate

in.

I am advised that this individual is not employed by the Ministry of Health. I'd tell the member opposite that if he has some specifics or some real

particulars he'd like to present to us or to the Integrity Commissioner, we would be only too pleased to respond to those.

I can say this: We have set a very high standard for ourselves. We are committed to improving the quality of life for Ontarians. I am pleased and proud that

we've made significant progress, whether in health care, education, the environment or the economy.

Today, it was with a great deal of pride that the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration introduced the Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2004.

Those are the things that we are working on. Those are the things that we are focused on. That's what this government is all about.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): New question.

Mr Runciman: According to the government phone book, that individual is working in the minister's office. We have a date on the e-mail as

well.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. We'll give the Leader of the Opposition an opportunity to ask the question.

GOVERNMENT APPOINTMENTS

Mr Robert W. Runciman (Leader of the Opposition): This is another question of ethics and integrity that involves the Minister of Health, but

I'm going to direct my question to the Premier.

Perhaps, Premier, you can explain to this House why, time after time, we've seen highly paid positions of influence handed to your Liberal cronies. The most

recent example is the appointment of Elinor Caplan to review the home care system.

It has become clear over the past year that it pays to be a Liberal. Time after time, we've seen party loyalists appointed to panels, boards and commissions

for various levels of remuneration. But this appointment takes the cake. You might say that this was the mother of all appointments.

You also broke your government's own rules and regulations and awarded Mrs Caplan an untendered contract.

You're paying Mrs Caplan the equivalent of $140,000 a year. That's more than the Minister of Health.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Could I have some order, please?

Hon Greg Sorbara (Minister of Finance): This has gone downhill from when Ernie was here.

The Speaker: Order, Minister of Finance.

The Leader of the Opposition.

Mr Runciman: The government is paying Mrs Caplan the equivalent of $140,000 a year. That's more than the Minister of Health. There might be

some justification in that, but we won't get into it.

Premier, you are the chief of the watch for the government. You have repeatedly spoken out about ending cynicism in government and then you let appointment

after appointment go unchecked and leave taxpayers on the hook for thousands of dollars in salaries being paid to your Liberal cronies. Premier, the question --

The Speaker: Thank you. Premier?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I am hopeful that at some point somebody over there, but the Leader of

the Opposition in particular, will begin to address those issues that weigh heavily on the minds of Ontario families, like their health care, like their education, like the nature of their

environment and what's happening with respect to jobs and the economy.

Let me remind the member opposite of some of the people we have been proud to retain for their ability, competence and integrity -- I include on this very

short list Bob Rae, Bill Davis, Marion Boyd and Jake Epp, all capable, competent people -- and we will continue to do so as we move forward.

Mr Runciman: Those good appointments certainly pale in the wake of the number of Liberal appointments.

Premier, while you were in opposition, shortly before the election, you said -- and I'm paraphrasing -- "At the end of the day, the Premier has to set some

standards for his cabinet and his cabinet ministers." Then you warned your new MPPs to beware of human frailties. You said that political --

Interjection.

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

Mr Runciman: Mr Speaker, I hope you'll show some latitude if they keep interrupting my questions.

The Premier warned his new MPPs to beware of human frailties. He said that political staff -- and Mrs Caplan apparently is political staff -- would undergo

unusually rigorous screening to avoid conflicts of interest or using positions for personal gain.

Premier, your latest appointment is a woman who's no stranger to Ontario politics. You've appointed a person who was forced to resign from cabinet due to

conflict-of-interest charges, the same person who was demoted from the Chrétien cabinet for, according to the gospel of the Toronto Star, not having a firm grip on a difficult department.

Premier, this appointment speaks to the credibility and integrity of your administration. Will you show some leadership and accountability? Will you step in

and put this appointment on hold pending a complete review from the committee on government agencies? Will you do that?

Hon Mr McGuinty: A few more names that I'm sure the Leader of the Opposition will be interested in learning about, people whom we have also

appointed: Brian Coburn, Marilyn Mushinski, Bill Saunderson, David Crombie. I look forward to further questions so I can further enlighten him with respect to the number of Tories we've been

appointing since we got into government.

Mr Runciman: I think the Premier requires enlightenment on a range of issues. Clearly the Premier doesn't like the question because it strikes

a little close to his cabinet and speaks to the ethics of those the Premier has advising him. You see, the Premier is leery of answering because his continued appointment of Liberal cronies is

making him look bad.

Taxpayers deserve to know the going rate for being a loyal Liberal. Mrs Caplan just received a $70,000 payout for her time as a federal member. She was granted

an approximately $700,000 pension buyout for her time as a provincial MPP. And now you want taxpayers to pay her another $140,000 annualized, plus expenses. Did I miss anything, or is that just a

partial list?

Premier, how can you justify appointing a lifetime Liberal to a position that pays $140,000 per year on top of expenses and pensions without any review or

consultation? Will you commit today to send the appointment of Elinor Caplan to the legislative committee on government agencies in order to afford the transparency that an appointment of this

magnitude deserves? Will you do that?

Hon Mr McGuinty: I have tremendous confidence in Elinor Caplan, who has served as Minister of Health in this Legislature, who served in the

federal government, who has a lengthy record of experience and has demonstrated tremendous competency and integrity. I would also say the very same thing about one Bette Stephenson, whom we have

also appointed in our capacity as a government. These are both people who are impeccable in terms of their character, who are supremely competent when it comes to the responsibilities they have

assumed.

We will continue to bring that approach to the appointments this government makes. It is not a matter of political stripe. It is a matter of looking for the

best people to get the job done, and we will continue to do that.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Before I ask the leader of the third party to ask his question, I am going to ask the government side to tone their noise

down a bit. It's the only opportunity the opposition has for a chance to ask questions.

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): Why didn't you stop the clock?

The Speaker: Order. I'm having too many interruptions going back and forth. I'm also going to ask the opposition to get your questions in

under the required time.

HEPATITIS C

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Premier. Your first year has been a year of excuses and broken promises:

promises of Highway 407 toll caps, of preventing development on the Oak Ridges moraine, of preserving the Hydro rate cap, the promise not to delist health care services, promises to help autistic

children and promises of no new taxes. On issue after issue, you said one thing before the election and have done exactly the opposite after.

There is one issue that is far too important for more McGuinty government broken promises, and that's the issue of health care. Will you commit today that all

the federal government money for health care will be used by your government to fund health care services and nothing else?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): It's very interesting to find that the leader of the third party now has

become a champion for public health care. The reason that just recently we were able to prevent the expansion of an American company into Ontario which was going to prey on Ontario seniors and

their fears was because of the Commitment to the Future of Medicare Act, which this government proudly passed under the championship of George Smitherman.

But I want to note that the member opposite voted against that very legislation, which we were able to use in a very expeditious and aggressive fashion to

protect public health care in Ontario. If Ontarians want to know where we stand on health care, they will know that we support public health care. They should also now know that the members

opposite voted against the Commitment to the Future of Medicare Act.

Mr Hampton: It was a very direct question: Does the Premier commit that the new federal health money will be spent on health services and

nothing else? He couldn't answer.

I want to draw your attention to federal health care dollars related to hepatitis C victims. In 1998, Ontario and other provinces, with Ottawa, created an

agreement to help some of the unfortunate and forgotten victims of hepatitis C. Under the agreement, Ontario received $135 million to provide enhanced health services for those victims. As I say,

it's supposed to be used to provide enhanced health services, but it is clear from the Ministry of Health report released on October 1 that the McGuinty government, like the Conservative government

before it, isn't using that money for enhanced health services. In fact, the report doesn't even mention enhanced health services. What you're doing is simply funnelling the money into OHIP and

then using it like you would use any other OHIP money. It's not going to enhanced health services.

Premier, you said in the election, "Choose change." Why is your policy with respect to hepatitis C victims the same as the policy of the previous Conservative

government?

Hon Mr McGuinty: I know the Minister of Health is eager to speak to this.

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): Earlier in the summer, we were requested by individuals to make known what had

We took the time necessary to call upon those individuals expert in the provision of services for people with Hepatitis C to develop an appropriate methodology to determine the extent to which all

of those investments and dollars had been invested in the expansion of services for people in our province with hepatitis C.

members opposite, the government of Ontario had acted in accordance with that agreement.

What remains outstanding, of course, is an

interpretation that goes back to the time that agreement was signed whereby some people had determined that the

language suggested that was going to be for out-of-pocket payments. But the legal agreement is very, very clear, and I've been keen to share all the available information that has come to our

knowledge with people concerned about this file. I would be happy to provide more information in a supplementary.

Mr Hampton: I find the minister's answer interesting, because this is a copy of the press release and the report of October 1, and it doesn't

mention enhanced services. In fact, it avoids the words "enhanced services." And this is a copy of the agreement between Ontario and the federal government. It is very clear. It says "health

services for hepatitis C that are not fully insured by publicly financed health care systems in Canada." It talks specifically about enhanced health care services above and beyond what is provided

by OHIP.

What is clear from this October 1 report from the Ministry of Health is that you are doing exactly what the former Conservative government did. You're taking

federal money that should be used to provide enhanced health care services for unfortunate hepatitis C victims and you're not using it for those enhanced health care services.

In the election, Mr McGuinty said, "Choose change." Tell me, Minister, where is the change when you're doing the same despicable thing that the former

Conservatives did in terms of letting down those hepatitis C victims?

Hon Mr Smitherman: I have a very significant point of departure from the honourable member. I am not one of those inclined to think that the

provision of extraordinarily good care from our system of health care in this province should be associated with the word "despicable."

The fact of the matter is that the Ministry of Health in this province, through governments and this government, stands for the idea, the principle, that we

should always be looking to enhance the quality of care that's available. The word "enhancement" comes to mean many things. One, for instance, is the fact that all the time we have new medical

discoveries related to the treatment of hepatitis C which we seek to take advantage of as quickly as is possible for the people struggling with hepatitis C in our province. This includes members of

my family. This is an issue that I am very, very familiar with.

We've gone further than just to make that accounting that was requested of us. We've asked John Plater, who is a distinguished leader from the hepatitis C

community, to bring back a group to take a look at a strategic plan that had been developed by the previous government but unfortunately had left some people out of the mix, to do a very, very

quick review of their work and to come forward with a strategic plan that we can all share to make sure not only that we provide the best possible treatments in our --

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Thank you. New question.

Mr Hampton: The minister wants to talk about what he might do in the future. Minister, this is a confidential letter from a friend of

yours.

The Speaker: To whom is the question?

Mr Hampton: To the Minister of Health.

The Speaker: Thank you.

Mr Hampton: It's from the former federal Minister of Health, Anne McLellan, to your predecessor, the Conservative Minister of Health. She says

there's no difficulty with

interpretation. She said then, in January 2003, that Ontario was misspending the hepatitis C money, that it was not being used for the enhanced health services for

hepatitis C victims that it should have been used for.

You knew this. Your officials have known this since January 2003. You've been the government for over a year now. Yet it's clear from your own report, where

you don't even mention enhanced health services for victims of hepatitis C, that you are following exactly the same policy of the Conservative government you replaced.

Mr McGuinty said, "Choose change." Minister, I ask you again, where is the change for these unfortunate hepatitis C victims when you're short-changing them

exactly as the Conservative government short-changed them before you?

Hon Mr Smitherman: The change is there, and it's clear and apparent for people in this province with hepatitis C. The change is this: that

we've assembled a group because we want to have a strategic plan which gives us the chance as a province to make sure that at the same time we're delivering the best possible quality of care, we're

also reaching out and finding those people who might have hepatitis C and don't know it and helping to prevent hepatitis C infections in the future.

With respect to that member's

interpretation of the letter that came, I was provided with a copy of this letter last week. I am seeking to obtain clarification

from the federal government, because what is absolutely clear is that a letter written from one minister to another, which I think we both agree does not have the same legal standing as an

agreement between jurisdictions, which was signed off on by members of that party while in government -- there is surely, across the breadth of our country, a very clear departure from the

interpretation that the honourable member brings to the discussion. All provinces across the country, to the best of the knowledge that we've been able to gain to date, have acted in the same

fashion as has the province of Ontario, which is to use those resources to make sure that the quality of care we're providing for people with hepatitis --

The Speaker: Thank you. Supplementary?

Mr Hampton: Well, Minister, I just spoke with officials in Manitoba. Manitoba has used that hepatitis C money to provide coverage for drugs

and medications that otherwise wouldn't be covered in Manitoba. They've used it to provide enhanced services. You've been the Minister of Health for over a year and you are doing exactly what the

Conservatives did before you, and all we're hearing from you today is that somewhere down the road you might do something different -- another McGuinty government promise. We've heard lots of

those.

Minister, this is a cabinet submission dated May 5, 2003. What's important in it is that Ministry of Health lawyers, the same Ministry of Health lawyers who

are there now, advised that the Ontario government is misspending hepatitis C dollars. They say, "The agreement supports the conclusion that the parties intended that ... the funds would be used to

of the agreement." And then they advocate that Ontario start using it for enhanced services.

Minister, you've been doing for a year exactly what the Conservatives before you did. When are you going to provide the enhanced services required in this

agreement? When are we going to see "choose change" instead of more broken promises?

Hon Mr Smitherman: I say to the honourable member in response, I'm going to have the opportunity on Friday, Saturday and Sunday to sit

alongside the Minister of Health from the province of Manitoba, Dave Chomiak, a man I have a lot of confidence in. I think when we go through it list by list by list of the services we're providing

in the province of Ontario for people with hepatitis C, it's going to bear a striking resemblance to the provision of services for people with hepatitis C in Manitoba.

Just because of his desire to have a partisan stamp on these services, the honourable member seeks to create some distinction which is artificial. The fact of

the matter is that provinces and the federal government came together many, many years ago and signed an agreement. In reading the agreement, as many members of the media have had the opportunity

to do over the past number of weeks, what is absolutely clear is that there is a decided distinction between the rhetoric associated with that agreement and what the agreement legally binds

provinces to provide.

But to suggest that we're resting on our laurels is inappropriate. We are working with leaders in the hepatitis C community to make sure that the province of

Ontario stands out in this nation as an exemplary record for providing care for people with hepatitis C.

Mr Hampton: The minister tries to refer to some legal mumbo-jumbo. Your own health ministry lawyers will tell you there is no mumbo-jumbo.

They tell you clearly that Ontario has an obligation to provide enhanced services for victims of hepatitis C. They tell you clearly that Ontario has that obligation to spend those dedicated federal

health dollars in the way that is outlined here. You haven't been doing that for over a year. You've been following the same discredited policy of your Conservative predecessors.

Mike McCarthy is someone who was infected with hepatitis C through tainted blood, and this is what he has to say: "Now, six years later, not one nickel has

gone for any enhanced care, treatment or out-of-pocket expenses reimbursement for tainted-blood victims.... Victims feel like they are a bag of garbage left by the side of the road."

Minister, your Premier said, "Choose change." What I hear you doing today is defending the same tired, discredited policy of the previous Conservatives. When

are we going to get the change rather than more broken promises?

Hon Mr Smitherman: It strikes me that the member's tripping all over himself in an effort to create distinctions that aren't there. The fact

of the matter is that Ontario has moved forward in a fashion that's entirely consistent with the legal agreement and consistent with what other provinces have done.

But he asks the question, "What have we been doing for the last year?", and here's what I'll tell him. We've been working very hard to invest again in

community-based care; to make sure, as an example, that someone in this province, in any part of this vast province, who's struggling with the challenge of finding access to a doctor because they

stopped producing them when they were a government and because they were slow to get back to it -- we've been working tirelessly to expand the role of the family practitioner, to provide more

incentive for them to provide community-based comprehensive care. The fact remains that we're charged with a terrific responsibility, and I'm honoured to be involved in it.

With respect to hepatitis C, here's the commitment that we make. This is our bottom line. The province of Ontario will stand out in Canada as a jurisdiction

that is prepared, able, and is providing a level of care that lives up to the high standards expected. What that means is that as new technologies become available and new approaches become

available, like new medicines, the province of Ontario will be in a position to support those expanded initiatives, and we will do so by working in co-operation with health care providers and

especially with the hepatitis C community.

LIBERAL CAMPAIGN PROMISES

Mr Jim Flaherty (Whitby-Ajax): The Minister of Health's answers were so long, I've forgotten my question.

My question is for the Premier. Premier, when you ran for office to be Premier more than a year ago now, you made a lot of promises -- in fact, more than 231

promises. You costed them, or at least you told the people of the province of Ontario that you costed them. You said that their total cost is $5.9 billion.

Shortly after you became the government about a year ago, it became known that there was a costing report by the public service of Ontario, the trusted public

service of the province. You were asked about that report. In fact, we made an information request for the report under the freedom of information act, and you and your government fought that tooth

and nail for almost a full year, until last week, when, as a result of the order, we got the report. Now we know why. The costing by the public service was in excess of $18 billion -- more than

three times what you told the people of the province of Ontario.

Will you now come clean and admit to the people of Ontario that you underestimated the costs of your promises by a factor of three -- from less than $6 billion

to more than $18 billion -- and that's why you hid the report?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I'm sure that the member opposite would want to be reminded of how the

Deputy Minister of Finance described someone's intention to tally up the numbers he put together. He said, specifically, that it would be wrong and "misleading," to quote the Deputy Minister of

Finance. He said, "So if somebody were to go through and just add up the columns -- that can be done -- it would be information that's actually meaningless."

Perhaps we shouldn't be surprised that the member opposite, being part of a party that hid a $5.6-billion deficit from the people of Ontario, is now prepared

to use information that is described by the Deputy Minister of Finance as wrong and misleading with respect to specific numbers.

Mr Flaherty: I understand the Premier's answer to the people of Ontario: "Don't add up the numbers." When they add up the numbers, they get a

very different number than he gave the people of Ontario when he added up his numbers and sought election in the province. This is a question of untrustworthiness -- or if it's not

untrustworthiness, it's plain incompetence. You say "$5.9 billion" to the people of Ontario. You say, "Elect me because I can do these 231 things and more for $5.9 billion." You get elected,

you get a report from the public service, you hide the report, you go through a budget with $4 billion of new spending and you don't come clean with the people of Ontario. Tell me, should they

consider you untrustworthy, incompetent or both?

Hon Mr McGuinty: I just can't put it any better than did the Deputy Minister of Finance: wrong and "misleading." You cannot tally up those

figures. The member opposite knows that some of those stretch out over an expenditure period that is in excess of some 39 years -- wrong and misleading.

OMA AGREEMENT

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Premier. One year ago you told people to choose change, and you said that

people would get an open and transparent government. Now we find that you have, behind closed doors, negotiated a deal with the Ontario Medical Association and you refuse to tell the people of

Ontario what is in the deal.

This is about health care for the people of Ontario, not about your secret arrangement with the doctors. Premier, you know the details, your cabinet knows the

details and now the doctors know the details, but you insist on keeping the public in the dark.

I ask you, as the Premier who promised open and transparent government, what are you trying to hide from the public? Will you release the entire agreement so

that people can find out what's happening to their health care system?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I wonder why the member opposite is so critical of this particular

process when it's one he followed flawlessly when they sat in government. There is a tradition in Ontario, when we negotiate these agreements with the medical community, that the agreement is

subject to ratification first by doctors, and once that has been completed, then it is made public. That's something all governments, of all political stripes, have respected in the past and we

will respect it in our term.

Mr Hampton: Premier, you may think that explanation passes, but what we've found out through some of the leaks is that in fact this agreement

has a number of side deals. One of the side deals says to doctors that if they trim $200 million from the Ontario drug benefit plan -- that is, if they take benefits away from the disabled, the

poorest and the elderly -- your government will bonus the doctors with $50 million more money. Many doctors are objecting to this. Some call it a bribe. Some call it an inappropriate way to address

health care issues.

Premier, what's your impression? Don't you think the people of Ontario deserve to know what's in this agreement before they wake up and find more side deals

like this that don't enhance health care and in fact take away benefits from the most vulnerable people in the province? When are you going to open up the agreement? When are you going to tell them

about the side deals, Premier: after more people get hurt?

Hon Mr McGuinty: I'm not, for all the obvious reasons, about to speculate on the contents of that agreement. I would suggest that the member

opposite has just enough information now to be dangerous with respect to speculating about the contents of the agreement.

What I can say by way of facts is this: When the member opposite formed the government, they froze funding for drugs. We have, in our first year, put a quarter

of a billion dollars more into drugs. I think that speaks to our values.

ELECTRICITY RESTRUCTURING /

RESTRUCTURATION DU SECTEUR

DE L'ÉLECTRICITÉ

M. Jean-Marc Lalonde (Glengarry-Prescott-Russell): Ma question s'adresse au ministre de l'Énergie. Minister, the McGuinty government is

charting new ground in the history of Ontario's electricity sector. The positive changes the government is making will ensure Ontarians continued prosperity by creating a conservation culture and a

cleaner Ontario while delivering a reliable, sustainable and diverse supply of competitively priced power for Ontario.

Bill 100, the Electricity Restructuring Act, 2004, provides the basis for achieving this by proposing sweeping legislative change. Minister, what will be the

role of the Ontario Energy Board under the proposed legislation to restructure the electricity sector?

Hon Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): I'm pleased to answer the question. Under Bill 100, the Ontario Energy Board

would have a stronger role in protecting Ontario consumers through licensing and rate regulation, something the previous government rejected. They left small consumers at the will of the free

market. The OEB would ensure economic efficiency, cost-effectiveness and financial viability of the elements of Ontario's electricity system. Its mandate is to protect consumers and ensure that the

industry operates efficiently and effectively. Bill 100 strengthens its role by mandating it to publicly review electricity plans prepared by the Ontario Power Authority and market rules prepared

by the IESO. It's a venue for stakeholder and public involvement in the energy sector.

With regard to electricity rates, the OEB would approve an annual rate plan for low-volume and other smaller consumers. These consumers would pay a blended

price. It would be based on regulated contract and forecasted competitive prices. This will ensure that prices are fair, stable and predictable, something this province desperately needs to

generate new electricity.

M. Lalonde: Merci, monsieur le ministre, de m'avoir donné les grandes lignes du rôle que jouera la commission.

Minister, Ontario now has about 31,000 megawatts in generation capacity. Between now and 2020, over 80% of Ontario's current electricity generating capacity,

which represents 25,000 megawatts, needs to be refurbished, conserved or replaced. Given the reality that previous governments failed to plan ahead and built very little new capacity over the past

10 years, under the proposed legislation what will the government do to ensure that Ontario's energy supply is enough to keep pace with our population and economic growth?

Hon Mr Duncan: The member is quite right. Until the introduction of Bill 100, there was no existing institution responsible for ensuring that

we have enough electricity to keep the lights on in Ontario. That was something ignored by the Conservatives, something ignored by the NDP. Bill 100 proposes to create a new institution, the

Ontario Power Authority. It would be responsible for ensuring long-term energy supply and adequacy. Its role will be to ensure that 20 years from now this province has adequate, affordable power

that will enable us to grow and prosper economically, as we have done under the first year of change in Ontario in the McGuinty government.

These changes, coupled with the economic management of this government, mean real change that means more jobs, better jobs, protection for the people of this

province and ultimately better health care and better education, change that we're delivering every day of this mandate and change that we as a government are very proud of.

GOVERNMENT APPOINTMENTS

Mr Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): My question is to the Minister of Health. I would like to follow up on a question put by my colleague from

Leeds-Grenville to the Premier which the Premier refused to answer.

Minister, you are the same minister who's threatening to take hospital administrators to the woodshed for misspending money, for spending money where you don't

feel it's appropriate, and yet with regard to the hiring of Elinor Caplan, this all-in-the-family type of contract issue, you have taken the same kind of hiring practice that you condemned when you

were in opposition.

I want to make it very clear that I don't call into question Ms Caplan's competence. What I am calling into question, however, is your own competency and

judgment. First of all, this was an untendered contract worth some $500,000, out of which Ms Caplan is being paid the equivalent of $140,000 a year.

Mr Minister, how do you justify taking administrators from hospitals to issue about the misspending of money when you can make this kind of expenditure without

breaking --

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

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): Firstly, I'd like to thank the member from -- what's his riding called? --

two-tier for his question.

Interjections.

Hon Mr Smitherman: That wound may not yet be healed. That two-tier wound may not yet be healed over there. I'll stay away from that line. I'm

sorry. I apologize for the sensitivity.

I want to say to the honourable member that, firstly, with respect to the CEOs of Ontario hospitals, they continue to be in our province among the most highly

accomplished public officials, and we're very grateful for the work that they do every single day. I have so many opportunities to address that to them personally, and I appreciate one further

opportunity.

With respect to value for money, I'll just remind the honourable member that he was a part of the government that was very pleased to pay the Minister of

Health's communications adviser $300,000, which is, on an annual basis, some quite extraordinary amount of money.

Mr Klees: This minister still fails to understand he is now the minister, that they are now the government. What we're talking about here is

the issue of competency and trustworthiness. The fact is they promised that they would do things differently. The fact is they're not. In fact, what they are doing is calling into question the very

principles that this Premier said he would bring to this government, and that's transparency. All I'm saying is, be transparent. The Premier refused to say that he would bring this contract before

the committee for review. What is so difficult about that?

With regard to the minister, he's refused to answer my question: Why did you not tender this contract? Simple.

Hon Mr Smitherman: I'm pleased, by way of continuance from my earlier answer, to remind the honourable member that we're the party that has

reappointed 279 Tories to a variety of boards. The fact of the matter is, I find it interesting --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order.

Hon Mr Smitherman: On the matter that the honourable member asked about with respect to transparency, at the media event where we announced Ms

Caplan's appointment, a question was asked directly from the media: How much will this cost, and what is Ms Caplan being paid?

The questions were answered in a very clear fashion. The total cost for this expedited review, which will last no longer than six months, to address what for

many people in our province is a very pressing challenge, will be no more than $500,000. On a $1.3-billion line item in our government's budget, we feel that's an appropriate expenditure.

Further, as I would look to find people of accomplishment to assist me with difficult challenges, I am enormously pleased that someone of Ms Caplan's

extraordinary capabilities and relevance as a former health minister and a parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Health in Ottawa --

The Speaker: Thank you. New question.

LONG-TERM CARE

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I have a question to the Minister of Health.

Minister, your ministry recently approved a request from the Sudbury Regional Hospital to discharge and transfer long-term-care patients outside our region.

This is because there are no long-term-care beds available in our communities. So up to about 20 patients are going to end up going to Manitoulin Island, Espanola and, indeed, even to Chapleau.

We've been contacted by many family members who are very concerned, because they're already going to the hospital every day to provide additional support.

This, of course, is going to be impossible when these patients are discharged and relocated so far from home.

The media reported last week that about 3,700 new long-term-care beds will be allocated this year, but none are coming to Sudbury. I'm asking you, Minister, if

you would immediately review this situation to determine if, indeed, some of those long-term-care beds can be allocated to Sudbury so this difficult situation doesn't become a permanent

situation.

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I do want to thank the member for the question. The member from Sudbury has

also been very clear in advocating on behalf of the needs of his constituents.

Let me make very clear that the situation with respect to those discharge policies is a very challenging one. For those families, I recognize that it's a long

distance from Sudbury to Manitoulin Island and other environments, and I want to say that we recognize that this is a policy that can only be put in place in extraordinary circumstances. What are

the extraordinary circumstances? There are two points.

The first is that if we do not have these discharge policies, the Sudbury hospital will not function properly and it will back up and cause even more

challenges. It is a request that's being made of those families. I recognize that it's a difficult one but it is necessary to try to maintain proper functioning of the health care system. The

challenge we have in northern Ontario is that in Timmins we had this problem in July. I think it's quite possible that some of the beds in Sudbury are occupied by people from Timmins who have also

been subjected to this.

I'll have more information for the honourable member in the second supplementary.

Ms Martel: My question was about an immediate review of the long-term-care bed allocation. I hope the minister is going to respond to that

because there may be some beds that could come to Sudbury. I understand that's not an immediate solution, but it might stave off a very permanent problem.

There are some other measures that I am going to ask you to implement, measures that you actually implemented in Timmins-James Bay that did keep some of these

people from having to go to Iroquois Falls, Hearst and other places. Those measures include establishing temporary long-term-care beds in existing facilities in Sudbury; establishing temporary

long-term-care beds at the Sudbury Regional Hospital; providing additional funds for palliative care so that people could be cared for at home and not in the hospital; and finally, some additional

resources to community-based agencies to do assessments earlier on the advice, for example, of a physician who sees a caregiver who is going to burn out, which is going to result in an immediate

admission to the hospital.

Are you prepared, Minister, to do the review, as I asked in the earlier question, and also to implement those four measures that you did implement earlier this

summer in Timmins-James Bay?

Hon Mr Smitherman: We did implement some of those measures in Timmins-James Bay. Perhaps you said that. I'm sorry; I misspoke.

To the member I'll say that yes, generally speaking there's a lot there. In our allocation of long-term care last week we have included funding for 500

temporary alternate-level-of-care beds. That's exactly what's to be applied in the circumstance the member has at hand.

The bigger issue we have is a northern Ontario challenge. It's a problem in Timmins, it's a problem in Thunder Bay and it's now most certainly a problem in

Sudbury. The previous government's allocations have not been adequate to meet the needs of people in northern Ontario who have very serious underlying health conditions -- lack of caregivers, in

some instances. We have already increased the funding that will give more access to palliative care and other strategies through community-based agencies.

On the central matter at hand, which is short-term allocation to deal with the problem, this is something that the ministry is currently examining. Longer-term

allocation is of course the priority that we're making to resolve this issue, not on a temporary basis but on a more permanent one.

In the meantime, I do again want to say to the honourable member, and to those families that are disadvantaged as a result of this, that we are asking a lot of

them, and we're very appreciative of the efforts they're going to be asked to make for the proper functioning of the health care system.

ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES LEGISLATION

Mr Tony C. Wong (Markham): My question is directed to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration.

Minister, last week I attended a fundraiser in Markham for a local group called Spirit of Life. Working with other community leaders in Markham, I helped to

create this group several months ago.

Spirit of Life was established to raise awareness about the needs of individuals with visible and invisible disabilities, to eliminate barriers and to improve

the quality of life for individuals with special needs. Simple things that most of us take for granted, like going to work or grocery shopping, become difficult tasks for 1.5 million Ontarians with

a visible or invisible disability. I believe that all Ontarians should have the opportunity to learn, work, play and otherwise participate in society to their fullest potential. Unfortunately, many

continue to be left behind.

disabilities?

Hon Marie Bountrogianni (Minister of Children and Youth Services, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration): The member summarized very well

what we heard across the province from people with disabilities, visible and invisible.

First, this legislation will cover both visible and invisible disabilities, which is a major step forward. The second is that we will have standards.

What we heard across the province was, "What are the rules?" Businesses asked us, "We would follow the rules if we knew what they were; what are the rules?

to go to restaurants and cinemas more freely and to do everything that we take for granted.

As well, there's a lot of discrimination presently in the employment sector against those with invisible or mental health disabilities. Those are the standards

that will take longer to develop --

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Thank you.

Hon Mrs Bountrogianni: -- because public education needs to be part of that. I'll continue in the supplementary.

Mr Wong: With the changing demographics, we all know that tomorrow's workplace and marketplace will look and function very differently from

today. With an aging population, 20% of Ontarians are likely to be persons with a disability by 2025. This group represents an estimated spending power of about $25 billion a year across Canada.

Doing nothing hurts everybody, both businesses and individuals. Minister, how will the new act assist businesses to prepare for the special needs of this significant consumer group?

Hon Mrs Bountrogianni: Indeed, we can't afford not to act. The honourable member is correct. One in five of us will have a disability in 20

years, largely due to the fact that we are aging. The baby boomers never were satisfied with the status quo, to their credit, and they won't be in 20 years either.

One of the ways we will be assisting businesses is by having flexibility. We will not be expecting the same sort of standards for a corner store that is

struggling as compared to a Loblaws or a Sobeys, which of course will have more resources for developing standards.

The bottom line is this: that every person with a disability, whether it's invisible or visible, has a right to attend cinemas, to buy milk at the corner

store, to go to hotels and other hospitalities.

MINISTERS' INTEGRITY

Mr John R. Baird (Nepean-Carleton): I had intended to ask this question to the Minister of Health, but rather, I will put it directly to the

Premier.

Premier, earlier in question period you were asked whether you thought it was appropriate to have a Liberal political staffer, paid for by the taxpayers, in

charge of stakeholder relations, someone who is in essence the gatekeeper to public appointments for the Minister of Health, at 4:30 being the gatekeeper and at 5:30 shaking people down to buy

tickets to Liberal Party fundraisers. I want to ask you very clearly, do you think that type of behaviour reaches the ethical standards in Dalton McGuinty's government?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Again, if there are some specifics that the member would like to provide

me or possibly the Integrity Commissioner with, I would be delighted to entertain those. But I can say once again that this individual is not employed by the Ministry of Health. I also understand

that he never served in this capacity, as manager of stakeholder relations.

Mr Baird: I listened with great interest when you answered the question of the Leader of the Opposition at prompting from the Minister of

Health. In fact, this individual was on June 30 e-mailing people in the health care community, shaking them down for political contributions to the Ontario Liberal Party, and in fact didn't leave

office -- what the minister didn't tell you is that they didn't leave his employ until September 3 of this past year. So what he was doing was that at 4:30 he was the community liaison, an

assistant in your political minister's office, being the gatekeeper, giving out public appointments and being the gatekeeper for that process. At 4:30 he was doing that, while at 5:30 he was

shaking down members of the health care community for donations to the Ontario Liberal Party.

I want to ask you very clearly, do you have standards that you will stand in your place and tell your cabinet what your ethical bottom line is? Yes or no,

Minister.

Hon Mr McGuinty: Yes, we have standards, and yes, they are much higher than those set by our predecessor government.

HOME CARE

Mr Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): My question is to the Minister of Health. Mr Minister, you promised during the last election, and indeed

since the last election, to improve home care services. I have to tell you that we in East York do not see much happening in that way.

Just in this past couple of weeks we have seen that our treasured community-based not-for-profit agency, Community Care East York, has been nudged out by a

multinational company because the bidding process was flawed. You have admitted that the bidding process is flawed. You have hired people to study that process. Why will you not include Community

Care East York and perhaps the Ottawa VON in that study and remedy something which is very wrong?

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): The honourable member asks me to seek a remedy which is to reach back into a

legally constituted process and change it because the outcome didn't satisfy him or some members of his community. I think it's important to note that we do have concerns about the competitive

bidding process as it relates to the community care access centres and provision of long-term care. That's why we've taken the actions that we have. But for the member to suggest that we have the

power to retroactively reach in and change those outcomes I think is inappropriate.

Further, in many of these very same processes, including the one in Ottawa, the big winners, if you will, of those contracts that were tendered are in fact

not-for-profit organizations. So I think the member should be careful in suggesting that it's for-profit providers that have won out in instances over those that are not-for-profit.

Our concern in taking on this review of the process by Elinor Caplan is that it is designed to create stronger levels of continuity of care for both patients

and providers, because we have been concerned about the upheaval the process has been causing to date.

I just want to say to the member with respect to the situation in East York and some other places that he might have referenced, of course we have no power to

reach in arbitrarily and change decisions that were arrived at in a legal process.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Supplementary.

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): I'm going to tell you right now that you'd better find a way to reach back in and fix the mess you've

made in my community of East York. It is unacceptable. The review of how contracts are being awarded is too late for our constituents in East York. You ran on "Choose change," but you did not stop

the cutthroat Tory process that gives contracts to for-profit outfits rather than proven, non-profit community-based home care providers like Community Care East York. These residents are set to

lose the home care workers that they let into their homes and that they know and trust. I'm going to ask you to fix this. Will you make the review retroactive to January so that Community Care East

York and providers like the VON and others can continue to deliver the excellent home care services they provide to my constituents in East York?

Hon Mr Smitherman: I believe I've already answered that part of the member's question. I will take this opportunity to mention that what we

are doing is building a system that will work even better in the future. The fact of the matter is that we put $103 million in additional funding into home care this year and it is providing

extraordinary new benefits to people. In fact, over the four-year mandate we've already indicated that funding will be increasing and an additional 96,000 people will benefit from home care, the

kind of care that's delivered right in their home. I believe we can improve this process and make it better from the standpoint of continuity of care for workers and patients alike, and that's the

path we're on right now.

The Speaker: That brings us to the end of question period.

PETITIONS

WATERLOO-WELLINGTON TRANSPORTATION ACTION PLAN

Mr Ted Arnott (Waterloo-Wellington): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, and it reads as follows:

"Whereas the residents of Waterloo-Wellington need and deserve excellent roads and highways for their safe travel; and

"Whereas good transportation links are vital to the strength of our local economy, supporting job creation through the efficient delivery of our products to

the North American marketplace; and

"Whereas transit services are essential to managing the future growth of our urban communities and have a relatively minimal impact on our natural environment;

and

"Whereas Waterloo-Wellington MPP Ted Arnott has asked all municipalities in Waterloo-Wellington to provide him with their top transportation priorities for the

next five years and beyond, all of them responded, and their recommendations form the Waterloo-Wellington transportation action plan; and

"Whereas the Waterloo-Wellington transportation action plan contains over 40 recommendations provided to MPP Ted Arnott by municipalities, and there is

recurrent support for implementing the corridor study of Highway 7/8 between Kitchener and Stratford, a new four-lane Highway 7 from Kitchener to Guelph, assistance for Wellington county to rebuild

Highway 24 from Guelph to Cambridge, a repaired and upgraded Highway 6 from Fergus to Mount Forest, Waterloo region's light rail transit initiative, OSTAR funding for transportation-related

projects, and other projects;

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

"That the provincial government support Ted Arnott's Waterloo-Wellington transportation action plan, and initiate the necessary studies and/or construction of

the projects in it."

I have affixed my signature as well to this petition.

OPTOMETRISTS

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): I've got a petition to the Ontario Legislature.

"Whereas the Legislative Assembly of the province of Ontario will be considering a private member's bill that aims to amend the Optometry Act to give

optometrists the authority to prescribe therapeutic pharmaceutical agents for the treatment of certain eye diseases; and

"Whereas optometrists are highly trained and equipped with the knowledge and specialized instrumentation needed to effectively diagnose and treat certain eye

problems; and

"Whereas extending the authority to prescribe TPAs to optometrists will help relieve the demands on ophthalmologists and physicians who currently have the

exclusive domain for prescribing TPAs to optometry patients; and

"Whereas the bill introduced by New Democrat Peter Kormos ... will ensure that patients receive prompt, timely, one-stop care where appropriate;

"Therefore, I do support the bill proposing an amendment to the Optometry Act to give optometrists the authority to prescribe therapeutic pharmaceutical agents

for the treatment of certain eye diseases and I urge the government of Ontario to ensure speedy passage of the bill."

It's signed by hundreds. I've affixed my signature as well. Page Anthony is taking this to the Clerk.

EYE EXAMINATIONS

Mr Kim Craitor (Niagara Falls): I'm pleased to present this petition on behalf of my riding of Niagara Falls.

"Whereas the 2004 provincial budget was not clear on whether adult optometry patients who have or who are at risk for medical conditions, such as diabetes,

glaucoma, macular degeneration and clinically significant cataracts would continue to be covered through the Ontario Health Insurance Plan; and

"Whereas Ontario's optometrists strongly feel that Ontario seniors, those under 20 and those with chronic sight-threatening diseases must continue to receive

primary eye care services directly from Ontario's optometrists; and

"Whereas forcing patients to be referred to optometrists through their family physicians ignores the years of specialized training optometrists undertake to

detect, diagnose and treat eye conditions; and

"Whereas almost 140 communities across the province have already been designated as underserviced for family practitioners and the government's approach will

only exacerbate the problem unnecessarily;

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

"That the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care immediately clarify that the eye examination services they provide to patients at risk for medical conditions

will continue to be covered by OHIP and the coverage for these services is not dependent on a patient being referred to an optometrist by a family physician."

I'm pleased to submit that with my signature attached.

KINGSTON STOCKYARDS

Mr Ernie Hardeman (Oxford): I have a petition here signed by a great number of residents of Ontario.

"Whereas the Canadian (and Ontario) beef industry has been in turmoil since the spring of 2003 when an isolated case of BSE (which did not reach the food

chain) was reported in Alberta resulting in the closure of the US border to Canadian beef exports; and

"Whereas since that time losses to farmers and their related suppliers such as livestock markets have been in the billions of dollars; and

"Whereas there is no immediate solution for the problem, which would cure the economic tragedy and stabilize the economics of the industry and its suppliers;

and

"Whereas livestock markets in Ontario are in imminent danger of being closed, and in fact one of Ontario's major markets for two generations, Lindsay Sale

Barn, has in fact closed its doors as of September 2004; and

"Whereas farmers who are already devastated by the evolution of this crisis to date need community livestock sales in order to have a place to sell their

stock; and

"Whereas the Kingston community stockyards -- the only remaining livestock market between Ottawa and Campbellford -- is in immediate danger of closing for

good, creating significant hardship for both the operators and the farming community who require this sale;

"Be it resolved, therefore, that we, the supporters of the Kingston Stockyards, hereby petition the Legislature to provide immediate financial relief for this

facility through this crisis so that it can continue to serve the community."

I add my signature to it, as I totally agree with it.

HEALTH CARE SERVICES

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I have a petition sent to me by Mr Maurice Lalonde of Whitefish, Ontario -- it's in my riding -- and I thank

him for it. It reads as follows:

"Whereas the McGuinty Liberal government is cutting provincial funding for essential health care services like optometry, physiotherapy and chiropractic

care;

"Whereas this privatization of health care services will force Ontarians to pay out of pocket for essential health care;

"Whereas Ontarians already pay for health care through their taxes and will be forced to pay even more through the government's new regressive health tax;

"Whereas the Liberals promised during the election that they would not cut or privatize health care services in Ontario;

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

"We demand the McGuinty Liberal government keep its promises and guarantee adequate provincial funding for critical health services like eye, physiotherapy and

chiropractic care."

I agree with the petitioners.

GO TRANSIT SERVICE

Mr Bob Delaney (Mississauga West): I have a petition to the Ontario Legislative Assembly from the Lisgar Residents' Association at their most

recent annual general meeting.

"Whereas the city of Mississauga has, within a generation, grown from a linked collection of suburban and farming communities into Canada's sixth-largest city,

and tens of thousands of people daily need to commute into and out of Mississauga in order to do business, educate themselves and their families and enjoy culture and recreation; and

"Whereas gridlock on all roads leading into and out of Mississauga makes peak period road commuting impractical, and commuter rail service on the Milton GO

line is restricted to morning and afternoon service into and out of Toronto; and

"Whereas residents of western Mississauga need to commute to commute, driving along traffic-clogged roads to get to overflowing parking lots at the Meadowvale,

Streetsville and Erindale GO train stations;

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

"That the government of Ontario, through the Ministry of Transportation and highways, instruct GO Transit to allocate sufficient resources from its 2004-05

capital budget to proceed immediately with the acquisition of land and construction of a new GO train station called Lisgar at Tenth Line and the rail tracks to alleviate the parking congestion and

provide better access to GO train service on the Milton line for residents of western Mississauga."

As one of those Lisgar residents, I'm pleased to affix my name.

CHIROPRACTIC SERVICES

Mrs Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener-Waterloo): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the elimination of OHIP coverage will mean that many of the 1.2 million patients who use chiropractic will no longer be able to access the health care

they need; and

"Whereas those with reduced ability to pay, including seniors, low-income families and the working poor, will be forced to seek care in already overburdened

family physician offices and emergency departments; and

"Whereas the elimination of OHIP coverage is expected to save $93 million in expenditures in chiropractic treatment and cost the government over $200 million

in other health care costs; and

"Whereas there was no consultation with the public on the decision to delist chiropractic services;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to reverse the decision announced in the May 18, 2004, provincial budget and maintain OHIP

coverage for chiropractic services, in the best interests of the public, patients, the health care system, government and the province."

I have several hundred petitions, and I'm pleased to sign my name.

LANDFILL

Mr Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): [Inaudible] site 41 is still a battle.

"Whereas the county of Simcoe proposes to construct a landfill at site 41 in the township of Tiny; and

"Whereas the county of Simcoe has received, over a period of time, the necessary approvals from the Ministry of the Environment to design and construct a

landfill at site 41; and

"Whereas, as part of the landfill planning process, peer reviews of site 41 identified over 200 recommendations for improvements to the design, most of which

are related to potential groundwater contamination; and

"Whereas the Minister of the Environment has on numerous occasions stated her passion for clean and safe water and the need for water source protection;

and

"Whereas the Minister of the Environment has indicated her intention to introduce legislation on water source protection, which is a final and key

recommendation to be implemented under Justice Dennis O'Connor's report on the Walkerton inquiry; and

"Whereas the Minister of the Environment has announced expert panels that will make recommendations to the minister on water source protection legislation;

and

"Whereas the Ministry of the Environment will now be responsible for policing nutrient management; and

"Whereas the citizens of Ontario will be expecting a standing committee of the Legislature to hold province-wide public hearings on water source protection

legislation;

"We, the undersigned, call upon the government of Ontario and the Ministry of the Environment to immediately place a moratorium on the development of site 41

until the water source protection legislation is implemented in Ontario. We believe the legislation will definitely affect the design of site 41 and the nearby water sources."

I'm pleased to sign my name to this.

OPTOMETRISTS

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I have a petition that has been sent to me by the Ontario optometrists' association. It reads as follows:

"Whereas the last funding agreement between the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care and the Ontario Association of Optometrists ... expired March 31, 2000;

and

"Whereas the optometric fees for OHIP-insured services remain unchanged since 1989; and

"Whereas the lack of any fee increase for 15 years has created a crisis situation for optometrists; and

"Whereas fees for OHIP services do not provide for fair or reasonable compensation for the professional services of optometrists, in that they no longer cover

the costs of providing eye examinations; and

"Whereas it is in the best interests of patients and the government to have a new funding agreement for insured services that will ensure that the most

vulnerable members of society are able to receive the eye care they need;

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

"That the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care resume negotiations immediately with the OAO and appoint a mediator to help with the negotiation process in

order to ensure that optometrists can continue to provide quality eye care services to patients in Ontario."

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

GOVERNMENT DEFICITS

Mr Lorenzo Berardinetti (Scarborough Southwest): I have a petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario and it reads as

follows:

"Whereas the Dalton McGuinty government inherited a fiscal mess in the province of Ontario;

"Whereas the government undertook