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

November 7, 2001

37th Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2001-Nov-07 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Wednesday 7 November 2001 Mercredi 7 novembre 2001

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

TAX CUTS

REMEMBRANCE DAY

HEALTH CARE

INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM FUNDING

ONTARIO NORTHLAND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION

ADOPTION DISCLOSURE

CENTRAL NORTH CORRECTIONAL CENTRE

HOLOCAUST EDUCATION WEEK

TAKE OUR KIDS TO WORK DAY

VISITORS

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE AND SOCIAL POLICY

STANDING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

HIGHWAY MEMORIALS FOR FALLEN

POLICE OFFICERS ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LES CONSTRUCTIONS

SITUÉES SUR LA VOIE PUBLIQUE

ET NOMMÉES À LA MÉMOIRE

DES AGENTS DE POLICE DÉCÉDÉS

ONTARIO SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION

OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

AMENDMENT ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LA SOCIÉTÉ DE PROTECTION

DES ANIMAUX DE L'ONTARIO

COMMUNITY CARE ACCESS

CORPORATIONS ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LES SOCIÉTÉS

D'ACCÈS AUX SOINS COMMUNAUTAIRES

VISITORS

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

COMMUNITY CARE ACCESS CENTRES

TAKE OUR KIDS TO WORK DAY

COMMUNITY CARE ACCESS CENTRES

VISITORS

ORAL QUESTIONS

TAX CUTS

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

PAYMENTS FOR LOW-INCOME CHILDREN

TAX CUTS

HOSPITAL FUNDING

WATER QUALITY

LONG-TERM CARE

ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES LEGISLATION

ACADEMIC TESTING

NURSES

SEPTIC WASTE DISPOSAL

ROYAL WINTER FAIR

PETITIONS

CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

ADOPTION DISCLOSURE

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

PROTECTION OF MINORS

HIGHWAY 407

COMMUNITY CARE ACCESS CENTRES /

CENTRES D'ACCÈS AUX SOINS COMMUNAUTAIRES

AUDIOLOGY SERVICES

CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

COMMUNITY CARE ACCESS CENTRES

LONDON HEALTH SCIENCES CENTRE

ADOPTION DISCLOSURE

EDUCATION FUNDING

ORDERS OF THE DAY

MUNICIPAL ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LES MUNICIPALITÉS

REMEDIES FOR ORGANIZED CRIME

AND OTHER UNLAWFUL

ACTIVITIES ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LES RECOURS

POUR CRIME ORGANISÉ

ET AUTRES ACTIVITÉS ILLÉGALES

Wednesday 7 November 2001 Mercredi 7 novembre 2001

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

TAX CUTS

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): What has become so very evident with yesterday's financial statement from the Treasurer is that the

Conservative government in Ontario is willing to sacrifice quality health care, education and environmental protection on the altar of unnecessary tax cuts for the rich and the powerful.

After riding high on a provincial economy assisted by low interest rates, a low-cost Canadian dollar and a booming US economy, the Harris Conservatives are now

confronted with the foolishness of their ideologically driven economic policies, their one-trick pony called tax cuts.

Having slashed essential programs that benefit the Ontario public and having added $21 billion to the provincial debt by borrowing money to pay for previous tax

cuts, the PCs in Ontario are reduced to whining for more federal money or hacking away further at health care and other important services.

Mike Harris and Jim Flaherty do not want more federal money for health care; they want the cash to pay for their tax gifts to the corporations and the rich. If

the PCs want to avoid further health care and other cuts, they need only abandon their foolish $2.2-billion corporate, $975-million income and $300-million private school tax gifts and they will

have plenty to invest in public services.

As a wise columnist said, "All this talk of tax cuts paying for themselves and Ottawa shortchanging Ontario is just a smokescreen."

REMEMBRANCE DAY

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): I would like to share with the House some thoughts on Remembrance Day in my riding of Durham.

Over 1.5 million Canadians served in the Second World War and the Korean conflict. We all know 110,000 gave their lives. On November 11, we honour these men and

women for preserving our freedom.

However, Remembrance Day is more personal to me because I think of the many ways my riding remembers those who perished and shows its gratitude to all who

served.

Starting in the east part of the riding, there is the village of Newtonville, site of a rare Boer War monument built in 1902. This Friday, local students from

Newtonville Public School will participate in a service there.

On Sunday, Sterling Mather and Doug Walton will once again be among those responsible for the community service in Newcastle.

Then in Bowmanville, Branch 178 Legion president Jim Connell, John Greenfield, Rae Abernethy, Norm Baker, Cecile Bowers, Walter Park, Doreen Park, Art Sheehan,

Nyhl Sheehan, Bill Calver, Steve Oke, Jack Mantle, Art Brooks, Ross Wright, Gary Cole, and poppy chair Lyne Puddister will be among the participants.

Moving to the north area of my riding, there will be a service in Blackstock on Sunday, and no doubt local veterans Carl Adams, Harold Martin and Stan Rahm will

be there to celebrate and remember.

In Port Perry, Legion Branch 419 president Rory Thompson, vice-president Stan Clarke, poppy chair Barb Doupe, co-chair Ron Hartrick, and past president Fred

McMann will be among those responsible for the Remembrance Day service.

In Orono, the service at the cenotaph took place last Sunday, November 4. Those I have mentioned are assisted by many others literally too numerous to

mention.

It is on this basis that I, along with them, would like to thank those who served and those who continue to serve this country and protect our freedom.

HEALTH CARE

Mrs Sandra Pupatello (Windsor West): In honour of the Premier of Ontario's visit to Windsor -- the first official visit in six and a half years,

I may add -- we launched a postcard campaign to let the Premier know what the people in Windsor were thinking about our health care system. We specifically said to the Premier, "We need your

help."

Over 3,000 postcards is all I could muster to bring into the House today, but just as a sample of how the people responded, they said, "Please, hearing exams:

not paid." "I'm a heart patient and can't get service." "We have no family doctor." Ultimately, probably the best comment from the cards was, "We need new leadership now."

This is exemplary of what the people of Windsor feel about our health system. How galling it was to watch the Premier of Ontario strut through the streets of

Windsor as though he were going to do something wonderful for us, when the reality is that where services count, the people in Windsor go wanting.

We demand hospitals beds to serve our people. We demand emergency care to serve our people. We demand doctors to take care of our people. These are the things

that we don't just demand but we deserve. Hard-working taxpayers from Windsor contribute to the Ontario GDP, and we don't get the health services we need.

This is just a sampling, but the people from Windsor are speaking loudly and clearly. They are asking for community supports like children's mental health

services, the very basics that we need and we demand.

INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM FUNDING

Mr Ted Arnott (Waterloo-Wellington): Municipalities in my riding of Waterloo-Wellington have applied for infrastructure funding under the

Ontario small town and rural infrastructure program, or OSTAR. They have identified priority projects that need to be completed, and I want to inform this House of my unconditional support for each

and every one of their applications.

The township of Centre Wellington needs funding to upgrade waterworks to be in compliance with tough new drinking water standards that are being enforced by the

Ministry of the Environment. The town of Minto and townships of Wellington North and Guelph-Eramosa are also applying to upgrade their water supply systems to comply with the new regulations. The

township of Wellesley has applied for support to reconstruct a bridge over Kirkland Creek. And the township of Mapleton absolutely needs funding to redevelop water and sewer infrastructure for the

entire community of Moorefield.

I've been in regular contact with my municipalities on these projects and we've had opportunities to discuss some of them in meetings that we have arranged with

Ontario cabinet ministers. Their projects are of top importance, chosen by the elected councils for the citizens and communities they represent. They are the foundation projects, the ones upon

which much of our communities' future health, safety and prosperity will be based. That is why I am insistent that to each and every municipality in Waterloo-Wellington that has applied for an

OSTAR grant, we owe adequate support and timely approvals through the Ontario SuperBuild Corp.

ONTARIO NORTHLAND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION

Mr David Ramsay (Timiskaming-Cochrane): Yesterday, while the Ontario Northland Transportation Commission internal solutions committee was

presenting its plan for a restructured organization, the Mike Harris government introduced in the House legislation that enables the transportation agency to discontinue any of its activities and

services and would further allow the commission to sell off any of its assets.

This comes as a stinging slap in the face to the union-management committee that has worked long and hard to develop made-in-the-north solutions to ensure the

viability of our transportation and telecommunication services throughout all of northeastern Ontario.

It would appear that the government is back on track with plan A, which is to dismantle the ONTC and all its services. This is most unfortunate, as after much

protest, including a massive Survival Express march on Queen's Park last spring, the Minister of Northern Development and Mines indicated he would listen to some local proposals. A team of

management and unionized employees went to work to develop a proposal that would revitalize our services while helping the ONTC stay as a crown agency.

It would appear again that the Mike Harris government is not listening to the concerns of northerners. Again, the Mike Harris government's policies are hurting

the north rather than helping the north.

ADOPTION DISCLOSURE

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): November is Adoption Awareness Month, and by coincidence, right here in this Legislature, in this House,

I want to tell people that they have an opportunity to find out everything they need to know about adoption awareness, because right now we are holding committee hearings on Bill 77, my private

member's bill to amend adoption disclosure in this province.

I invite all members in this House, particularly those who have some concerns about adoption disclosure reform, to drop into committee room 1 this afternoon

after routine proceedings to hear from many groups, many individuals who themselves have been involved directly over the years in the adoption reform movement. They will dispel many of the myths

I've heard over and over again in this House from but a few members who still object to the bill.

I want to say that I find that the majority of members in this House, from all sides -- all the NDP members, most of the Liberals and most of the Conservatives

-- support going ahead with adoption disclosure reform in this province.

We are far behind other jurisdictions. There are jurisdictions all over the world that have amended and brought in these new laws. They have worked perfectly

well. I urge all members to drop in this afternoon and support this very important bill.

CENTRAL NORTH CORRECTIONAL CENTRE

Mr Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): It's so nice to see so many young people in the House today.

We also have in the House, Hartzel Black, director of rehabilitation programs of Management and Training Corp of Canada, the company that has recently entered

into partnership with the Ontario government to operate the Central North Correctional Centre at Penetanguishene in my riding of Simcoe North.

Management and Training Corp operates 17 correctional facilities and 23 Job Corps centres in the United States, Australia and the Marshall Islands.

MTC has a long history in training and rehabilitation, which they have put to excellent use in their correctional facilities. They offer extensive personal

development programs in areas like substance abuse, life skills, anger management and crisis intervention, just to name a few.

Since last April, when MTC was named as the partner with our government, the company quickly acted to become part of the community of Penetanguishene. In October

they held an open house, where thousands of people throughout Simcoe North could come and tour the correctional facility to see how safe and secure the facility is.

In July and August, several job and vendor fairs were held so local people could meet with MTC officials to discuss job and business opportunities with the new

correctional facility.

To date, MTC has hired 149 people to work in the new facility, 74% of those local people coming from the communities surrounding the facility. It is estimated

that around 300 people in total will be hired to run the new facility. MTC has also committed to buy goods and services locally. I would like to thank MTC for keeping its strong commitment to

hiring local personnel and buying locally to improve the economy of the town of Penetanguishene. I'd like everyone to welcome Hartzel Black, of Management and Training Corp of Canada.

HOLOCAUST EDUCATION WEEK

Mr Michael Bryant (St Paul's): Kazetnik writes that for all those who walked upon the ramp of Auschwitz, the Holocaust is not over. That is why

we are so fortunate to have so many Holocaust survivors and their families involved in Toronto's Holocaust Education Week, taking place between October 27 and November 10. It's in fact a model

Holocaust Education Week, which is adopted and referred to by a number of cities and regions across the world.

We have more than 106 events taking place across the city. I was pleased to participate in an event at Amsterdam Park, in St Paul's, with the students of Brown

Public School and Deer Park community school, who are ordinarily there as well, in memory of Anne Frank. The children retell the story and plant tulip bulbs, which of course will come up in the

spring for them to see.

I encourage members of this House who are currently in Toronto these days to participate in the many Holocaust Education Week events. I congratulate the

organizers and volunteers who make this event such an extraordinary one. It is just one more way in which we say that we will never forget. We will never forget.

TAKE OUR KIDS TO WORK DAY

Mr Bob Wood (London West): I rise today to recognize National Take Our Kids to Work Day. Today thousands of grade 9 students in Ontario and

across Canada will spend a day at work with a parent, relative, adult friend or volunteer host.

Take Our Kids to Work is a national program with participation and support from all provinces and territories. This program has three main objectives: to offer

students a view of the work world and to give them an understanding of its demands and opportunities; to allow students to see their parents or volunteer hosts in different roles and

responsibilities and to understand what they do to support a family; to emphasize that education goes beyond the classroom and that the preparation of younger generations for the future is a

community responsibility.

Grade 9 students were selected for a number of reasons. Provincial curriculum guidelines include career education at this level, and it's an opportune time for

students to see the practical side of what they have learned in school. Grade 9 students also make course selections for the following year that could have an impact on their futures.

I am joined at work today by two students from South Secondary School in the great riding of London West. I know South to be a good school because my father

graduated from it in 1927 and I did so in 1965. I ask two possible future MPPs, Mira Pavan and Virginia Kane, along with Mira's mother, Anita, to stand in the gallery and be recognized. I ask all

members to join with me in congratulating all the young people across Canada who are joining their mentors at work today.

VISITORS

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I would like members of the assembly to know that in the members' gallery

west is Mr Ron Hansen, who is the former MPP for what was then called Lincoln, from 1990 to 1995.

Mrs Marie Bountrogianni (Hamilton Mountain): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: In the spirit of taking your kids to work, my grade 9 son,

Alexander Tsanis, is here from St Mary's High School.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): That's not a point of order, just as if I announced my daughter Makenzie was in the west gallery, that wouldn't be

a point of order as well, and of course I didn't do that.

Mr Ernie Parsons (Prince Edward-Hastings): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: One of our kids has actually brought her parents to work today. We

have page Courtney immediately to your left. I'd like to welcome her parents, Mr and Mrs Kiss, from Prince Edward county, and her brother Jordan.

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of Labour): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: In the spirit of the day, I want to introduce my son who is here with

me working today, Kale Stockwell, and my nephew Evan Snow, up in the last row of the public gallery.

Mr David Tilson (Dufferin-Peel-Wellington-Grey): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: The member for Perth-Middlesex is unable to be here today. He

asked that the House welcome the parents, both sets of grandparents, a brother and two friends of page Andrew Hodes who comes from his riding.

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE AND SOCIAL POLICY

Mr Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): I beg leave to present a report from the standing committee on justice and social policy and move its

adoption.

Clerk at the Table (Ms Lisa Freedman): Your committee begs to report the following bill without amendment:

Bill 69,

An Act to protect victims by prohibiting profiting from recounting of crime / Projet de loi 69, Loi visant à protéger les victimes en

interdisant les gains tirés du récit d'actes criminels.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Shall the report be received and adopted?

Interjections: No.

The Speaker: I heard that loud and clear.

All those in favour will please say "aye."

All those opposed will please say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1350 to 1355.

The Speaker: All those in favour of the motion will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

Agostino, Dominic

Arnott, Ted

Baird, John R.

Barrett, Toby

Bartolucci, Rick

Beaubien, Marcel

Bountrogianni, Marie

Boyer, Claudette

Bradley, James J.

Brown, Michael A.

Bryant, Michael

Caplan, David

Chudleigh, Ted

Clark, Brad

Clement, Tony

Coburn, Brian

Colle, Mike

Cordiano, Joseph

Crozier, Bruce

Cunningham, Dianne

DeFaria, Carl

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duncan, Dwight

Dunlop, Garfield

Ecker, Janet

Elliott, Brenda

Flaherty, Jim

Galt, Doug

Gilchrist, Steve

Gill, Raminder

Gravelle, Michael

Guzzo, Garry J.

Hardeman, Ernie

Hastings, John

Hodgson, Chris

Hudak, Tim

Jackson, Cameron

Johns, Helen

Kells, Morley

Kennedy, Gerard

Klees, Frank

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Levac, David

Marland, Margaret

Martiniuk, Gerry

Maves, Bart

Mazzilli, Frank

McLeod, Lyn

McMeekin, Ted

Miller, Norm

Molinari, Tina R.

Munro, Julia

Mushinski, Marilyn

Newman, Dan

O'Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Parsons, Ernie

Patten, Richard

Peters, Steve

Phillips, Gerry

Pupatello, Sandra

Ramsay, David

Runciman, Robert W.

Ruprecht, Tony

Sampson, Rob

Smitherman, George

Snobelen, John

Sorbara, Greg

Spina, Joseph

Sterling, Norman W.

Stewart, R. Gary

Stockwell, Chris

Tilson, David

Tsubouchi, David H.

Wettlaufer, Wayne

Wilson, Jim

Witmer, Elizabeth

Wood, Bob

Young, David

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

Nays

Churley, Marilyn

Hampton, Howard

Kormos, Peter

Marchese, Rosario

Martin, Tony

Prue, Michael

Clerk of the House (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 80; the nays are 6.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

The bill is therefore ordered for third reading.

STANDING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): I beg to inform the House that today the Clerk received the 15th report of the standing committee on government

agencies.

Pursuant to standing order 106(e), the report is deemed to be adopted by the House.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

HIGHWAY MEMORIALS FOR FALLEN

POLICE OFFICERS ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LES CONSTRUCTIONS

SITUÉES SUR LA VOIE PUBLIQUE

ET NOMMÉES À LA MÉMOIRE

DES AGENTS DE POLICE DÉCÉDÉS

Mr Bartolucci moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 128,

An Act to permit the naming of highway bridges and other structures on the King's Highway in memory of police officers who have died in the line of

duty / Projet de loi 128, Loi permettant de nommer des ponts et d'autres constructions situées sur la route principale à la mémoire des agents de police décédés dans

l'exercice de leurs fonctions.

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

The member for a short statement?

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): I'm going to read the

preamble to the bill, which is very short but I think summarizes what every member in this

House believes.

"We, the people of Ontario, are forever grateful to the dedicated police officers who have courageously and unselfishly given their lives in the line of duty.

Our debt to them can never be repaid.

"We are also forever grateful to Ontario's police officers who have demonstrated extraordinary courage by giving their lives to preserve our free and peaceful

society.

"We must never forget the contribution of those men and women to whom we owe so much. As a gesture of our respect, we seek to honour them by permitting the

Legislature to name highways, bridges and other structures in their memory."

Therefore, this bill permits the Legislature to name highways, bridges and other structures on the king's highway in memory of police officers who have died in

the line of duty.

ONTARIO SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION

OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

AMENDMENT ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LA SOCIÉTÉ DE PROTECTION

DES ANIMAUX DE L'ONTARIO

Mrs Munro moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 129,

An Act to amend the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act / Projet de loi 129, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la Société

de protection des animaux de l'Ontario.

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

The member for a short statement?

Mrs Julia Munro (York North): This bill makes it possible to define puppy mills in a way that gives the Ontario Society for the Prevention of

Cruelty to Animals the tools they need to eliminate puppy mills in Ontario.

COMMUNITY CARE ACCESS

CORPORATIONS ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LES SOCIÉTÉS

D'ACCÈS AUX SOINS COMMUNAUTAIRES

Mrs Johns moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 130,

An Act respecting community care access corporations / Projet de loi 130, Loi concernant les sociétés d'accès aux soins

communautaires.

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

The minister for a short statement?

Hon Helen Johns (Minister without Portfolio [Health and Long-Term Care]): Speaker, I will defer until ministers' statements.

VISITORS

Hon David Young (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: We have four very special guests

with us today in the members' gallery. I thought I would take just a moment to introduce them.

We have Julian Hwang, Nicholas D'Amico, Michael Fine and my son Cory Young who have joined us.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

COMMUNITY CARE ACCESS CENTRES

Hon Helen Johns (Minister without Portfolio [Health and Long-Term Care]): I rise in the House today to introduce the Community Care Access

Corporations Act, 2001. This bill is part of a comprehensive strategy to strengthen accountability in the community-based long-term-care sector, a sector that manages a budget of more than $1

billion. This act would result in improving community-based services for Ontarians who need them.

First, though, let me briefly explain how we got to this point. CCACs can be proud of what they have accomplished in just the three years since their

inception. They have made remarkable strides to provide one-stop shopping for long-term care for the people of Ontario.

However, there is an undeniable need for improvements in the operations of the province's 43 CCACs. In fact, the CCACs asked our government for standards,

direction and improvements regarding their operations. Consequently, we initiated one province-wide program review of CCACs and an operational review of the Hamilton-Wentworth CCAC.

The province-wide review, which was conducted by PricewaterhouseCoopers and released this past summer, found a number of areas where CCACs needed strengthening

to meet their mandate of serving Ontarians efficiently and effectively. These areas included financial accountability, fiscal practices and quality management strategies.

Similarly, the Hamilton-Wentworth operational review revealed deficiencies in many areas. It was evident that there was a minimal understanding of the factors

contributing to the deficit. The board had a critical shortage of staff members with business skills or experience, there was poor understanding of how to correct the situation of growing

expenditures, and there was no effective monitoring or management of service utilizations and caseloads.

This led to the appointment of a ministerial designate to manage the operations of the CCAC and to ensure the review's recommendations were implemented.

As everyone here knows, I was recently asked by the Premier to develop a strategy for the future of CCACs. During that process, we met with more than 35

organizations and talked to nearly a dozen stakeholder associations, toured CCACs and held multiple briefings on key issues of concern. The end result of this is an overall business strategy

detailing operational and system changes, in addition to the proposed legislation that I am introducing in the House today.

I want to emphasize the collective resolve that has characterized our work. The political will was matched by the bureaucratic determination, by the commitment

of many concerned individuals in the 43 CCACs and by the anticipation of the service providers in the field. That collective forward movement has been most gratifying to experience and I'm proud of

the legislation that we're proposing today.

Let me take a moment, Mr Speaker, to refresh your memory about Ontario's network of 43 CCACs. The community care access centres offer simplified access for

Ontarians in need of community-based services, home care, housekeeping, long-term care facilities and a hospital discharge program under a single umbrella. Every month, thousands of Ontarians

receive home care services through their local CCAC. These range from nursing care and therapy services to homemaking, to housekeeping and personal support services.

Each of the 43 community care access centres is responsible for a multi-million-dollar budget, and collectively they ensure the provision of services to over

400,000 Ontarians and their families every year. The Ontario government provides $1.17 billion in funding to CCACs, an increase of more than 70% in home care services funding since 1995.

Some of the key areas of the Community Care Access Corporations Act, 2001, are: the authority to designate by regulation each individual community care access

centre as a statutory corporation; following designation of the CCAC, the authority to appoint board members by order in council; following designation of a CCAC, the authority to appoint its

executive director by OIC appointments; and the authority to determine the number of CCAC board members, most likely between five and seven.

Let me expand on these provisions. Following the designation, CCACs under the Community Care Access Corporations Act, 2001, would become statutory corporations

that must comply with all ministry policies, directives and guidelines. Executive directors and their members of the board of directors of the CCAC would be appointed by order in council. To

support the CCACs as they move into the next stage of development, the OIC-appointed board members and the OIC-appointed executive directors will be provided with orientation on their governance

responsibilities. We expect many of the current CCAC CEOs and board members to stay on in their new positions and, of course, the staff of the CCAC will be totally unaffected by the changes

required by this legislation.

There has been considerable discussion about the challenges to improve linkages among health care providers that serve the community care sector in the

province. As part of the government's commitment to enhance services to the public and promote integration in the health care system, each CCAC board will be required to establish a community

advisory council to provide a forum for identifying issues of concern among the partners that CCACs link with, specifically hospitals, long-term-care facilities and other community support

services.

The advisory council will meet regularly to address issues of how best to serve people in the community with the resources available from all sectors of the

health system. This will enable hospitals and the CCACs to work together to smooth transfers for patients, ensuring that plans are developed to support the care needs of Ontarians. As well, it will

mean that the system issues arising from problems that people face entering long-term-care facilities will also be better resolved.

It will also ensure that community support services and CCACs work together to provide the most appropriate services for their communities and that case

managers understand the community services that are available.

As part of our strategy to enhance CCAC services to clients, in addition to this bill we will promote a series of measures that will provide a framework to

improve the business practices of community care access centres. These will provide consistent approaches to the work that case managers do across the province.

As an example of these tools, a province-wide system requiring CCAC case managers to manage budgets for their caseloads will be implemented. The case manager's

role will be clarified through province-wide training and a common assessment tool. This will be developed to equip the case manager with a systemized and evidence-based method of identifying the

needs of all clients.

The CEO of one of our CCACs says that the budgeting tool she has already implemented in her CCAC "ensures services are provided in an equitable, responsive,

and accountable manner. It supports the case manager's professional judgement in making the best use of available resources to meet individual client need."

Furthermore, we will work with the Ontario Association of Community Care Access Centres to identify best practices that can be explored for implementation into

the management and case management systems.

New accountability responsibilities that would be required of CCACs include: creating a strategic plan to meet the government's vision and objectives;

establishing accountability relationships throughout the organization; developing evidence-based performance indicators that would allow them to evaluate their own performances; regular and

consistent monitoring and reporting to ministry offices on CCAC activities, including budget and service outcomes; strengthening our service agreements to ensure consistent expectations and clear

requirements in the operation of all CCACs.

There will be no changes to the current request for proposals process for services, but we would improve training to strengthen CCAC business expertise in

contract management, with an aim of facilitating consistency across the province.

We propose to change placement coordination processes to streamline the procedures and ensure that appropriate clients are placed on long-term-care facility

waiting lists.

We intend to move forward with a province-wide information system so that we can compare CCACs throughout the province. With this system there will be common

and comparable data that will ensure services are being provided to every community in Ontario. This will allow us to ensure that precious health care dollars are focused on client needs. We will

also be developing best practices and benchmarks based on performance measures.

Our government wants to ensure a strong community care system where the right people are able to access the right services at the right time.

The last three years have clearly shown that changes have to be made to CCACs if they are to achieve their potential as a key part of Ontario's health care

system.

I urge to everyone in the House that this bill, the Community Care Access Corporation Act, 2001, receive swift passage. Nothing is more crucial to the citizens

of the province than the assurance of quality health services delivered by health providers who are accountable to Ontario's taxpayers for how their health dollars are spent.

The steps we are taking today will improve the accountability, consistency and coordination of community care access centres across the province. The measures

I have just outlined are essential to the operation of community care access centres, as well as ensuring that CCACs meet their mandate effectively and efficiently with the patients' needs at their

heart.

TAKE OUR KIDS TO WORK DAY

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of Labour): Today, parents across Ontario are taking their children to work with them as part of the Learning

Partnership's Take Our Kids to Work Day. This day is an important opportunity for all our sons and daughters to learn what we do every day. It gives first-hand experience of the workplace they will

soon be entering.

Regrettably, today also marks the first Take Our Kids to Work Day since last year's tragic deaths of two children at a worksite in Welland. I know all our

members join me in offering condolences to the families and fellow students who must live with this very terrible loss.

This past year, the Learning Partnership has worked together with the Ministry of Labour and our other partners in Ontario's health and safety system to make

sure that children taking part today are safe. I want to congratulate the Learning Partnership on the steps they have taken to make today safe and rewarding. An expert panel, established following

the tragedy in Welland, examined all aspects of this program. The 14 recommendations of the panel have been fully implemented by the Learning Partnership. These recommendations include mandatory

supervision of all students at all times; sessions on health and safety rules for students; a ban on driving motorized vehicles; and special supports, including a guide for teachers and employers

involved in this program.

I am pleased to say that the 14 recommendations of the expert panel, which have already been implemented, go above and beyond those of the inquest jury that

examined this tragedy. The Ministry of Labour has responded to the inquest jury's recommendations as well.

The ministry continues to wholeheartedly support Take Our Kids to Work Day. Right now, a group of grade 9 students is touring ministry offices learning how

government works, and they are also visiting the Legislature this afternoon. Our guests have already been given a full safety orientation. Our managers have also been given the Learning

Partnership's new workplace guide and have been fully prepared to ensure the safety of our students and staff. We are committed to making Take Our Kids to Work Day a safe learning event in our

offices and in all our workplaces across the province.

I urge all Ontario workplaces to support the Take Our Kids to Work program and to use it as an opportunity to show leadership in demonstrating safe work

practices and proudly showcasing the goods and services they contribute to Ontario's economy.

COMMUNITY CARE ACCESS CENTRES

Mrs Sandra Pupatello (Windsor West): This side of the House cannot believe this minister would stand up and drop this piece of legislation --

do this to home care and community care access centres across this province. They were demanding that this government help them. You knew, Minister, and everyone on this side of the House knew,

that people were doing without services. What you decided to do today to try to remedy that -- remedy what you created, which was as clear as mud in terms of governance -- was to take it over. This

is the Ontario government's notion of gagging anyone who says the services aren't enough, that they are not adequate for people.

This is the new theme of the Ontario government. "Shut your trap" is what you tried to tell members of the opposition and members of the public today who dare

to speak up for patients, who dare to stand up and say, "We need good health services."

"Shut your trap" is what we're being told today. That is just the way --

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Order. It's hard to keep order when you use language like that. It could be said in the same way in a different

tone. I would ask the member to try and take that into consideration. It's very difficult to control when you use language like that. They just begin yelling and it's very difficult. Sorry for the

interruption.

Mrs Pupatello: This is vindictiveness on the part of this government. This government knew that CCAC boards were finally speaking up. They

were saying, "We need help." They said, "We need standards." They say, "We had inadequate funding to do what you were telling us to do." This government's response was to gag them with this bill;

to suggest that those boards no longer exist and you will now appoint the people that you want who are going to do your bidding.

Here's that Pricewaterhouse report that you dared to reference in your speech today, Minister. Do you know what this report said? It called for standards in

home care. It said we have to decide what is right for people to get in home care when they reach their home. Some 70% of patients are sent from hospitals today, Minister. These people are not

getting adequate care. This government's response was musing about the potential of user fees. Now we can't get one minister to say yes or no as to whether you're going to introduce user fees in

the home care sector. But today you solved all your problems, or so you think. You figure you'll just fire the lot of them that chose to act as advocates for patients. You sent them out the door,

Minister, and you are now going to appoint the people that you want.

This Minister of Health knew a long-term-care act has been sitting on his desk for three years. Where is that act? That act is nowhere to be seen.

Where are all of the standards that we asked for in 1997 when you brought these community care access centres in? We said you have to set the standards. You

let the horse out of the barn without the fundamentals that these people needed to deliver good care.

What are we going to do today for Kitchener-Waterloo, which is suffering from $12 million of deficit because they can't service their clientele? What are we

going to do for Halton: $6 million, not servicing their community? What do we do for York region: $12 million? We have their own local MPPs saying it's all their fault.

Are you going to solve these problems now by shoving them out the door and have your government lackeys come in and do your dirty work? That's the answer that

you have for the elderly, the infirm, the people that need help? You're sending their advocacy out the door and you're bringing in your government appointments.

Minister, that is wrong. It is wrong to gag the public. It is wrong to gag the very people who came in to work for the community, give them the health care

they needed, even though you were tying their hands in the area of funding. How dare you reference a report that said you're lacking funds. That's what the report said and you ignored that. This is

the report that said we need standards and you ignored that. This is the report that you called for, Minister, not this diatribe that you just read. It's nothing but garbage.

We said to you that you need to fund properly for the services that are required today. The people of this province demanded it. It was this government that

changed the mandate of what a community care access centre would be. You decided that 70% of these people are coming out of hospital, Minister, and now you're doing absolutely nothing for them.

Not only that. Finally, after three years, people are starting to learn the only way they could get somewhere was to actually act as advocates for their

patients, and now you throw them out the door. Gag them, muzzle them; that is the feature of this government, and now you're doing it again.

Speaker, we know what we suffer in this House to be told, "Shut your trap," by members opposite. That's just the way it is in this House. That is not going to

go anywhere, Minister. I will commit today that people will speak out louder than ever. People will speak out louder than ever.

The Speaker: Further responses?

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): I think people across Ontario should watch this legislation that is being introduced today with great

care, because what this is all about is in effect a centralization and a takeover of what have been called community care access centres. This is a government that doesn't want community care

access centres giving out information as to what kinds of patients are now being cut off or being restricted or limited in terms of their access to community care. This is a government that doesn't

want the public out there to know what kinds of companies are getting literally tens of millions of dollars of government contracts with absolutely no accountability. The government doesn't want

people to know, for example, that companies like Comcare and Dynacare and Olsten don't have some of the best track records, either in Ontario or elsewhere in North America, in terms of delivering

care.

So to keep all of that out of the media and to keep it out of the public discourse, the government is essentially taking over the community care access

centres. And if you read some of the details of the legislation, it is making sure that less information than ever before about how $1.4 billion of public money in health care is spent is ever out

there for the public to see.

Just look at

section 18 of the bill.

Section 18 of the bill basically says that the minister can make available the annual report from the CCAC but then can

decide to make no other information available. That is a complete takeover and a complete attempt to shut the public of Ontario out of basic information about how ill, frail seniors are being

treated, about how chronically ill patients are being treated, about the quality of treatment they're receiving, or the lack of treatment they are receiving, which is more and more becoming the

case.

To give you another example of how complete this takeover is,

section 15: a community care access centre can no longer convey property, can no longer purchase

an interest in property, cannot even appoint a person to a management position without the permission of the Lieutenant Governor in Council; in other words, without the permission of the

government. This is an attempt now to run community care access centres, to run home care, from Toronto, from the minister's office.

There are a lot of problems out there. Some of the biggest problems are with the private companies, the private, for-profit companies that are mandated by this

government to in fact provide community care access, to provide the home care. Is there anything in this legislation which is going to make those private, for-profit companies more answerable, more

accountable? Nothing. Nothing.

This government is prepared to cover up for some of those private, for-profit companies which have horrendous records in the United States and horrendous

records where they've been in business elsewhere in Canada. The government's not going to do anything about that; in fact, they are going to cover up for them. And as far as those people who are

working in communities, who are trying to respond to the community, who are trying to work out there with seniors' groups and with organizations representing seniors, they are the very ones who are

being taken over.

This doesn't respond to any of the needs out there with respect to home care. This doesn't provide the funding that is available. This doesn't provide any of

the expertise that some of the community care access centres are asking for. This doesn't provide any freedom from the cutthroat contracts, the cutthroat bidding that this government has

encouraged. It doesn't do anything about that. In fact, it's going to encourage it even more. It's going to set up almost a direct relationship between this government and those private, for-profit

corporations, and it's going to shut the community activists, the community volunteers, out of the process almost entirely.

People across Ontario need to understand that there won't be community care any more; it will be ordered out of the minister's office and it will be provided

by the private, for-profit corporate friends of this government, and everyone else is shut out.

VISITORS

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Just before we begin, we have with us today in the Speaker's gallery the federal interns. Please join me in

welcoming our special guests from Ottawa.

ORAL QUESTIONS

TAX CUTS

Mr Gerry Phillips (Scarborough-Agincourt): My question is to the Minister of Finance. Six months ago in the budget, you predicted a balanced

budget for next year and 3.5% real growth. Yesterday you painted a substantially bleaker picture, where economic growth will be but 1.3%. According to your own numbers, that means the revenue drop

will be about $1.5 billion, leaving a $1.5-billion problem to balance the budget and, I assume, cuts of $1.5 billion. You also announced yesterday your plan to proceed with corporate taxes 25%

lower than our competitors in the US, at a cost of $2.2 billion.

My question is: knowing in the picture you painted yesterday how tough it's going to be to sustain our education and health, will you agree today to cancel

your plan to cut corporate taxes 25% below the US and simply leave them at the current rates, which are competitive with the US?

Hon Jim Flaherty (Deputy Premier, Minister of Finance): We will lower taxes to promote economic growth and to leave more money where it

belongs, in the pockets of Canadians.

"Canadians are entitled to keep more of the money they earn. After all, they worked for it; it's theirs." Those are not my words. Those are the words of the

federal Minister of Finance in question period in Ottawa. The Liberals at Queen's Park are the only political group I know of in Canada who still don't understand that you can increase government

revenues and have substantial medium- and long-term growth by reducing taxes: personal income taxes, corporate income taxes and capital tax.

Not only are we going to continue with our tax cuts, we are accelerating the tax cuts from January 1 to the beginning of October. It's the best fiscal policy

for the province of Ontario. In fact, the Harris government has proved that over the course of the past six years. Our revenues over the past six years have grown by some $15 billion since we began

the program of tax reductions.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): The minister's time is up.

Mr Phillips: I want to continue on your tax cuts, Minister. In 53 days, on January 1, your $300-million tax cut to fund private schools will

begin. You signalled yesterday that we face huge challenges in maintaining our support for public education, but in 53 days you will begin to implement a plan to provide at least $300 million in

funds for private schools.

I say to you again, Minister, recognizing the very dramatic changing conditions in the last six months, will you today agree to cancel your plan to provide at

least $300 million of support for private schools and keep that in the treasury so we can make certain we have the maximum amount of funds to sustain our health care system and our education

system?

Hon Mr Flaherty: We are committed to choice. We are committed to working-class and middle-class parents who, for religious and cultural

reasons, choose to send their children to alternative schools, to private schools in Ontario.

The member opposite forgets to mention that people who send their children to alternative schools in Ontario pay their full taxes. They fully support the

school taxes, they also pay sums of money to send their children to alternative schools. We believe they should have that choice and some support from the people of Ontario in that regard.

Now that Ontario has made this decision, more than 90% of the families in Canada -- every family west of Quebec -- have that option in our country.

Mr Phillips: What I understand is what you said yesterday; that is, we are facing an extremely tough situation. You promised a balanced budget

six months ago. Your own numbers say we're going to be $1.5 billion short. We have a serious problem. Ontarians understand that. Yet you're proceeding with corporate taxes 25% lower than the US,

and you're proceeding with a plan to put $300 million into private schools when you have already told us we're going to have severe problems with health and education next year.

I say to you again, Minister, what is the rationale for corporate taxes 25% lower than the US and $300 million put into private schools when you've indicated

we have severe problems with our health and education systems? Give Ontario the rationale for that.

Hon Mr Flaherty: Corporate tax reductions create jobs. They encourage corporations to invest in plant and equipment and to hire more people.

Indeed, that has been the history of Ontario in the past six years.

It sure wasn't the history of Ontario under your government from 1985 to 1990. High taxes, high spending, increasing the retail sales tax from 7% to 8%,

bringing in a new tax on tires, increasing personal income taxes, increasing corporate taxes: that's what your government did. That's what you Liberals at Queen's Park believe in. Look at what you

left during the last economic slowdown. You left a vulnerable government in 1990-91.

Fortunately, Ontario now has a solid foundation, thanks to six years under the leadership of Premier Harris, including tax reductions. Thank goodness we're not

in the condition you left Ontario in in 1990-91.

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

Mrs Sandra Pupatello (Windsor West): My question is for the Minister of Finance and Deputy Premier. The whole purpose of yesterday's economic

statement was supposedly to shed some light on the province's finances. One day later, the Minister of Health could not tell Ontario hospitals how much money they are receiving. He said, "Cabinet's

deferred that decision. Please stand by."

Ontario's sick cannot wait until you guys get your stuff together. While you delay your programs, they are being cancelled. Hospitals are delaying surgery. Our

emergency wards are still full. Nurses are being fired. Patients are being turned away. It's happening right across the province, not just in Ottawa and London.

Minister, how is it possible that one day after your economic statement you don't know how much money there is for Ontario's hospitals?

Hon Jim Flaherty (Deputy Premier, Minister of Finance): I think the member opposite is speaking about next year's budget. Certainly for this

year we have budgeted an increase of 6.9% in health care spending. That's the fact in Ontario: almost 7% higher spending on hospitals this year and, in addition, $300 million this summer. In fact,

no government in the history of Canada has spent as much on health care as this government. Spending on health care in Ontario has increased from $17 billion to more than $23 billion this year.

That's an increase of $6 billion in the course of the past six years.

Our concern, of course, is that our federal partners are not keeping pace on health care spending. That's a great concern not only for the people of Ontario

but for people in all the provinces across Canada.

I can tell you the finance ministers across Canada spoke with one voice to the federal finance minister 10 days ago when we met in Ottawa: they must be full

partners in health care.

Mrs Pupatello: Minister of Finance, shame on you. Every time Ottawa gives you a dollar for health, you give it away in a tax cut. That's what

you do with federal money that belongs in the health system. Shame on you.

I think you need to go over and talk to the Minister of Health, because if you decided you were giving hospitals a whole whack of dough for all their deficits,

you'd think he would have announced it this morning while he was talking to all the hospitals. But he didn't. Instead, what he said was that your wait-and-see approach is the "least sensible one."

He said your approach, frankly, was leading to perverse consequences.

It's November. The year is almost over. Hospitals across the board are facing deficits and haven't heard a word of sustenance from the Minister of Health.

Cabinet has deferred the decision. I ask you again: how long does the world have to "Please stand by"?

Hon Mr Flaherty: In response, Mr MacKinnon, the head of the Ontario Hospital Association, appeared before the Kirby committee in Ottawa, the

Senate committee that was examining health care. He indicated to that committee that insufficient funding by the federal government to the provinces is one of the major reasons there are such

service delivery problems in some provinces with respect to health care.

Certainly the head of the Ontario Hospital Association understands. What I don't understand is how the Liberal member opposite can defend the federal

government as it fails to provide adequate health care funding, as our partner, in the province of Ontario. I thought she cared about health care. I thought she cared about services for the people

of Ontario.

Certainly Mr Martin has come along and he understands the importance of tax cuts. The members opposite don't even understand the importance of tax cuts yet.

Worse than that, they don't appreciate the fact that we need to have an equal partner in Ottawa supporting health care if we're going to be able to deliver those services --

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): The minister's time is up.

Mrs Pupatello: Minister of Finance, shame on you. Every time Ottawa gives you a dollar in health care you give it away in a tax cut. That's

the reality of your history here. Every increase in the last budget of this government was federal dollars from Ottawa. So don't be zooming the public about money from Ottawa. Here's the reality:

we have hospital deficits across the board in Ontario and this Minister of Health could not tell them this morning how they were going to do this, how they were going to deal with it. We are toward

the end of November and they don't know how much money they're getting this year, never mind next year.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order.

Mrs Pupatello: Minister of Finance, I recognize you have a significant amount of chaos on that side, but hospitals, more so people --

The Speaker: Member take her seat. Minister of Transportation, I just called order and you're standing there right in front of me with your

gestures at the member.

Interjection.

The Speaker: You were so. I saw you two seconds ago. Don't do it, please. Sorry for the interruption.

Mrs Pupatello: Minister of Finance, here's the point. You have chaos on that side of the House. We need to understand whether Ontario

hospitals will be able to cover their deficits or not. The Minister of Health told them today, "Don't worry about it, run deficits." You were talking about accountability and that they couldn't do

that. You appeared yesterday to say they might have some. Why wouldn't the Minister of Health have told them that? There is utter confusion here. How will you deal with this? How long will you tell

them to please stand by?

Hon Mr Flaherty: There's a great deal of confusion in this House and it's on that side of the House, I can assure you. The confusion is that

unlike every government in this country, you don't yet understand that if you reduce taxes you'll increase investment. Paul Martin understands that. What Paul Martin and the federal government

don't yet have right are the priorities. The first priority of the Canadian people is health care and the delivery of health care services. If you actually care about health care services and their

delivery to the people of Ontario, then speak to your federal cousins and tell them that the number one priority is health care, that they can't sit there paying 14 cents on the dollar and say

Interjection.

The Speaker: Sorry for the interruption. Order. The member for Windsor West, you've asked the question. You can't ask the question and then

shout at the person for the entire minute when they're trying to answer the question. You get a question on today and then all you do is shout across. I'm not going to continue with it. This is

your last warning. If you continue to ask a question and then shout at the minister when he's trying to answer it, you're going to be thrown out and you won't get another question in here

today.

Hon Mr Flaherty: Certainly the hospital association through Mr MacKinnon understands the federal government is not fulfilling its partnership

obligation to the provinces. It's regrettable the members opposite are confused in their priorities as well. Their number one priority apparently is not health care; it's something else. I'm not

sure what their number one priority is, but we know what our number one priority is on this side of the House --

The Speaker: Order. The minister's time is up.

PAYMENTS FOR LOW-INCOME CHILDREN

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Minister of Finance as well. You announced yesterday that some low-income

families with children in the province will receive a $100 one-time cheque. When we looked at the fine print, the lowest-income children in the province, those children whose parents have to rely

on the Ontario disability support plan, who have had their benefits frozen for six years, will not receive a benefit. Children whose parents have lost their jobs since May, and there are 29,000 of

them, will not receive this benefit. Children whose parents are forced to rely on Ontario Works, social assistance -- again some of the poorest children in Ontario -- will not receive this

benefit.

How did you decide that 200,000 families in Ontario would receive this $100 benefit, but that literally hundreds of thousands of other families who are very

poor, who are much poorer, would receive nothing. What were the criteria?

Hon Jim Flaherty (Deputy Premier, Minister of Finance): So that there will be no confusion or misunderstanding, persons who are on social

assistance in fact right now receive a winter clothing allowance which is paid in the month of November, which is more than $100. It's actually $105 per eligible child for children aged between

birth and seven years of age. That benefit is there. That's a benefit that happens every November.

With respect to unemployed people, if they qualify under the Ontario child care supplement for working families, when they fill in the form then of course

they'll qualify for the $100 payment. The payment can be more, of course. It is more, depending on the number of children in the family.

Mr Hampton: That was a wonderful attempt at a diversion, but everybody out there knows it's simply not true. Somebody who is just laid off

will not be entitled to the child benefit for working families, and somebody who has to rely upon the Ontario disability support plan. Think of all those parents out there who are disabled with

children. They will not get this benefit.

I ask you again, Minister: how did you decide that the poorest children in this province would be excluded, would get nothing, and yet you selected 200,000

other families and said, "We're going to give you $100 for Christmas"? What are the criteria? How do you exclude some poor children and then say to others, "But we've selected you"?

Hon Mr Flaherty: Again, the member opposite is misinformed. So that the people of Ontario will not be misinformed, they should know that

persons on the ODSP, the disability plan, also receive $105 per eligible child in the month of November for clothing. Once again, the member is wrong. The social assistance payment of $105 happens

in November. The ODSP, the disability payment, also happens in November.

What we have addressed here -- and this is important. These are the working folks who are hit hardest by the effects of September 11. We heard about that

during the pre-statement consultations, that those are the folks who are suffering reduced working hours, some of whom have been laid off. I'm sure the member opposite agrees with me that it's the

right thing to do, to give them a $100 supplement for their kids at Christmastime.

Mr Hampton: Again, I would say to the minister, nice try at confusing people. You know that somebody who receives disability assistance or

someone who receives social assistance will get the money for a winter clothing allowance and has been for some time. Now you're saying, for some reason, you're going to pick 200,000 families and

you're going to give them an additional $100. I just say to you, how do you exclude these other families? How do you come along now and say these families receive another $100 and these other

families do not?

Similarly, how do you decide that children seven or under receive a benefit, but as soon as a child turns eight there is no benefit? How do you make that

decision? It would seem to me that an eight-year-old child would need winter clothing just as much as a seven-year-old. How do you make these decisions to exclude some poor children, but then say

to others, "Oh, but in this case we want to make a press release, so we're going to give you $100"? What are the criteria, Minister?

Hon Mr Flaherty: The criteria are: be a resident of Ontario; be eligible to receive the Ontario child care supplement for working families,

which is a wonderful program introduced by our government several years ago; receive the Canada child tax benefit; have children under age seven; have the appropriate income level or qualifying

child care expenses; and have family employment earnings for the 2000 tax year over $5,000.

The $105 payment does cover families on social assistance. The $105 payment also covers disability situations where someone is eligible for the ODSP. This

additional payment will cover working families who are entitled to receive it under the Ontario child care supplement for working families.

TAX CUTS

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): To the Minister of Finance: the former Minister of Finance is so impressed with your answers that he's

coming back out of retirement. I think that is the biggest comment upon your performance as Minister of Finance.

You were told last year, during the pre-budget consultations, that Ontario's economy was in trouble, yet you blunder ahead with $2.5 billion in corporate tax

cuts, you blunder ahead with other personal income tax cuts for the well-off, and now you're forced to admit that health care, education and many of the services that people depend upon are in

trouble.

Tell us again, Minister, how do you justify putting forward $2.5 billion of corporate tax cuts, $300 million in tax cuts for private schools, and then you turn

to the people of Ontario and say, "Oops. Sorry. We may not have the money for health or education this year"? How do you do that?

Hon Jim Flaherty (Deputy Premier, Minister of Finance): We've heard in the House in recent days the leader of the third party advocate for tax

cuts, where he comes forward and says the provincial government should reduce the retail sales tax, presumably because he thinks that's good policy. That's an acknowledgement, of course, that in

the reduction of taxes you can encourage economic activity in the province. I think that was the honourable member's point when he was asking us to reduce that type of tax.

It's inconsistent for him now to say, "Don't reduce other types of taxes. Don't reduce personal income taxes. Don't reduce corporate taxes. Don't reduce any

other kind of tax." The rationale is the same. The creation of economic activity -- more jobs, more investment, more taxpayers, more taxes getting paid -- increases government revenues over the

medium and long term in Ontario.

Mr Hampton: Minister of Finance, or soon-to-be former Minister of Finance, the point is this: the economy is in trouble. Consumer confidence

is declining. Governments around North America are trying to think of ways to address consumer confidence. You don't do it by giving more tax cuts to corporations; you do it by saying to consumers,

"We're going to cut the retail sales tax so you can afford to make some purchases." That's the difference.

You're not doing anything. Your financial statement yesterday did absolutely nothing to address the recession. Essentially what you said is, "I have no new

ideas, so I'm just going to continue to give money to corporations. I'm going to continue on the course I already set, and then I'm going to say to people, `Oops. Sorry. We don't have the money for

health care. We don't have the money for education. And oh, by the way, I can't do anything about consumer confidence either, because I gave all the money away to my corporate friends.'"

Don't you have an original idea on how to battle a recession, on how to help people who are laid off, on how to put some construction money out the door so

communities can begin those construction programs?

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): The member's time is up. Minister?

Hon Mr Flaherty: I think there was a question there somewhere. In terms of consumer confidence, David Dodge, the governor of the Bank of

Canada, was speaking this morning and was talking about the importance of consumer confidence. We're fortunate in Ontario to have that kind of consumer confidence because of the sound fiscal

planning in the province over the course of the past six years. We have three balanced budgets in a row, and we'll continue to plan balanced budgets in the province of Ontario.

We have low, competitive taxes. We have substantial net income gains by the people of Ontario over the course of the past six years.

Yesterday, the Retail Council of Canada spoke to this issue of consumer confidence. It said, "When Retail Council of Canada met with [Minister Flaherty] on

October 31 in advance of today's economic statement, we asked that he consider taking measures that would help build consumer confidence and consumer incomes, especially for Ontarians of modest

means. We are delighted that he listened to and acted on our recommendations."

Not only will the $100 bonus to children --

The Speaker: The minister's time is up. New question?

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Mrs Lyn McLeod (Thunder Bay-Atikokan): This is for the Minister of Health. Minister, yesterday your colleague the Minister of Finance

presented a second-quarter statement that suggested there might be more money for hospitals. We can only assume there is no new money here since you made no mention of new funding in your speech to

the hospital association this morning. What you did tell the hospitals was that cabinet had deferred any decision on hospital funding for next year, and in fact you didn't seem to know exactly how

much money hospitals were going to be getting this year.

You suggested this morning, Minister, that your government's current funding approach -- and I quote from your speech -- was "the least sensible process."

Minister, for once I agree with you. We all agree with you. Having hospitals forced to cut their programs, to lay off staff, to run waiting lists for surgery and then at the end of the year coming

through with money makes no sense at all. So I ask you, how is it possible that the Minister of Finance continues to play games with hospital funding? Does he not understand the consequences of not

making it clear to hospitals what their funding is going to be?

Hon Tony Clement (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): Indeed, we as a government are committed to ensuring that hospitals receive their

funding from the public purse as early as possible. From our perspective that is a desirable goal and still is a desirable goal.

As evidenced by the statement by the Minister of Finance yesterday, we are aware that the economy is in a period of uncertainty that none of us ever

anticipated or expected and I believe we've discussed it in this House from numerous different facets. The fact of the matter is that since the attacks on America, since September 11, it would not

be prudent, would not be wise to predict with any degree of certainty what government revenues will be for next year. For this year, I can say to this House with absolute certainty that the record

amount of funding for hospitals of $8.7 billion is happening, will be happening, is part of our budget and will continue to be part of our budget. But we have to recognize the uncertainty of the

future. As soon as we have a more certain outlook and prospect, we certainly will transmit that to the hospitals.

Mrs McLeod: Minister, the other thing you made clear to the hospitals this morning was that you thought they should receive multi-year funding

but you couldn't get your cabinet colleagues to agree with that. It seems unusual that colleges and universities have multi-year funding. The Minister of Colleges and Universities was able to

persuade her cabinet colleagues that universities need long-term funding so that they can do their planning. Surely you would agree that hospitals need as much, particularly since you and your

predecessor have had a new funding formula for hospitals sitting on your desk for a least three years now. But for some reason, the Minister of Finance wants to keep hospitals hanging.

You also know, Mr Minister, that the Minister of Finance has a proposed law before the House right now that would force hospitals to eliminate their deficits.

But you went to the hospital association meeting this morning and you told the hospitals that since they don't know how much money they're going to get, they don't have to balance their budgets

this year. In fact, you said, "Cabinet has agreed with me that I will not pursue balanced budget requirements for hospitals until such time as multi-year funding has been announced."

Minister, I don't know who's winning the cabinet fight, whether it's you or the Minister of Finance, so I just have one question for you today. You have just

told hospitals that they can indeed run deficits. Does that mean that the London Health Sciences Centre and Queensway Carleton Hospital can now cancel the cuts they've made to their programs?

Hon Mr Clement: There's a whole bunch of questions in that question --

Interjection: And assumptions.

Hon Mr Clement: And assumptions; thank you. From my perspective, I think hospitals continue to have an obligation to deliver excellent,

accessible, quality care in a manner which is clinically acceptable. That is true for the London hospital; that's true for any other hospital in the province of Ontario. That is a standard by which

we judge them and by which we expect them to meet our expectations and standards. I can assure this House that that continues to this day.

We do have budgets for hospitals this year. It is a record budget. And we do expect our hospitals to continue to be accountable. In fact, the Ontario Hospital

Association is partners with us when it comes to accountability, when it comes to ensuring that patients and their satisfaction are put in the forefront. We are the government, after all, that

published the first-ever hospital report card in conjunction with the Ontario Hospital Association to ensure that patients have a say and have an opinion that is published about the bedside manner

and about the satisfaction of their hospitals. That project, that task, continues to this day. We are there as partners to the hospital, we know that we have uncertain times and we are taking the

difficult but necessary decisions within that context.

WATER QUALITY

Mr David Tilson (Dufferin-Peel-Wellington-Grey): My question is for the Minister of the Environment. Madam Minister, the recent changes in the

drinking water protection regulations have put increased pressure on homeowners who are served by community wells. While the citizens of rural Ontario who are served by these smaller drinking water

systems understand the need for tougher drinking water standards, they're worried about the cost of attaining the tougher standards. At least one community has told me it may cost as much as

$10,000 per household. Does the Ministry of the Environment have a solid plan of action that will help these residents of rural Ontario to handle the anticipated increased costs?

Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Minister of the Environment): As the member knows, our priority is, first of all, to ensure that all Ontarians, no

matter where they live in this province, have access to safe, clean drinking water. I have heard concerns expressed by the member, and I've also heard concerns expressed by the member for Parry

Sound-Muskoka, about how these small communal systems are going to meet the drinking water protection regulation. We have had consultants hold 28 consultations across Ontario to learn first-hand

about some of the concerns and also to receive suggestions as to how they could comply with the water protection regulation. We've also had the opportunity to ensure that consultants visit some of

the communal systems, such as the private communal wells, the campgrounds, the gas stations, the motels and the restaurants. We have been gathering the information and supplying free training and

also preparing a user-friendly guide.

Mr Tilson: We're all interested in having the safest drinking water possible and we expect our government to ensure tough drinking water

standards. In my riding of Dufferin-Peel-Wellington-Grey, there are a number of small rural subdivisions that have been meeting throughout the summer and fall with their municipal councillors to

decide what would be the best way to deal with these increased costs. These municipalities and the people who live in these subdivisions understand what you have done, but they're concerned about

what the provincial government is now going to do to help them. I would like the minister to tell us of her plans and initiatives for consultations and other areas and of any involvement with the

municipalities.

Hon Mrs Witmer: We have been gathering data and listening to the owners and the operators of the small communal systems. Based on the

information we have received and the excellent suggestions they have made as to how they could be in compliance with the drinking water protection regulation, it would be our plan now to have

further consultations with all those who will be impacted, to ensure that the regulations and all the guidelines that are going to be introduced are such that they can be introduced at a reasonable

cost to all those who will be impacted, but at the same time that this will ensure they have access to safe, clean drinking water. The consultations will begin this November and December.

LONG-TERM CARE

Mr Dwight Duncan (Windsor-St Clair): I have a question for the associate minister of health. Your government funds residents in nursing homes

far below most other provinces in this country and below states such as Maine, South Dakota, Michigan and Mississippi. In fact, our parents and grandparents who are being cared for in nursing homes

get less direct nursing and therapy than anywhere else in this country. These members of our families are allowed $4.49 a day for food by this government. The children, grandchildren, friends and

neighbours of these frail, elderly and sick residents have lobbied your government to provide an additional $25 per day for each resident of an Ontario nursing home. You responded with $2.60

effective October 1 and $2.60 effective January 1, 2002. Given this, can you tell Ontario's families how the $2.2 billion corporate tax cut will benefit our frail and elderly neighbours who are in

your care?

Hon Helen Johns (Minister without Portfolio [Health and Long-Term Care]): I refer this to the Minister of Health.

Hon Tony Clement (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I want to assure this House that we have increased funding for long-term-care

facilities, both capital and operating. Indeed, we're up to $1.6 billion for 2001-02. The honourable member neglected to mention that we are one of the only jurisdictions that is reinvesting the

medical equipment fund for our long-term-care facilities, which we wrung out of the federal government, with great reluctance, I might add.

Interjections.

Hon Mr Clement: We had to shame them into it. You're absolutely right. Shame on them. They should have done it automatically, and no help from

you guys across the aisle there, I can tell you that much. You sit there and you bray and bray and bray and we have to do the hard work to make sure the federal government lives up to its

commitments. That's our job, we know that, but you should do your job rather than kissing up to your federal cousins and doing nothing for the people of Ontario.

Mr Duncan: The president of the Ontario non-profit nursing homes association said at this Legislature in February that, because of your

funding decisions, the system will continue to be underfunded and plagued with problems. Your government has provided an average of less than 1% per year. Given the current projected rise in demand

for these services, their operating problems will not be addressed.

Minister, I was astounded to learn today that your government pays an average of $136 a day to house criminals in our jails, yet you only have $62 a day for

the most frail, elderly and sick members of our families who are in the province's nursing homes. The fact is, Ontario is last in Canada and most of the western world in how it treats our family

members in nursing homes; and it became that way under your government. Your callow and shallow answer to my previous question indicates and confirms your government's lack of care for these

people. How can you defend a $2.2-billion cut in corporate taxes when thousands of our fellow citizens are in nursing homes that, by your definition -- by any capable definition -- says they're

underfunded and deserving of a lot more?

Hon Mr Clement: I've heard a lot of things in this House; now I have heard it all. Here is a party that, when they were in government,

promised the world to the long-term-care sector. They were going to increase funding to provide 4,000 new chronic and acute care hospital beds, and they were in office for three years when they

made that promise. What did they accomplish? Nada. Zilch, bubkes. That's what they accomplished. In the 1995 campaign, they promised to set up a committee to look into it.

This government acted. We are proud that we are introducing and are building the most effective, the best capital program in the history of Ontario when it

comes to nursing homes and long term care. That is our commitment. It's on the ground. It's being built for our seniors. We've made that commitment. We are sick of empty Liberal promises. We are

acting for the people of Ontario.

ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES LEGISLATION

Mr Doug Galt (Northumberland): My question is for the Minister of Citizenship. Minister, Monday was indeed a landmark day in Ontario's

legislative history with your introduction of the Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2001. Soon after you tabled the bill, Liberal Leader of the Opposition Dalton McGuinty rose to his feet to

congratulate you and the government. I also extend my congratulations along with my peers: a great job on a very difficult task.

While Mr McGuinty admitted he hadn't had time to review the legislation, the opposition leader said he would be looking to ensure that it reflected the 11

principles unanimously supported by the members of this Legislature. Minister, I'm concerned. Does the legislation reflect those 11 principles voted upon in this House, and does it indeed have any

substance?

Hon Cameron Jackson (Minister of Citizenship, minister responsible for seniors): First of all, I want to thank all members of the House who

participated in the debate that developed the 11 principles, and I want to reassure the House that the 11 principles were followed very carefully in the drafting of this legislation. For the first

time in Ontario's history, it creates a full-time agency of the government of Ontario to coordinate and implement this new legislation. It gives full force and effect, something never before done

in Canada, to the disabilities community so they have a voice and a say as we develop the regulations on an access council for Ontario. It includes all sectors of our economy, something that was

very important. It covers goods and services and purchasing habits of all levels of government. It covers public education, an important component as the public understands the needs of the

disabled. Mandatory provisions will be prescribed in regulations as set out in the 11 principles. This is leading-edge legislation in this country, something this government is very proud of.

Mr Galt: Despite some criticisms of the legislation introduced on Monday, it is my understanding that it has the full support and backing of

many persons with disabilities and a significant number of major organizations that work on behalf of persons with disabilities.

On Monday, after your statement, I had the opportunity to meet with various members of the disabled community. I can assure you that not only were they

supportive, they were also very complimentary of this legislation. Minister, what was the reaction within the disabled community to the tabling of this legislation?

Hon Mr Jackson: It was very evident on Monday, with the presence of about 30 different organizations representing disability stakeholders in

our province. Duncan Read, the past president of the Ontario March of Dimes, indicated that it was a historic moment for the disabled community and should allow them to eventually participate fully

as citizens in our society. Dean LaBute, who's a member of the ODAC committee from Windsor, said, "This legislation offers an unprecedented level of commitment that will effect change and move us

toward a barrier-free society." Bill Adair from the Canadian Paraplegic Association said, "Basically it's a real win."

I think members of the Canadian Paraplegic Association in Ontario are excited, as is the Ontarians with Disabilities Committee. We're all excited. This is a

real milestone for the disabled citizens of Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): New question. The member for Sault Ste Marie.

Mr Tony Martin (Sault Ste Marie): Minister, let me give you another perspective. Our review of this bill indicates that your government has

once again broken its promise to the 1.6 million people in this province living with disabilities. You've let the private sector totally off the hook. The little you've asked of the municipalities

comes with no resources, no money and no ability to enforce. My question to you today, on behalf of those 1.6 million individuals in Ontario living with disabilities, is, what really has changed?

How is the life of the average disabled Ontarian going to improve under this act?

Hon Mr Jackson: Very clearly, there are huge gains for the disabled community in this legislation. For the first time in Ontario's history we

to happen is those standards have to be created. They will be created by the disabilities community of this province because this government's made an unprecedented commitment to them that they

will help us make those regulations.

This government is very proud of its commitment. When we entered office, we were spending less than $5 billion on the disabled in this province. Today, we're

spending $6 billion, a $1-billion increase from this government. That's a tangible commitment to persons with disabilities in this province.

Finally, I want to share with the member opposite that the private sector is specifically named in this legislation, and the regulations we will create

together will cover each and every sector of this province. That is a promise made by the Mike Harris government, and we'll keep that promise.

Mr Martin: Minister, I sure hope you're right, because 1.6 million disabled Ontarians have been waiting for six years for you to deliver on

this promise. The only hope I can see for this bill is that you agree with us today to extensive and fully accessible public hearings across this province. You can't buy groceries at Queen's Park

and you don't go out for dinner at the Ministry of Transportation offices. We need to hear from all of the people. They've waited for over six years. A few token cities won't cut it, Minister. Will

you commit right here and now to widespread and travelling hearings and to listen to the people of this province where this bill is concerned?

Hon Mr Jackson: I'm very surprised to hear from the member opposite and the approach he's taking. I read in the newspaper the other day that

your leader, Howard Hampton, all of a sudden now is prepared to commit, as he suggests, $1 billion on this agenda.

You ask what's happened. I'm asking you, for the last five years of the NDP government, what did you do to help persons with disabilities in this province?

Absolutely nothing, and now, all of a sudden -- this government is going to commit millions of dollars toward this agenda.

Interjection.

The Speaker: Order. Member for Sault Ste Marie, come to order please. You have asked the question. Now is the time for the answer. Sorry,

Minister.

Hon Mr Jackson: This government has implemented leading-edge legislation for disabled persons on this continent that we're proud of. We are

committing real dollars to its improvement. I want to ask you to look into your soul as to what you did for five years and why you didn't even have five cents for Gary Malkowski and his disability

bill. He was a member of your own caucus. Your leader was the Attorney --

The Speaker: Order. The minister's time is up.

ACADEMIC TESTING

Mr Gerard Kennedy (Parkdale-High Park): My question is for the Minister of Education. I want to ask you about the results of your tests that

came in just recently, "your tests" meaning the total results for the entire province showing that grade 3 and grade 6 students have been left stalled in the last couple of years under your

leadership. Under your leadership, Minister, the increase in test results has been cut in half from the year before. Under your leadership, Minister, the test results in this province are a third

to half of those found in other jurisdictions using standardized tests.

I want to know, on behalf of elementary students and their parents, will you take responsibility for your lack of success? Will you admit that your program is

failing? Will you start to take on some of the things that come from Dalton McGuinty's excellence-for-all program, like smaller class sizes? Will you finally do the right thing for students in this

province?

Hon Janet Ecker (Minister of Education, Government House Leader): The member opposite loves to stand up and talk about how this government is

supposed to criticize the education sector. They love to say that. But when the education sector starts to see tangible improvements, when teachers, parents and students start to have tangible

improvements, what does the Liberal Party do? They stand up and say, "The sky is falling."

This is the party that didn't want a standardized curriculum that's trying to tell us to water it down; that didn't support standardized testing; that somehow

thinks we're going to solve the problems of those schools that need the extra help by waving a magic wand, picking 20 lighthouse schools, and miraculously all that light will just flow out to all

those schools that need extra support and cause their results to improve magically. Well, that's not how it works.

It takes money, which we've invested. It takes support strategies, which we have in place. It takes higher standards, which we are putting in place. It takes

helping those students meet those standards. These are all things this government is doing for our kids.

Mr Kennedy: Minister, I think I would be careful if I were you about mocking other possible solutions. You will probably end up taking them

on, as you have many of the other things we've done.

Under your watch, under your leadership, you gave $918 less per student in this province. Teachers and parents are trying to have their kids learn the new

curriculum with fewer resources, less encouragement. You've created a war in our schools by attacking teachers every chance you get. But there is a way to stand off from that, and I think parents

and students are particularly looking for a signal from you.

I wonder if you would then go to any elementary school in this province with me, visit teachers, parents and students and find out what they say is the reason

that our students cannot actually get the results they need. Minister, I wonder if you'll take up the MPP back-to-school program this year and if you'll encourage every single member of your caucus

to do the same thing next week during constituency week.

Hon Mrs Ecker: I don't need lectures from the honourable member about visiting schools in this province. I do it not as a special political

campaign that he likes to announce on a regular basis; I do it because as Minister of Education it's part of my job and I will continue to do that because it is part of my job.

I know the Liberal Party thinks that if all they do is throw money at schools, miraculously the results are going to go up. I know they believe that. But we

know that it takes a lot of hard work by teachers, it takes good strategies and it takes high standards.

Let's look at these results that the Liberal Party is criticizing our schools for. Mathematics: 43% to 61%. Even in the new math that is an improvement.

Writing: 42% to 51%; reading: 48% to 55%. Tangible improvements step by step, setting higher standards for our kids, helping those kids meet those standards, that's what education reform is all

about. This side of the House understands that. The Liberal Party is still living in la-la land.

NURSES

Mr Marcel Beaubien (Lambton-Kent-Middlesex): My question is for the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities. In March 1999, the

Minister of Health and Long-Term Care announced that a four-year bachelor degree in nursing would be mandatory for new nursing graduates starting November 1, 2005. Prior to this requirement, nurses

required a degree or a diploma from a recognized college or university in order to register as a nurse in the province of Ontario.

Here is what Dr John Tibbits, who is the President of Conestoga College, had to say: "At present, 80% of the nursing graduates in Ontario are produced by the

colleges of applied arts and technology. These programs are monitored by program advisory committees.... These nursing programs are market-driven, with a heavy emphasis on clinical practice."

Minister, can you tell my constituents in Lambton-Kent-Middlesex why you are proceeding with this initiative, especially when there is already a lack of nurses

in the province of Ontario?

Hon Dianne Cunningham (Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities, minister responsible for women's issues): The reason we have to move

forward with the initiative of a bachelor of science in nursing for registered nurses is that this is the requirement of the regulatory body. If one doesn't have this requirement, then they cannot

be a registered nurse.

I should also add for the member for Lambton-Kent-Middlesex, as he represents his riding today, that we also have college certification for registered

practical nurses. There is a mix across the system of registered nurses and registered practical nurses.

Our promise, in our collaboration working with the nurses of Ontario, is that we would reach a projected graduating class enrolment of 2,800 nurses by the year

2003-04. We are well on our way, with the entrance into our new collaborative programs, to reach this requirement by 2003-04. It's been a good success.

Mr Beaubien: In order to make sure that we have the proper complement of nurses in the province of Ontario, I would not be opposed to making

regulatory changes.

Recently I had the opportunity to talk to a hospital administrator in my riding. He tells me that when they are recruiting nurses for work in the general

nursing units, the hospital looks for a nurse that is registered in the province of Ontario and can meet the job requirements. They do not hire nurses based on their educational background.

Minister, why are you not listening to what some of the hospital administrators, especially in rural Ontario, are telling us?

Hon Mrs Cunningham: I can tell my colleague that institutions are very much interested in hiring the best-qualified nurses that they can get.

In Ontario, we take pride in this.

Talking to my own colleague and everyone in this House, this September, as I looked at the results that we just received, I can tell you right now that across

14 collaborative nursing programs and also one in his riding of Windsor-Lambton-St Clair, we have increased far beyond our expectations, a 25% increase.

The member for Windsor sits there with a smirk on his face, and I will say that the University of Windsor and I will be meeting tomorrow. Some 1,851 students

have registered in those collaborative programs and the number is up to 1,917.

All of us together are worried about having enough nurses --

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): I'm afraid the minister's time is up. New question.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. We're on to the next question, please.

SEPTIC WASTE DISPOSAL

Mr Sean G. Conway (Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke): My question is to the Minister of Agriculture. The minister will know that the safe and secure

disposal of septic waste in rural Ontario is becoming an ever more controversial and an increasingly costly business. In the upper Ottawa Valley in my constituency, approximately 40,000 homeowners,

property owners, depend on private haulers as their method of disposing of septic waste. Today the cost is approximately $150 to $160 per trip. The projections are that in the next very few months

that cost will go up over $600 per trip. What specific measures is the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs prepared to take to assist property owners and rural municipalities

with this very serious, pressing and costly issue?

Hon Brian Coburn (Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs): I thank the member for the question. The member can recall the extensive

consultation we had all across Ontario when we developed the nutrient management bill, Bill 81. Through those consultations, one of the things we heard was the concern with nutrients and

application procedures. As a result of that consultation, the banning of septage over the next five years is in the legislation, if this bill is passed.

The other component of this, as I'm sure the member will appreciate, is that in the extensive consultation we had in developing Bill 81, I've already committed

that that extensive consultation will also happen with our stakeholders, and those are municipalities and other businesses, in terms of septage in this particular case, on how we'll be able to deal

with that.

Certainly there will be some costs associated with it, but I would say to the member, please don't discount it. When new regulations come in, and we are

concerned as a society in terms of our environmental concerns, new technologies emerge from that. So part of this legislation, as well, embraces the fact that if there are new technologies, they're

going to come forward. In my ministry that's one of the things we embrace and try to pursue.

Mr Conway: I'm well aware that across rural Ontario there are active discussions going on at the municipal level and in the private business

community. Let's use Renfrew county as an example, the largest county in the province, over 3,000 square miles. We've got rural municipalities, many of them with large cottage populations, where

the density factor is going to make this a very real economic challenge. It's quite clear, on the basis of what municipalities and private operators are telling me now, that government is going to

have to be involved, particularly in those areas of rural Ontario where we've got populations sprinkled over large areas. It won't be just Renfrew county, but it'll be Haliburton and it'll be a

variety of other areas the minister knows well.

Is it the intention of the Ontario government to provide financial assistance in the not-too-distant future to rural municipalities, rural businesses and

others, which are telling me and undoubtedly are telling members of the government caucus that without this kind of assistance they will not be able to meet the new standard and the new tests being

imposed by, among other provincial government regulations, the about-to-be-passed Bill 81?

Hon Mr Coburn: As I have indicated, as we go through some of these challenges we face as a society, we want to be able to work with our

stakeholders to determine what some of the solutions are. Yes, there are some challenges. There are financial challenges and challenges to our environment, and these are some of the things we'll

have to come to grips with. That is one of the reasons we have in the enabling legislation that over the five-year period we'll be phasing out septage.

One of the things I think is important is that in the breadth and width of this great province we have, we're not going to have those facilities on every

doorstep. That's for certain. That, of course, will bring challenges as well. Some municipalities are addressing that, in anticipation of the environmental concerns they have in their own

jurisdictions, to upgrade their sewage treatment plants. That is part of the solution. We'll work with our stakeholders over the next five years. I'm sure that the solutions will unfold as they

have in the past and that we'll be able to work with our stakeholders. Will that involve some financial commitment? It may and it may not. We'll have to see how new technology helps us in that

respect.

ROYAL WINTER FAIR

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): My question is also to the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. As you know, the Royal Agricultural

Winter Fair is going on in Toronto. I'd like to take this time to say that Don Rickard, who is one of my constituents and a very well respected Durham family farm businessman, is the president of

the fair this year. Everyone knows how important the fair is to agriculture. Some have called it the Olympics of agriculture.

Minister, could you expand on the role your ministry will play at this year's Royal Winter Fair?

Hon Brian Coburn (Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs): I thank the member from Durham for the question.

Certainly the Royal Winter Fair is the pinnacle, the Grey Cup or the Stanley Cup, of fairs in this great country. It is certainly a badge of honour when over

the course of the summer you are a competitor, whether it's with livestock or whatever, at various fairs across Ontario, indeed across the country, and that culminates in displaying your

championship livestock at the Royal Winter Fair.

One of the things that's important about the Royal Winter Fair is that it gives an opportunity for those who have not been raised in a rural or a farm

environment to go down there and understand more about agriculture, more about livestock, more about some of the things we're doing in rural Ontario to work with the environment. Our ministry has a

very wide-ranging display down there, educational components that talk about Bill 81, that talk about life sciences, that talk about food safety and in terms of crops and soil, the advances we have

made in technology as well. It's an educational experience.

PETITIONS

CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): I have a petition that reads as follows:

"To the provincial Legislature of Ontario:

"Whereas puppy mills and other cruel animal breeding activities are unregulated and unlicensed in the province of Ontario;

"Whereas the Ontario SPCA needs more power to inspect and control animal kennels or breeders;

"Whereas Ontario consumers have no way of knowing if the animals they purchase as pets have been abused;

"Whereas there are no provincial penalties to punish people guilty of abusing animals that are bred and sold to unsuspecting consumers;

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

"That the province of Ontario pass legislation" proposed by MPP Mike Colle "that outlaws puppy mills and other cruel animal breeding activities and that

strengthens the powers of the Ontario SPCA to establish a provincial registry of kennels and breeders subject to SPCA inspection, and to allow the SPCA to impose fines and jail terms on those found

guilty of perpetrating cruelty to animals for the purpose of selling these animals to an unsuspecting public."

I affix my signature. I am in complete agreement with this petition supporting Mike Colle's private member's bill.

ADOPTION DISCLOSURE

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): I have more petitions in support of Bill 77, my adoption disclosure reform bill. It reads:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas in Ontario, adopted adults are denied a right available to non-adoptees, that is, the unrestricted right to identifying information concerning their

family of origin;

"Whereas Canada has ratified standards of civil and human rights in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the UN Declaration of Human Rights and the UN

Convention on the Rights of the Child;

"Whereas these rights are denied to persons affected by the secrecy provisions in the adoption sections of the Child and Family Services Act and other acts of

the province of Ontario;

"Whereas research in other jurisdictions has demonstrated that disclosure does not cause harm, that access to such information is beneficial to adult adoptees,

adoptive parents and birth parents, and that birth parents rarely requested or were promised anonymity;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislature of Ontario to enact revision of the Child and Family Services Act and other acts to permit adult adoptees

unrestricted access to full personal identifying birth information; permit birth parents, grandparents and siblings access to the adopted person's amended birth certificate when the adopted person

reaches age 18; permit adoptive parents unrestricted access to identifying birth information of their minor children; allow adopted persons and birth relatives to file a contact veto restricting

contact by the searching party; replace mandatory reunion counselling with optional counselling."

I am in complete agreement with this, and I will affix my signature.

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

Mr John Hastings (Etobicoke North): I have a petition regarding Saving for Our Children's Future Act, 2001, and it reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas post-secondary education is very important in the development of young adults, to the betterment of society and the economic future of our province;

and

"Whereas the continuing challenge and cost of education facing families in Ontario in the 21st century is ever increasing; and

"Whereas the cost of post-secondary education in Ontario requires a combination of government and individual financial support; and

"Whereas the tax credit proposed in Bill 4, Saving for our Children's Future, 2001, will effectively and beneficially encourage families to save for their

children's education; and

"Whereas the large majority of children and families with a registered education savings plan do not apply for OSAP, thereby freeing millions of dollars for

other OSAP students;

"Therefore, we, the undersigned, hereby respectfully petition the Legislature of Ontario to act quickly to pass Bill 4, Saving for our Children's Future, 2001,

and thereby extend the opportunity of post-secondary education to thousands of children."

I affix my signature with pride to this petition.

PROTECTION OF MINORS

Mr Dave Levac (Brant): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas there is currently no law regulating the sale of CDs and tapes in Ontario,

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

"That a law be put in place requiring merchants to abide by the age guidelines on CDs and tapes when selling to minors (similar to those that restrict the

admittance to movies deemed inappropriate for children under a stated age)."

I sign my name to this petition.

HIGHWAY 407

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): It's my pleasure to present a petition on behalf of my constituents in the riding of Durham, specifically Philip and

Robert Brown, among thousands of others.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the province of Ontario has proposed the extension of Highway 407 into Durham region and the proposed routing, designated as the technically preferred

route, will dissect the property of Kedron Dells Golf Course Ltd in Oshawa" -- actually, it's in my riding,

"Whereas such routing will destroy completely five holes and severely impact two additional holes, effectively destroying the golf course as a viable and

vibrant public golf course,

"We, the undersigned, respectfully petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to change this routing to one of the other identified alternate routes, thus

preserving this highly regarded, public facility patronized annually by thousands of" my constituents and "residents of Durham region and the GTA."

I'm pleased to endorse this on behalf of this small family business.

COMMUNITY CARE ACCESS CENTRES /

CENTRES D'ACCÈS AUX SOINS COMMUNAUTAIRES

M me Claudette Boyer (Ottawa-Vanier) : "Whereas the Mike Harris government promised to institute patient-based budgeting for health

care services in the 1995 Common Sense Revolution;

« Attendu que les Centres d'accès aux soins communautaires doivent maintenant collectivement faire face à un manque à gagner de

175 $ millions en raison d'un gel de leur financement par le gouvernement provincial ;

"Whereas due to this funding shortfall, CCACs have cut back on home care services affecting many sick and elderly Ontarians;

« Attendu que ces réductions dans les services ont principalement été effectuées dans les services d'auxiliaires familiales, ce

qui oblige les Ontariens et Ontariennes à recourir à des établissements de soins de longue durée plus coûteux ou à retourner à l'hôpital ;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to immediately institute real patient-based budgeting for health care services, including

home care, so as to ensure that working families in Ontario can access the health care services they need."

J'appose ma signature à cette pétition.

AUDIOLOGY SERVICES

The Acting Speaker (Mr Michael A. Brown): The member for Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Aldershot.

Mr Ted McMeekin (Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Aldershot): Thank you for getting the name correct, Speaker. That's very good.

I have 1,000 signatures here, and have been asked by the following communities: Fenelon Falls, Omemee, Sebright, Burnt River, Sturgeon Falls, Bobcaygeon,

Kinmount, Lindsay, Oshawa, Oakwood, Janetville, Enterprise, Mount Forest and Fergus -- they've all asked me, on this side of the House, to present this petition.

"Whereas services delisted by the Harris government now exceed $100 million in total; and

"Whereas Ontarians depend on audiologists for the provision of qualified hearing assessments and hearing aid prescriptions; and

"Whereas the new Harris government policy will virtually eliminate access to publicly funded audiology assessments across vast regions of Ontario; and

"Whereas this new Harris government policy is virtually impossible to implement in underserviced areas across Ontario; and

"Whereas this policy will lengthen waiting lists for patients and therefore have a detrimental effect on the health of these Ontarians;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, petition the Ontario Legislature to demand the Mike Harris government move immediately to permanently fund

audiologists directly for the provision of audiology services."

CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

The Acting Speaker (Mr Michael A. Brown): Petitions?

Ms Marilyn Mushinski (Scarborough Centre): Excuse me.

The Acting Speaker: The member for Scarborough Centre.

Ms Mushinski: I know I'm short in stature, Mr Speaker, but I really am standing up.

I have a petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, which reads as follows:

"Whereas the Criminal Code of Canada considers animal cruelty to be a property offence; and

"Whereas those who commit crimes against animals currently face light sentences upon conviction; and

"Whereas those who operate puppy mills should, upon conviction, face sentences that are appropriate for the torture and inhumane treatment they have inflicted

on puppies under their so-called care;

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

"That the Ontario provincial government petition the federal government to move forward with amendments to the cruelty of animal provisions in the Criminal

Code as soon as possible."

I'm pleased to affix my signature to this petition.

COMMUNITY CARE ACCESS CENTRES

Mr David Caplan (Don Valley East): I have a petition entitled, "Community Care Access Centres -- Thaw the Freeze." It is to the Legislative

Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas the Mike Harris government promised to institute so-called `patient-based budgeting' for health care services in the 1995 Common Sense Revolution;

"Whereas community care access centres are reporting a funding shortfall of $175 million due to a funding rollback by the Mike Harris government;

"Whereas Ontarians depend upon community care access centres to assist in services affecting many sick and elderly Ontarians;

"Whereas cutbacks to home care are forcing patients to stay in hospital longer or to be placed in long-term-care facilities, both of which are much more costly

than providing home care;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, petition the Ontario Legislature to demand the Mike Harris government move immediately to lift the home

care funding freeze in order to allow community care access centres to provide services based on patient need."

I have affixed my signature to this petition.

LONDON HEALTH SCIENCES CENTRE

Mr Steve Peters (Elgin-Middlesex-London): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas the London Health Sciences Centre is a world-class academic health sciences centre serving people throughout southwestern Ontario; and

"Whereas the Ministry of Health has forced the London Health Sciences Centre to find $17 million in annual savings by 2005; and

"Whereas the London Health Sciences Centre has agreed to cut 18 programs in order to satisfy directions from the provincial Ministry of Health; and

"Whereas these cuts will put the health of the people of southwestern Ontario, and particularly children, at risk; and

"Whereas these cuts will diminish the London Health Sciences Centre's standing as a regional health care resource; and

"Whereas these cuts will worsen the continuing physician shortages in the region;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, petition the Ontario Legislature to demand that the Mike Harris government take immediate action to ensure

that these important health services are maintained so that the health and safety of people throughout southwestern Ontario," such as London, Strathroy, St Thomas, Woodstock and Stratford, "are not

put at risk."

I'm in full agreement and have affixed my signature hereto.

ADOPTION DISCLOSURE

Mr Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): I have a petition, which reads:

"Whereas in Ontario, adopted adults are denied a right available to non-adoptees, that is, the unrestricted right to identifying information concerning their

family of origin;

"Whereas Canada has ratified standards of civil and human rights in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the UN Declaration of Human Rights and the UN

Convention on the Rights of the Child;

"Whereas these rights are denied to persons affected by the secrecy provisions in the adoption sections of the Child and Family Services Act and other acts of

the province of Ontario;

"Whereas research in other jurisdictions has demonstrated that disclosure does not cause harm, that access to such information is beneficial to adult adoptees,

adoptive parents and birth parents, and that birth parents rarely requested or were promised anonymity;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislature of Ontario to enact revision of the Child and Family Services Act and other acts to permit adults adoptees

unrestricted access to full personal identifying birth information; permit birth parents, grandparents and siblings access to the adopted person's amended birth certificate when the adopted person

reaches age 18; permit adoptive parents unrestricted access to identifying birth information of their minor children; allow adopted persons and birth relatives to file a contact veto restricting

contact by the searching party; replace mandatory reunion counselling with optional counselling."

I support this petition.

EDUCATION FUNDING

Mr David Caplan (Don Valley East): I have a petition. Actually it's an older one but it's certainly germane. It reads:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas we believe that all education resources should be directed to our public schools, not private schools;

"Whereas Mike Harris has been attacking public education for six years, chopping $1.8 billion from the classroom and now wants to pay parents to leave public

education for private schools;

"Whereas we believe that a voucher plan for private schools is wrong, unfair and steals money from public education;

"Whereas we believe that these funds being invested in private schools would be better spent on rebuilding public education through such measures as bringing

class sizes down to 20 students per class in the early years;

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

"Do not turn your back on Ontario's working families. Fight Mike Harris's voucher system for private schools; fight for smaller class sizes;" and last and most

important, "fight for public education."

I'm proud to put my name on this petition.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

MUNICIPAL ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LES MUNICIPALITÉS

Resuming the debate adjourned on October 31, 2001, on the motion for second reading of Bill 111,

An Act to revise the Municipal Act and to amend or repeal

other Acts in relation to municipalities / Projet de loi 111, Loi révisant la

Loi sur les municipalités et modifiant ou abrogeant d'autres lois en ce qui concerne les

municipalités.

The Acting Speaker (Mr Michael A. Brown): Pursuant to the order of the House dated November 6, 2001, I'm now required to put the question.

Mr Hodgson has moved second reading of Bill 111,

An Act to revise the Municipal Act and to amend or repeal other Acts in relation to municipalities. Is it the

pleasure of the House that the motion carry?

All in favour will say "aye."

All opposed will say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

Call in the members; this will be a five-minute bill.

The division bells rang from 1548 to 1553.

The Acting Speaker: Those in favour will please stand one at a time until recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

Arnott, Ted

Baird, John R.

Barrett, Toby

Beaubien, Marcel

Chudleigh, Ted

Clark, Brad

Clement, Tony

Coburn, Brian

Cunningham, Dianne

Dunlop, Garfield

Ecker, Janet

Elliott, Brenda

Flaherty, Jim

Galt, Doug

Gilchrist, Steve

Gill, Raminder

Guzzo, Garry J.

Hardeman, Ernie

Hastings, John

Hodgson, Chris

Hudak, Tim

Jackson, Cameron

Johns, Helen

Kells, Morley

Klees, Frank

Marland, Margaret

Martiniuk, Gerry

Maves, Bart

Mazzilli, Frank

Miller, Norm

Molinari, Tina R.

Munro, Julia

Mushinski, Marilyn

Newman, Dan

O'Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Runciman, Robert W.

Sampson, Rob

Snobelen, John

Spina, Joseph

Sterling, Norman W.

Stewart, R. Gary

Stockwell, Chris

Tascona, Joseph N.

Tilson, David

Tsubouchi, David H.

Turnbull, David

Wettlaufer, Wayne

Wilson, Jim

Witmer, Elizabeth

Wood, Bob

Young, David

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

Nays

Agostino, Dominic

Bartolucci, Rick

Bountrogianni, Marie

Boyer, Claudette

Bradley, James J.

Caplan, David

Churley, Marilyn

Colle, Mike

Conway, Sean G.

Cordiano, Joseph

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duncan, Dwight

Hampton, Howard

Kennedy, Gerard

Kormos, Peter

Kwinter, Monte

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Levac, David

Marchese, Rosario

Martin, Tony

McLeod, Lyn

McMeekin, Ted

Parsons, Ernie

Patten, Richard

Peters, Steve

Phillips, Gerry

Prue, Michael

Pupatello, Sandra

Ramsay, David

Ruprecht, Tony

Smitherman, George

Clerk of the House (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 52; the nays are 32.

The Acting Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

Pursuant to the same order of the House, the bill is referred to the standing committee on general government.

REMEDIES FOR ORGANIZED CRIME

AND OTHER UNLAWFUL

ACTIVITIES ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LES RECOURS

POUR CRIME ORGANISÉ

ET AUTRES ACTIVITÉS ILLÉGALES

Resuming the debate adjourned on November 1, 2001, on the motion for third reading of Bill 30,

An Act to provide civil remedies for organized crime and other

unlawful activities / Projet de loi 30, Loi prévoyant des recours civils pour crime organisé et autres activités illégales.

The Acting Speaker (Mr Michael A. Brown):