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

May 27, 2002

37th Parliament, 3rd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2002-May-27 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Monday 27 May 2002 Lundi 27 mai 2002

INTRODUCTION OF MEMBER

FOR NIPISSING

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

SUDBURY ON-LINE HEALTH RESOURCE

AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY

NORTHERN HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT

WEST NORTHUMBERLAND HOSPITAL

CONTAMINATED SOIL

DURHAM HOCKEY TEAMS

GOVERNMENT'S AGENDA

ATTAWAPISKAT EVACUATION

TOM TURNHAM

MOTIONS

COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP

HOUSE SITTINGS

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

WATER QUALITY

DEFERRED VOTES

THRONE SPEECH DEBATE

ORAL QUESTIONS

CHILDREN'S HEALTH SERVICES

MINISTRY OF THE ENVIRONMENT STAFF

WATER QUALITY

COMPETITIVE ELECTRICITY MARKET

CHILDREN'S HEALTH SERVICES

AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY

CURRICULUM

HIGHWAY 401

LONG-TERM CARE

COMPETITIVE ELECTRICITY MARKET /

MARCHÉ COMPÉTITIF DE L'ÉLECTRICITÉ

NORTHERN ONTARIO DEVELOPMENT

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

WATER QUALITY

PETITIONS

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION FUNDING

ANIMAL PROTECTION

HYDRO ONE

MEDICAL SCHOOL TUITION

ONTARIO DISABILITY SUPPORT PROGRAM

CHILDREN'S HEALTH SERVICES

DOCTOR SHORTAGE

EDUCATION FUNDING

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

INSURANCE CLAIMS

HYDRO ONE

AUDIOLOGY SERVICES

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION FUNDING

ORDERS OF THE DAY

TIME ALLOCATION /

ATTRIBUTION DE TEMPS

Monday 27 May 2002 Lundi 27 mai 2002

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

INTRODUCTION OF MEMBER

FOR NIPISSING

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): I beg to inform the House that during the adjournment a vacancy has occurred in the membership of the House by

reason of the resignation of Michael Harris, as member for the electoral district of Nipissing, effective the second day of April 2002.

Accordingly, I issued my warrant to the Chief Election Officer for the issue of writs for by-elections.

I beg to inform the House that the Clerk has received from the Chief Election Officer and laid upon the table a certificate of the by-election in the electoral

district of Nipissing.

Clerk of the House (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): I have a letter addressed to:

"Mr Claude DesRosiers

"Clerk of the Legislative Assembly

"Room 104

"Legislative Building

"Queen's Park

"Toronto, Ontario

"M7A 1A2"

It reads as follows:

"Dear Mr DesRosiers:

"A writ of election dated the third day of April, 2002, was issued by the Honourable Lieutenant Governor of the province of Ontario, and was addressed to John A.

Inch, returning officer for the electoral district of Nipissing, for the election of a member to represent the said electoral district of Nipissing in the Legislative Assembly of this province in

the room of Michael Harris who since his election as representative of the said electoral district of Nipissing hath tendered his resignation. This is to certify that, a poll having been granted

and held in Nipissing on the second day of May, 2002, Al McDonald has been returned as duly elected as appears by the return of the said writ of election, dated the twenty-first day of May, 2002,

which is now lodged of record in my office.

"John L. Hollins

"Chief Election Officer

"Toronto, May 27, 2002."

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Mr Speaker, I have the honour to present to you and to the House Al McDonald,

member-elect for the electoral district of Nipissing, who has taken the oath and signed the roll and now claims the right to take his seat.

The Speaker: Let the honourable member take his seat.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

SUDBURY ON-LINE HEALTH RESOURCE

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): Today I'd like to applaud a Sudbury doctor, Dennis Reich, for creating a one-stop, patient-friendly Web site. Dr

Reich makes it much easier for Sudburians to access health resources in the midst of our severe doctor shortages.

He has created www.sudburyhealth.ca, a user-friendly Web site designed to take the guesswork out of looking for our local health resources.

Dr Reich, who works at a Sudbury clinic, tries to keep, as he explains it, "the dam from bursting." He is well aware that over 40,000 Sudbury area residents are

without a family doctor, and so understands the need for this Web site. The site provides answers to questions Dr Reich hears repeatedly. He identified a need and took the initiative to respond in

a very accessible way. His vision and leadership should be commended by this government. He advises that the new Web site is a work in progress and is constantly being updated in order to provide

accurate information to our patients.

My staff and I will certainly be referring constituents to www.sudburyhealth.ca. Dr Reich's efforts serve to patch up the leaks in the health care dam while we

continue to lobby the Eves government to address Sudbury's critical doctor shortage.

AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY

Mr Ted Arnott (Waterloo-Wellington): First of all, I want to congratulate the member for Nipissing on taking his seat this afternoon for the

first time.

I also want to inform the House of another positive development in Ontario's automotive industry and more new jobs in my riding of Waterloo-Wellington.

As indicated recently in the Kitchener-Waterloo Record, Trim Masters Inc is set to begin construction of a new factory in Elmira that's expected to employ about

150 people in the business of supplying seats and door panels for Toyotas assembled in Cambridge. These new jobs will strengthen the automotive cluster that is developing in Waterloo-Wellington to

supply that same Toyota plant and the Honda plant in Alliston. Reinforced by governments -- local and provincial -- our educational institutions and skilled workers, the auto cluster is enhanced

with every new supply-line industry that comes to our area.

To illustrate the strength of our automotive industry, I'll share with you some facts provided to me by Canada's Technology Triangle, a not-for-profit economic

development organization that markets Waterloo region and its cities internationally. Their 1999 export study found that the motor vehicle industry is the most important in terms of value,

accounting for about $3.5 billion in exports. Around Waterloo region and Wellington county, the auto sector is flourishing. Elmira is also home to YM Technologies, a Honda supplier. There's TG

Minto in Palmerston, Musashi in Arthur, Jefferson Elora in Elora, Long Manufacturing in Mount Forest and Denso in Guelph, all of which have opened in the last six years or so, supplementing our

substantial automotive employment at companies like Budd Canada and Lear Seating.

I want to congratulate the Minister of Enterprise, Opportunity and Innovation for the summit that he held last week. Together, in partnership with the province,

we will continue to work hard to strengthen our local economy and continue to create the new jobs we need.

NORTHERN HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT

Mr Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North): I'm pleased to have the opportunity today to once again speak about crucial highway

infrastructure needs in northwestern Ontario. Certainly it was heartening to hear Premier Eves during his recent visit to Thunder Bay speaking publicly about his plans to four-lane the

Trans-Canada. Clearly the

section between Thunder Bay and Nipigon must be the number one priority in our area, and I hope we will see evidence of this Premier's sincerity in next month's budget.

What we need is a yearly allocation specifically geared to that part of Highway 11/17. This is a vital infrastructure need in my riding, one that we've been waiting for for too long.

In terms of other priorities, I want to renew my call for a full set of advance warning lights along the Thunder Bay Expressway. Advance warning lights save

lives. It's as simple as that. They are utilized very effectively in many other provinces, and it continues to trouble me that the Ministry of Transportation has resisted using them more often. To

the Premier I say, please hear our plea. Advance warning lights are not expensive. They work. They save lives. Certainly I will not give up my fight to see them put in place.

Another part of my riding that demands significant and speedy improvement is Highway 584 between Geraldton and Nakina. This is a truly dangerous stretch of road

that is narrow, bumpy and pothole-ridden. It is a true hazard for all who drive it, and I fear we may soon face a needless tragedy unless the government recognizes this as the true priority it

needs to be.

Let's not wait until tragedy strikes to see all these crucial improvements put in place.

WEST NORTHUMBERLAND HOSPITAL

Mr Doug Galt (Northumberland): I rise in the House today to recognize the hard work of everyone involved in the construction of the new hospital

for west Northumberland residents. I'm pleased to announce that construction is on time, with a scheduled opening in the late fall of 2003.

But perhaps more importantly, the project is currently under budget. The fundraising campaign, Caring for Generations, has been extremely successful, raising $22

million from a local population base of only 50,000. Even more impressive is that $15.6 million has come from local residents and businesses.

Many thanks to the Caring for Generations chair, Mr Bill Patchett, and all members of his organization for their dedication.

Thanks also to the hard work of hospital staff and volunteers. Mr Brian Hart, the hospital committee chair, Ms Joan Ross, the hospital CEO, and Mr Don Morrison,

chair of the hospital's board of trustees, have dedicated many hours to this project which indeed are appreciated.

Finally, thanks to everyone who has volunteered their time and made helpful donations to this wonderful cause.

I encourage all members to check out the progress of this wonderful facility on the southwest corner of Highway 401 and Burnham Street in Cobourg.

CONTAMINATED SOIL

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): The new Minister of Environment and Energy, although preoccupied with his duties as government House leader

and mired in the mess of his government's proposed sale of Hydro One, has an opportunity to take a positive and comprehensive piece of action to deal with the very difficult circumstances facing

those residents of Port Colborne whose properties have been contaminated from industrial airborne fallout. The minister has a chance to alter and toughen the control order placed on Inco to better

reflect the concerns of the affected residents; specifically, advancing the timetable for the cleanup, lowering the threshold at which the soil is considered traditionally to be contaminated and

specifying adequate compensation for those whose properties have been devalued and whose health has been adversely impacted.

The model the minister should consider employing is that which was used for lead contamination in the Niagara and south Riverdale neighbourhoods of Toronto in

the late 1980s, when the Peterson government utilized more aggressive levels of cleanup and took fast action to ensure that the health and safety of the residents could be protected.

The consultation process should be superior to that which now exists. Residents feel that their full input has not, so far, been reflected in MOE actions and the

minister has the power to rectify this situation.

The minister should ensure that all matters related to the Port Colborne situation be treated as a priority and that adequate staff and resources be made

available immediately to address this serious situation.

DURHAM HOCKEY TEAMS

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): I rise in the House today to pay tribute to three hockey teams from my riding of Durham that captured Ontario

championships. Just this weekend I was pleased to join the Orono teams at their awards banquet. The village of Orono is understandably very proud of its Orono Lumber Midgets team and the Allin's

Orchard Bantams team, each of which won 2001-02 Ontario championships this year.

I would like to pay tribute to the Orono athletic association and to the players, parents and coaches of both teams. Because of time constraints, I cannot name

all the players although I would like to. However, the coaches for the Allin's Orchard Bantams are head coach Brian Allin, trainer Arnold Hicks, assistant coach Blain Moffat and practice coach

Scott Wood. Coaching staff for the Orono Lumber Midgets are coach Dale Millson, manager Ken Rowe and trainer Brent Weiss.

Finally, I would like to recognize the Newcastle Stars Atoms, who not only won the Ontario Atom Championship but also captured the gold medal in the Lake Placid

International tournament last month. The Stars are also the Regional Silver Stick Champions. Congratulations to each of the team members on their accomplishments. I'd also like to pay tribute to

the sponsor, Newcastle IGA, along with coach Rick Palmateer, assistant coach Ken Boyd, trainer Tom Malone and manager Doug Orr. The members of the Newcastle Stars team have a sense of

accomplishment.

These teams represent the best of our hockey traditions and are excellent ambassadors for their communities. We salute them all.

GOVERNMENT'S AGENDA

Mr Dwight Duncan (Windsor-St Clair): You are no doubt aware that today we begin the third week of sitting in the second session of the 37th

Parliament, and what have we had from the government? In a few short moments we will be voting on a speech from the throne. Now, speeches from the throne lay out a legislative agenda, a legislative

plan. Have we had one bill introduced since the House started? Not a single piece of legislation; not one piece of legislation. Have we had a date announced for the budget? No; no date for a

budget, the most important piece of financial information the government of the day can lay out for the people of this province. We don't have a date. The only thing we've been able to do is delay

estimates because the government's estimates weren't ready on time for consideration by this House.

But is it a question of not having things to do? Absolutely not. The government tells us they're going to bring forward hydro legislation in what they termed

"enabling legislation." What that is code for is that they'll do a blank piece of legislation now and not make their announcement until the summer, when the House doesn't sit and the government

can't be held accountable.

They've done nothing about the crisis in long-term care, they've done nothing about the crisis in home care and they've done nothing of any substance to address

the funding problems in our schools.

It's a shameful first three weeks. We need a Dalton McGuinty Liberal government.

ATTAWAPISKAT EVACUATION

Mr Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): Members in the House would know that over the last couple of weeks the residents of Attawapiskat had to be

evacuated from that community because of the threat of a flood in that community.

I want to thank those people who were involved in the evacuation from the Attawapiskat First Nation who worked really hard at their end in order to organize

things, but also the many volunteers within the community of Moosonee and Timmins, where some 1,800 people were evacuated by aircraft in order to put them up in various accommodations while the

threat of flood was going on in the community. I know that the people of Attawapiskat were well treated. In all of the discussions I've had with the relief workers and the emergency workers,

everybody who was involved in both the Moosonee and the Timmins operations on the evacuation side really felt that things went well. It was a really positive experience for our community. I can

tell you that I'm very proud of the work our volunteer firemen have done, as well as the people of the Red Cross and multiple other organizations who were there in a time of need.

I think it's at times like that that you find out that our communities, although they may be spread apart in northern Ontario, and in this particular case by

quite a large distance, sometimes we're a lot closer than we think. When it comes to an emergency, people do come together, pull together and make sure that people are well taken care of.

To the chief of Attawapiskat, Theresa, all her council and the community members, glad to see that you're back home. I look forward to seeing you as I go up to

Attawapiskat over the next few weeks and assess things from there.

This is a very good story of what people can do when they come together.

TOM TURNHAM

Mr R. Gary Stewart (Peterborough): I'm pleased to stand today in recognition of one of my constituents from Peterborough, Tom Turnham, who was

presented with the Duke of Edinburgh Gold Award at St James's Palace in London recently.

Only 200 youths throughout the British Commonwealth are given the opportunity to receive the Gold Award each year. This award has four categories and is

completed in three stages.

Tom Turnham began working toward the award when he was only 14 years of age. He completed the categories to work his way through bronze, silver and gold as

follows: service to the community, where he worked with the elderly in the role of caregiver; expedition, where he completed a canoe adventure in Algonquin Park; physical recreation, where he chose

Tai Chi; and selected skill, where he took first aid.

The Gold Award also comes with the completion of an extra category called a residential project. For this project, Tom Turnham attended a one-week course at the

Royal Institute of Photography in England. As activities are selected for respective categories, participants must specialize and progress within those categories on a point system.

Please join me in recognizing this fine young citizen for his recognition in receiving this outstanding award.

MOTIONS

COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of Environment and Energy, Government House Leader): I move that the following amendments be made to the

membership of certain committees: Mr McDonald replaces Ms Mushinski on the standing committee on general government, and Mr McDonald replaces Mr DeFaria on the standing committee on justice and

social policy.

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

HOUSE SITTINGS

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of Environment and Energy, Government House Leader): I move that, pursuant to standing order 9(c)(i), the House

shall meet from 6:45 pm to 9:30 pm on Monday, May 27, Tuesday, May 28, and Wednesday, May 29, 2002, for the purpose of considering government business.

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

All those in favour of the motion 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 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

Chudleigh, Ted

Clark, Brad

Clement, Tony

Coburn, Brian

Colle, Mike

Conway, Sean G.

Cordiano, Joseph

Cunningham, Dianne

Curling, Alvin

DeFaria, Carl

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duncan, Dwight

Dunlop, Garfield

Ecker, Janet

Elliott, Brenda

Eves, Ernie

Flaherty, Jim

Galt, Doug

Gilchrist, Steve

Gill, Raminder

Gravelle, Michael

Guzzo, Garry J.

Hastings, John

Hodgson, Chris

Hoy, Pat

Hudak, Tim

Jackson, Cameron

Johns, Helen

Johnson, Bert

Kells, Morley

Kennedy, Gerard

Klees, Frank

Kwinter, Monte

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Levac, David

Marland, Margaret

Martiniuk, Gerry

Maves, Bart

Mazzilli, Frank

McDonald, Al

McLeod, Lyn

McMeekin, Ted

Miller, Norm

Molinari, Tina R.

Munro, Julia

Mushinski, Marilyn

Newman, Dan

O'Toole, John

Parsons, Ernie

Patten, Richard

Peters, Steve

Ramsay, David

Runciman, Robert W.

Sampson, Rob

Sergio, Mario

Smitherman, George

Spina, Joseph

Sterling, Norman W.

Stewart, R. Gary

Stockwell, Chris

Tascona, Joseph N.

Turnbull, David

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

Bisson, Gilles

Churley, Marilyn

Hampton, Howard

Kormos, Peter

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

Prue, Michael

Clerk of the House (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 79; the nays are 7.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

Motions? Statements by ministries?

M. Gilles Bisson (Timmins-Baie-James): Un point d'ordre, monsieur le Président : c'est juste pour être clair. Je comprends que

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

WATER QUALITY

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of Environment and Energy, Government House Leader): I rise today to talk to this House about water; how we as

Ontarians treasure it and yet sometimes take it for granted. Everyone in Ontario now knows the challenges of dealing with water. We know how a seemingly benign glassful could bring harm to many. We

know how a lack of responsibility in planning and science all contributed to the transformation of water from a thing of vitality to a cause of death. And we know what we must do to prevent that

situation from recurring. We know these things partly because of the patient strength of the men, women and children of Walkerton. These are people who, though pained by tragedy, have remained

dedicated to transforming their experiences into lessons for others.

We also know the road that lies ahead of us, thanks to the work of Justice Dennis O'Connor. I think all members of this House would agree that, just as the

government asked him to do two years ago, he has produced a comprehensive and thorough report. He offered his recommendations with one eye on Walkerton and with one eye on the future, reflecting

the balance that you would expect from someone skilled with the scales of justice. Yet he also produced a document that calls for change, even as it avoids condemnation. As he said on page 11,

"[My] recommendations should not be viewed as a criticism of Ontario's current water quality standards ... the current standards were established with great concern for the safety of the province's

drinking water...."

Those words are both heartening and helpful: heartening because the most comprehensive environmental study in this province's history has concluded that while

Ontario's water system deserves attention, it is fundamentally sound; helpful because the report serves as a plan for the work that awaits us.

This government's "great concern for the safety of the province's drinking water," something that was sensed and confirmed by Justice O'Connor, has been

sincere. That concern guided our immediate actions to protect drinking water and it continues to guide us as we put the focus on the broader issues outlined in the second O'Connor report.

You would expect us to undertake a thorough and complete review of a report that has been lauded for its comprehensiveness and attention to detail, and we are

doing that. But make no mistake: as the Premier said, we will address all of Justice O'Connor's recommendations. Some actions are straightforward and can be acted on more quickly than others. Some

recommendations require new legislation that will benefit from the counsel of our partners; for example, the introduction of a Safe Drinking Water Act. Still others will take the form of continuous

improvements in the way we do business. But all of the recommendations will be dealt with. That is our commitment to the people of Ontario and that is our promise to future generations. Members of

this House can look forward to seeing actions over the coming weeks and months, actions that both address the key themes of Justice O'Connor's report and represent the fundamental approaches of our

water strategy for Ontario.

When I looked through the report, I was happy to see that many of its themes are consistent with the work we have already started. This is particularly the

case with the report's emphasis on looking at water from source to tap. It ties in with our immediate emphasis on drinking water protection, as well as our ongoing work on nutrient management and

watershed planning. As members of this House know, the government's proposed Nutrient Management Act would substantially improve our ability to track sources of pollution and address capacity for

the system to absorb these pollutants on a watershed basis. We are glad that our approach meshes with Justice O'Connor's report's emphasis on nutrient and watershed management.

Justice O'Connor's recommendations are also consistent with the strategic investments we have made, as well as the pilot projects that have begun in six

communities. It ties in with the doubling of our ministry inspection teams, as well as expansion of our training opportunities for municipal operators.

Justice O'Connor's report is also consistent with the two things that have guided our actions since the tragedy in Walkerton: first, that Ontario's water

future demands and deserves innovative thinking; second, that those thoughts must come from the broadest range of people, who have the broadest range of responsibilities for protecting Ontario's

water. We are going to need co-operation and commitment from many parties to move forward on these recommendations. We need to move quickly to work with our partners. We need to hear their ideas

about how together we can make the kinds of changes that will continue to provide Ontario's people with clean, safe water.

As I said, we are moving forward with a plan based on two years of work by Justice O'Connor and his team. Four of the commissioner's part one report

recommendations were met in advance of the report's release in January. Since then we have implemented six more, and ministries are actively working on the remaining recommendations. In the weeks

and months ahead, the Ministry of the Environment will move with great speed to develop implementation strategies to deal with the rest.

Justice O'Connor's work has shed a thoughtful and penetrating light both on what happened during that fateful Victoria Day weekend some two years ago as well

on as the state of water management across this province. Across this country, the federal government and other jurisdictions from coast to coast are looking at O'Connor's words very carefully for

the lessons that can be learned.

We too in this government have been doing that. Even as we embrace this final report from the O'Connor inquiry, we remind ourselves that Walkerton has been a

lesson for everyone, whether they test samples, build systems or enforce standards.

We have waited for this report for some months. Now that Justice O'Connor's recommendations have been tabled with the public, we will take action on each of

them. The people of Walkerton and future generations of Ontarians deserve that clean water legacy.

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): The people of this province should be reminded that this tragedy in Walkerton was contributed to

immensely by government cutbacks; that is, approximately half of the budget and one third of the staff of the Ministry of the Environment were eliminated when Premier Ernie Eves was Minister of

Finance. That drastically increased the risk to the water supply in this province, and no one should ever forget the contributing factor that that policy decision was in this situation.

We got the water and sewer situation muddied a bit in 1997 when the government said, "We're getting out of that infrastructure. We're backing away from that.

We're no longer going to provide funding for those purposes." The Red Tape Commission was lurking in the background, always threatening the Ministry of the Environment, trying to weaken it in every

way possible. The government proceeded with funding cuts to essentially pay for a premature tax cut that even the Minister of the Environment, to his credit in those days, opposed -- having that

tax cut invoked before the budget was balanced. Therefore, they had to have even deeper cuts.

Only eight of 28 recommendations from the first part of the report have been implemented so far. This government has been moving at a snail's pace in this

regard.

The closing of the Ministry of the Environment labs, getting rid of all those expert scientists and technical people, was a drastic mistake on the part of this

government.

What we have to do is toughen the Nutrient Management Act and make it very specific.

What we have to do is restore the staff and the funding to the Ministry of the Environment. The minister said, "They're all going to be permanent people." I

just read Topical. Half the people they're hiring in one category are temporary people. They are not permanent, as the minister tried to buffalo the press with the other day.

I want to say as well that there are going to have to be massive amounts of money for infrastructure renewal, contributed to by users, the federal government,

provincial government and local governments.

We're going to have to have a Safe Drinking Water Act in this province, without question. We're going to have to have water treatment and sewage treatment

plants improved considerably. We must protect the raw water supply as well as the drinking water supply. That means tough enforcement of the municipal-industrial strategy for abatement commenced in

the late 1980s in this province. We must have a clean air regulation, a clean air program which is going to prevent those contaminants which today fall from the air into our waterways and therefore

contribute to the contamination of water.

We must ensure, in other words, that the Ministry of Environment has its funding returned to its previous levels at least, that it has its staffing returned to

its previous levels at the very least. Even though the province has grown, even though there's been much more development which impacts the environment, those two things are certain.

But another that is certain is that the Ministry of Environment must have its clout back. At one time, the Ministry of the Environment was almost feared within

government because it was a regulatory ministry. It was a ministry which policed other parts of the government, the private sector, the crown corporations and so on. Today, some of the polluters

out there in the private sector simply thumb their noses at the Ministry of Environment of Ontario. Even those within government sharpen their elbows and elbow aside the Ministry of Environment in

any tough decision-making process.

The Premier, who will say anything, apparently, that comes to his mind on a given day, has indicated he is prepared to implement these recommendations. Those

of us in the opposition, environment groups and residents are going to be looking at those 93 recommendations and relooking at the recommendations from the first part of the report to ensure that

this government implements them. I don't believe they have the will to do it, and I don't believe they have the intention to do it.

Mr Steve Peters (Elgin-Middlesex-London): The Minister of the Environment states that he's glad in regard to the Nutrient Management Act, glad

that the approvals mesh with the report's emphasis on nutrient and watershed management. Perhaps the minister should read the report because -- this is right from the report -- "Nutrient management

plans do not necessarily take into consideration watershed-specific information."

Let's go on further with this report, where it says "the Nutrient Management Act as it is proposed may not be sufficient in itself to protect the sources of

Ontario's drinking water," and its "effectiveness will depend on the development of appropriate regulations." The report goes on to say, "There is a substantial overlap between the farm water

protection planning I recommend and nutrient management planning for other purposes, and I think it may make sense to deal with both of these issues at once."

There are a number of points that are raised in here, and what we're seeing is this Nutrient Management Act at general government with one half-hour to deal

with some very specific recommendations. It's not enough time. I would ask that you give consideration to the general government committee to fully deal with and implement these in the act.

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): The first thing the minister should have done today was get up and make an announcement that the

government would be immediately reinstating the staff: the front-line staff, the inspectors, the scientists, the people who do the work for us; that the people who they laid off over the last

several years would be reinstated as of today; that the budget would be put back to at least where it was when this government came to power in 1995 and immediately started talking about protection

of the environment as red tape. There were some members of the government who did that.

I want to focus on two elements of the Walkerton Inquiry report. I want to thank Judge O'Connor and all of the many people who were involved in making this

report possible; in particular to thank and to show our respect to the people of Walkerton, who waited a very long time for this report to come forward. It's very important to them and indeed to

all of the people of Ontario that these recommendations be implemented without delay.

I want to focus on the Safe Drinking Water Act. As you know, two years ago I presented a Safe Drinking Water Act in this Legislature. It has been before the

House twice. It is based on existing American legislation that's been around for 20 years, plus some made-in-Ontario components. It is a very good bill and responds to a lot of the issues and

questions that are before us today. That bill should be sent out to committee now so that we can hear the people of Ontario, so that we can make, if necessary, any amendments and improve upon it.

That bill is ready to go out. There is no excuse for delay. It should be sent out immediately for public hearings.

The second thing I want to focus on, and I hope the new Minister of the Environment listens carefully to this, is that he lauded the Nutrient Management Act in

his statement. I want to say to the minister that the Nutrient Management Act as it is now written is inadequate for the purposes of meeting the requirements and recommendations from Judge

O'Connor. I'm going to give him a couple of examples.

Minister, this is extremely important. The NDP, fortunately, did force the bill back to committee hearings on Wednesday. We have a short window of opportunity

to make some amendments that the NDP proposed earlier, which were rejected by your government and which we want to make again. This is what I want to say very clearly: studies submitted to the

Walkerton Inquiry establish that over 150,000 wells in Ontario may be contaminated by bacteria in excess of maximum levels from the Ontario drinking water objectives. Studies indicate that

contamination results twice as frequently in fields where manure is regularly applied. Evidence also indicates that the pathogens contained in the manure can survive in soil for months or years and

may travel through the soil, entering underground aquifers kilometres away from their point of origin.

I want to make clear to you, Minister, that nutrient management plans as now defined in your bill will not prevent what happened in Walkerton, will not prevent

manure contamination of our drinking water, because they focus mostly on the nutrient requirements for the growing of the crops but fail to address the pathogens in the manure.

Your Nutrient Management Act is proposing by regulation -- regulation which we have not seen yet -- simply to make mandatory nutrient management planning,

agricultural best management practices and environmental farm plans. There is a limited regulatory approach and it may be, from my reading of it and many other experts in the field as well, no more

successful than the present system.

We need a risk-based approach to water resource management which will require aquifer mapping and vulnerability assessment programs with continued

monitoring.

Minister, please take a look at the nutrient management plan. Make sure that it's the Ministry of the Environment overseeing the plan. Make the necessary

amendments that will actually meet the recommendations from the commissioner. As it sits now, it will not do that. You have an opportunity on Wednesday to get your members to support my amendments,

or bring in your own; I don't care. But the Nutrient Management Act, as it now sits, must be amended if you want to fulfill the recommendations required by the O'Connor commission.

Mr Peters: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: Given that Justice O'Connor's report contains sweeping and specific recommendations regarding Bill

81, the Nutrient Management Act, and given the Premier's commitment to fully implement those recommendations, and given that the standing committee on general government has Bill 81 currently

before it, with very short time constraints -- one half-hour -- therefore, I'm seeking unanimous consent of this Legislature that the standing committee on general government be given additional

time to carefully consider the recommendations of Justice O'Connor's report in order to ensure that Bill 81 truly reflects and implements that report.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Is there unanimous consent? I'm afraid I heard some noes.

DEFERRED VOTES

THRONE SPEECH DEBATE

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): We now have a deferred vote on Mr Hampton's amendment to the amendment to the motion for approval of the speech

from the throne.

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

The division bells rang from 1417 to 1422.

The Speaker: All those in favour of the amendment to the amendment to the motion for approval of the speech from the throne will please rise

one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

Agostino, Dominic

Bartolucci, Rick

Bisson, Gilles

Bountrogianni, Marie

Boyer, Claudette

Bradley, James J.

Brown, Michael A.

Bryant, Michael

Christopherson, David

Churley, Marilyn

Colle, Mike

Conway, Sean G.

Cordiano, Joseph

Curling, Alvin

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duncan, Dwight

Gravelle, Michael

Hampton, Howard

Hoy, Pat

Kennedy, Gerard

Kormos, Peter

Kwinter, Monte

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Levac, David

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

McGuinty, Dalton

McLeod, Lyn

McMeekin, Ted

Parsons, Ernie

Patten, Richard

Peters, Steve

Prue, Michael

Ramsay, David

Sergio, Mario

Smitherman, George

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

Nays

Arnott, Ted

Baird, John R.

Barrett, Toby

Chudleigh, Ted

Clark, Brad

Clement, Tony

Coburn, Brian

Cunningham, Dianne

DeFaria, Carl

Dunlop, Garfield

Ecker, Janet

Elliott, Brenda

Eves, Ernie

Flaherty, Jim

Galt, Doug

Gilchrist, Steve

Gill, Raminder

Guzzo, Garry J.

Hastings, John

Hodgson, Chris

Jackson, Cameron

Johns, Helen

Johnson, Bert

Kells, Morley

Klees, Frank

Marland, Margaret

Martiniuk, Gerry

Mazzilli, Frank

McDonald, Al

Miller, Norm

Molinari, Tina R.

Munro, Julia

Murdoch, Bill

Mushinski, Marilyn

O'Toole, John

Runciman, Robert W.

Sampson, Rob

Spina, Joseph

Sterling, Norman W.

Stewart, R. Gary

Stockwell, Chris

Tascona, Joseph N.

Turnbull, David

Wettlaufer, Wayne

Wilson, Jim

Witmer, Elizabeth

Wood, Bob

Young, David

Clerk of the House (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 37; the nays are 48.

The Speaker: I declare the amendment to the amendment to the motion lost.

The next question to be decided is Mr McGuinty's amendment to the motion.

All those in favour of Mr McGuinty's amendment to the motion will please say "aye."

All those opposed will please say "nay."

In my opinion, the nays have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1425 to 1430.

The Speaker: All those in favour will please rise and be recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

Agostino, Dominic

Bartolucci, Rick

Bisson, Gilles

Bountrogianni, Marie

Boyer, Claudette

Bradley, James J.

Brown, Michael A.

Bryant, Michael

Christopherson, David

Churley, Marilyn

Colle, Mike

Conway, Sean G.

Cordiano, Joseph

Curling, Alvin

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duncan, Dwight

Gravelle, Michael

Hampton, Howard

Hoy, Pat

Kennedy, Gerard

Kormos, Peter

Kwinter, Monte

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Levac, David

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

McGuinty, Dalton

McLeod, Lyn

McMeekin, Ted

Parsons, Ernie

Patten, Richard

Peters, Steve

Prue, Michael

Ramsay, David

Sergio, Mario

The Speaker: All those opposed to the amendment to the motion will please rise.

Nays

Arnott, Ted

Baird, John R.

Barrett, Toby

Chudleigh, Ted

Clark, Brad

Clement, Tony

Coburn, Brian

Cunningham, Dianne

DeFaria, Carl

Dunlop, Garfield

Ecker, Janet

Elliott, Brenda

Eves, Ernie

Flaherty, Jim

Galt, Doug

Gilchrist, Steve

Gill, Raminder

Guzzo, Garry J.

Hastings, John

Hodgson, Chris

Jackson, Cameron

Johns, Helen

Johnson, Bert

Kells, Morley

Klees, Frank

Marland, Margaret

Martiniuk, Gerry

Maves, Bart

Mazzilli, Frank

McDonald, Al

Miller, Norm

Molinari, Tina R.

Munro, Julia

Murdoch, Bill

Mushinski, Marilyn

O'Toole, John

Runciman, Robert W.

Sampson, Rob

Spina, Joseph

Sterling, Norman W.

Stewart, R. Gary

Stockwell, Chris

Tascona, Joseph N.

Turnbull, David

Wettlaufer, Wayne

Wilson, Jim

Witmer, Elizabeth

Wood, Bob

Young, David

Clerk of the House: The ayes are 36; the nays are 49.

The Speaker: I declare the amendment to the motion lost.

We now come to the motion by Ms Mushinski.

All those in favour of Ms Mushinski's motion 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 1434 to 1439.

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

Ayes

Arnott, Ted

Baird, John R.

Barrett, Toby

Chudleigh, Ted

Clark, Brad

Clement, Tony

Coburn, Brian

Cunningham, Dianne

DeFaria, Carl

Dunlop, Garfield

Ecker, Janet

Elliott, Brenda

Eves, Ernie

Flaherty, Jim

Galt, Doug

Gilchrist, Steve

Gill, Raminder

Guzzo, Garry J.

Hastings, John

Hodgson, Chris

Jackson, Cameron

Johns, Helen

Johnson, Bert

Kells, Morley

Klees, Frank

Marland, Margaret

Martiniuk, Gerry

Maves, Bart

Mazzilli, Frank

McDonald, Al

Miller, Norm

Molinari, Tina R.

Munro, Julia

Murdoch, Bill

Mushinski, Marilyn

O'Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Runciman, Robert W.

Sampson, Rob

Spina, Joseph

Sterling, Norman W.

Stewart, R. Gary

Stockwell, Chris

Tascona, Joseph N.

Turnbull, David

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

Agostino, Dominic

Bartolucci, Rick

Bisson, Gilles

Bountrogianni, Marie

Boyer, Claudette

Bradley, James J.

Brown, Michael A.

Bryant, Michael

Christopherson, David

Churley, Marilyn

Colle, Mike

Conway, Sean G.

Cordiano, Joseph

Curling, Alvin

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duncan, Dwight

Gravelle, Michael

Hampton, Howard

Hoy, Pat

Kennedy, Gerard

Kormos, Peter

Kwinter, Monte

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Levac, David

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

McGuinty, Dalton

McLeod, Lyn

McMeekin, Ted

Parsons, Ernie

Patten, Richard

Peters, Steve

Prue, Michael

Ramsay, David

Sergio, Mario

Smitherman, George

Clerk of the House: The ayes are 50; the nays are 37.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried. Let it therefore be resolved that an humble address be presented to His Honour the Lieutenant

Governor as follows:

"To the Honourable James K. Bartleman, Lieutenant Governor of Ontario:

"We, Her Majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects, the Legislative Assembly of the province of Ontario, now assembled, beg leave to thank Your Honour for the

gracious speech Your Honour has addressed to us."

Mr Dwight Duncan (Windsor-St Clair): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: A moment ago my colleague raised the possibility of extending time in

committee with respect to Bill 81. The government House leader indicated a willingness to discuss that at House leaders' meeting. Mr Speaker, I seek your advice. If we wait until the House leaders'

meeting to do that, it'll be too late because the bill is before committee Thursday morning for half an hour for clause-by-clause.

Given Justice O'Connor's report, and I know the sincerity the government House leader conveys with respect to the implementation of that report, could I ask

that the government consider a meeting today between the three House leaders to make a determination with respect to further opportunity to discuss Bill 81 in the context of Justice O'Connor's

recommendations?

The Speaker: As you know, the Speaker doesn't

schedule the House leaders' meeting. They can meet any time they like. You can use any of the

facilities; we have an office at the side. We'll offer anything we can and it will be up to the House leaders. I don't set up the meetings, unfortunately.

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of Environment and Energy, Government House Leader): On the same point of order, Mr Speaker: My door is always

open.

ORAL QUESTIONS

CHILDREN'S HEALTH SERVICES

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): My question is to the Premier. Last week the Minister of Health said that he was shutting down

children's cardiac care programs in Ottawa and London. You said, when approached by the media, that you needed an opportunity to review the matter. Now that you've had that opportunity, I'm sure

you would have come to two very important realizations. First of all, requiring families to drive up to five hours to Toronto for care will impose tremendous hardship on them. Second, there is no

medical rationale supporting this centralization program. Premier, will you admit that the decision to centralize cardiac care for our children is wrong and that the best thing for our kids is to

provide continuing quality care close to home?

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): No, I will not. I think the most important thing at issue here is the health

of young people and how they can best be looked after to the best of everyone's ability. That is the underlying focus of the government. It was the underlying focus of the study which was done by a

group of professional medical people.

Mr McGuinty: Premier, you're making the same argument as your minister: you're saying this is all about better health care. If you take a look

at the studies that have been quoted by your minister, you will discover that in those particular cases we're talking about some tragic, horrific outcomes.

In the case of the Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, the success rate for pediatric cardiac surgery and catheter interventions is the same as at Sick

Kids. There is no medical rationale for taking this program away from CHEO and transferring it to Sick Kids. On top of that, doctors are telling us that we are going to place very tiny, very

fragile, very vulnerable children -- infants, in fact -- at risk by requiring that we transport them to Sick Kids in Toronto.

I'm asking you, Premier, to take a long, hard look. If you do that, you will discover that what this effectively does is impose a tremendous burden on our

families. It is not a case of improving outcomes for our families; if that were the case, you and I would have something on which we could agree. But the fact is that the outcomes at Sick Kids are

the same as the outcomes at the Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario. I'm asking you to review this matter, and, once you've done that, I'm asking you to agree that this is not in the best

interests of eastern Ontario families or their kids.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): It's too noisy. We'll wait. Sorry, Premier.

Hon Mr Eves: I'd be happy to review the report, but I don't believe the facts in the report are indeed as the leader of the official

opposition states. I believe the facts are that the mortality rate in comparable cases at Sick Children's Hospital in Toronto is zero and at CHEO it's somewhere between 2% and 4%. Therein lies the

crux of this very difficult decision the government has to make. The government has to make a decision based on what is in the best interests of all the young people who are in need of this type of

surgery in the province.

You will recall that a similar situation arose in London, Ontario, and that particular hospital stopped doing these types of procedures as of last November,

following a coroner's report. Surely the leader of the official opposition isn't going to wait until there is a coroner's report to deal with the situation in Ottawa. We're trying to avoid that

situation.

Mr McGuinty: Premier, I can tell you that your information is not the same as my information. If you have information that you would like to

table here and make clear to all of us, we'd be delighted to entertain that and receive it.

What I can tell you is that my information is telling me the outcomes at the Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario are identical to the outcomes at Sick Kids

in Toronto.

I can also tell you that in those cases where studies have said that in order to bring about improvement in outcomes you have to bring about an increase in

volume, the study that's relied upon by your minister is a California study. The plan there resulted in an average travel distance for families of 45 miles to the centralized site. In the case of

Ottawa families having to travel to Toronto, we're talking about a distance that is closer to 300 miles.

I think a very important factor in all this is, what is the hardship that is going to be saddled on our families? It is tough enough to have a very sick child

in the family. That is already extremely stressful. But to tell those families that they have to visit their child 300 miles away, that they have to struggle to juggle their responsibilities

vis-à-vis their child at a hospital in Toronto and the rest back home in Ottawa, is unfair to those families.

I'm asking you, Premier, to review the --

The Speaker: The member's time is up.

Hon Mr Eves: I've already indicated to the leader of the official opposition that I'd be happy to review the report. But I do have to point

out a few facts from the report, as I understand them.

First of all, this is a specialized pediatric services review committee. Over half the members of the committee are people who aren't from the greater Toronto

area. In fact, it is made up of people from southwestern and eastern Ontario, as it should have been.

The number of procedures being performed at CHEO have been declining steadily for the last three or four years. The studies coming from Manitoba, our own

study, as well as other studies around the world indicate that the more procedures, especially complicated procedures, that are carried out at any specific site, the higher the success rate and the

lower the mortality rate. Surely that is the ultimate objective here at the end of the day.

MINISTRY OF THE ENVIRONMENT STAFF

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): This question is to the Premier. Last week we received part two of the Walkerton Inquiry

report. I was frightened, in fact, to learn through the Globe and Mail and the Toronto Star that you insist that your 1996 cuts to the Ministry of the Environment and to the number of inspectors

working there had no link whatsoever to the Walkerton tragedy.

I am sure you've had the opportunity to read part one of the report of the Walkerton Inquiry. You will be aware of Mr Justice O'Connor's findings with respect

to the impact your cuts had and the way they contributed, at least in part, to the Walkerton tragedy.

I'm asking you today, Premier: in the face of Mr Justice O'Connor's findings, how can you possibly say the cuts you made as our Minister of Finance had nothing

whatsoever to do with the Walkerton tragedy?

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): There were many contributing factors to the tragedy that happened in

Walkerton two years ago. Obviously, it is hindsight now, but it was the reporting mechanisms with respect to testing and where those results were reported to which in

part contributed to the

tragedy that was Walkerton. That is what I said on Friday and that is what I'm saying in this Legislature today. The important thing from here is to get on with the job we have started of making

sure that Walkerton never happens again.

Surely the leader of the official opposition will recognize that on page 2 of Mr Justice O'Connor's report, he talks about the quality of drinking water in the

province of Ontario and how safe it is. It's one of the leading jurisdictions in the world. I didn't hear that in his

preamble. I'm sure he left that out by mistake.

Mr McGuinty: What I didn't hear from you, sir, is at least some admission to the effect that your cuts -- you wielded the knife recklessly --

led, at least in part, to what happened at the Walkerton tragedy.

Pages 34 and 35 of Mr Justice O'Connor's report, part one, say the following: "Before the decision was made to significantly reduce the MOE's budget in 1996

... the cabinet received numerous warnings that the impacts could result in increased risks to the environment and human health. These risks included those resulting from reducing the number of

proactive inspections -- risks that turned out to be relevant to the events in Walkerton. The decision to proceed with the budget reductions was taken without either an assessment of the risks or

the preparation of a risk management plan." He is talking here specifically, Premier, about your cuts and how they led, at least in part, to the Walkerton tragedy.

I don't need to hear about the reporting requirement. We know that too was a problem. I need some assurance that you understand the role you played leading up

to the Walkerton tragedy. Ontarians need to know that if we're going to have confidence in you moving the yardstick forward now.

Will you stand up, Premier, and admit that your cuts led, at least in part, to the Walkerton tragedy?

Hon Mr Eves: Your bluster in the House here today is really trying to make political hay out of a tragedy that happened in the province of

Ontario. I don't really think it does anybody any good at the end of the day --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Sorry for the interruption. Premier?

Hon Mr Eves: Since May 2000, the government has spent over $351 million in safe drinking water initiatives. Is it enough? Obviously, it's not

enough. That's why on Friday morning I said we will be committing to implement every one of Mr Justice O'Connor's 93 recommendations in the second report as well. It is going to take some time to

implement some of those recommendations, but some of them are going to be relatively easy to deal with. We're going to deal with them in short order.

I would remind the leader of the official opposition, though, that Mr Justice O'Connor premises and prefaces his remarks by saying that readers should not

conclude that Ontario's existing system needs radical reform. It does not. We can be proud of the high level of expertise and competence that our leading water providers exhibit.

Mr McGuinty: Premier, you can bob and weave all you want, but at some point in time you're going to have to admit that your cuts to the

Ministry of the Environment -- you're the guy who wielded the knife -- led at least in part to the Walkerton tragedy.

In the Tory leadership debate on January 17, you had this to say, "You know, within 30 days of taking office in 1995, Mike Harris and I sat down, and we were

able to cut $2 billion of spending out of the provincial budget."

Mr Justice O'Connor said -- to remind you, Premier -- "The reductions were initiated by the central agencies of the government, rather than from within the

MOE, and they were not based on an assessment of what was required to carry out the MOE's statutory responsibilities."

This has everything to do with your involvement in the Walkerton tragedy, Premier. If you really want to move forward, the first thing you have to do is take

responsibility. When are you going to stand up and take responsibility for the fact that your reckless cuts -- you wielded the knife with wild abandon -- led at least in part to the Walkerton

tragedy?

Hon Mr Eves: Very simply, that is not the case. He has no conception at all of how the budgetary process in this place works or how any

reductions that may have taken place in any ministry occurred. They're not imposed from the top down; they are requested from various ministers. They go to the Minister of Finance every year. That

is how the process goes. That is how the process worked then and how it's working now.

If he wants to come back to the Walkerton issue --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. The Premier has a few more seconds.

Hon Mr Eves: I understand the frustration of the member from Vaughan-King-Aurora -- I'm glad to see he's here. I understand his frustration.

He wishes he were sitting there. Maybe some day he'll get a chance to sit there.

Walkerton is a very serious issue. The government is taking the recommendations of Mr Justice O'Connor very seriously, and we will be proceeding with those

recommendations.

WATER QUALITY

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Premier. Last week Mr Justice O'Connor presented his recommendations to protect

Ontario's drinking water and prevent another Walkerton tragedy. His recommendations set out a clear agenda: to provide safe, clean drinking water for all Ontario residents.

We understand from the press that you have now committed to implementing all his recommendations. If that's the case, Premier, you will have to get busy, very

busy, this spring session. Safe drinking water needs to be job number one.

So my question is, will you stop pushing Hydro privatization, which nobody wants, and focus on safe, clean drinking water, which everybody needs?

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): First of all, we are not pushing Hydro privatization. Secondly, we will

certainly spend the time that is required to deal with the implementation of Mr Justice O'Connor's report.

Mr Hampton: Well, Premier, according to your

schedule we have five weeks left in the spring session to get serious about safe, clean drinking

water. If you are serious, there's some work you can do right now.

Your colleagues tried to push through a flawed nutrient management bill last December. New Democrats held it up because it was flawed, and Mr Justice

O'Connor's recommendations point out how clearly it was flawed. But the bill is still before a legislative committee.

New Democrats will bring forward amendments straight out of Mr Justice O'Connor's report so that they can be implemented in that bill. The question is, will

you commit to the people of Ontario that you will not try to pass the nutrient management bill until the recommendations from Mr Justice O'Connor that should be in that bill are in fact

included?

Hon Mr Eves: As a matter of fact, Mr Justice O'Connor says on page 138 of his second report, "With respect to nutrient-containing materials,

the act, if passed in its present form, would certainly provide the province with the authority to create the tools it would need to develop the farm water protection planning system that I am

recommending."

That is exactly what we plan on doing. To the leader of the third party, the draft regulations and thoughts on regulations can be ready to go. They can go out.

They are the tools, I believe, that Mr Justice O'Connor is referring to on page 138 of his report. We'd be happy to have your input and that of the committee and your members on the committee over

the summer to those regulations to implement the tools in the act in its current form, as Mr Justice O'Connor himself recommends passing in this Legislature.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Final supplementary.

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): Premier, if you go on to read the report you will find that there are discrepancies in the existing

Nutrient Management Act and the recommendations from Judge O'Connor, one being that he wants the Ministry of the Environment to be the lead ministry. There are others that I pointed out earlier

today. I am glad that my caucus, the NDP caucus, in fact sent it back out to committee so that we do have another opportunity to make those amendments.

I want to ask you another question here. You say you want to support all of the recommendations made by Judge O'Connor. Let me remind you that the introduction

of a Safe Drinking Water Act is one of his key recommendations. But when push comes to shove, your government has denied again and again the ability to send my Bill 3, the Safe Drinking Water Act,

which passed in this House, out to committee so we can bring it back for speedy passage.

There is a bill before the House already which is comprehensive and should be sent out to committee now. So I'm asking you, will you commit today to send Bill

3, my Safe Drinking Water Act, out for public committee hearings so it can come back for third reading and a final vote?

Hon Mr Eves: Yes, I will. As a matter of fact, I had an opportunity to review the member's bill over the weekend. There are five or six

additions that the government believes are amendments that would be needed to provide the effect that Mr Justice O'Connor would like to provide with the Safe Drinking Water Act. I'd be more than

happy to see that member's bill go out to committee for discussion.

COMPETITIVE ELECTRICITY MARKET

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): A question to the Premier: Tom Adams, your comrade-in-arms and supporter of your scheme to deregulate

and privatize our hydro system, now says that Ontario's electricity consumers are facing big hydro price spikes this summer.

For months your government has been saying, "Oh, don't worry. Ontario has plenty of power. Ontario won't be like California. Everything's going to be fine."

But now one of your staunchest supporters is saying that you're in trouble. He says, "Deregulating hydro when you don't have enough power means hydro rates can go through the roof this summer."

Premier, why are you risking big hydro price spikes when even one of your staunchest supporters says it's going to put you into trouble?

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): First of all, there will be fluctuations in the price of hydroelectric power,

electricity rates. He knows that. He knows that if he looks at what the rates have been since the market was opened, in general the rates have been far below what they normally are. He will also

know that there is some protection with respect to the rates not going above 3.8 cents a kilowatt hour that OPG provides to their customers, and if they do happen to spike for a brief period of

time in the summer over that amount, those customers from OPG will be rebated.

Mr Hampton: Mr Adams said very clearly, "The delay in returning Pickering A to service, combined with" other issues "and slowdown in

private-sector investment, is substantially increasing the risk of big price swings and big price spikes."

Premier, you know that in a deregulated hydro system the price swings can be very wild, and you know that the problem in California, as your government keeps

saying, is that they didn't have enough power at the right time. That sounds like the same recipe that Mr Adams says you're now headed for here.

So I'm asking, why do you persist in your agenda of deregulating our hydro system when even one of your staunchest supporters says it may lead to incredible

hydro price spikes this summer?

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I'm sure the Minister of Energy can answer this specific request.

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of Environment and Energy, Government House Leader): Mr Adams was referring to the supply adequacy report done

by the IMO in April 2002.

The fact of the matter is, I say to the leader of the third party, when they were discussing the supply adequacy report, Pickering was assumed not to be in

place. Therefore, having Pickering up or having Pickering down would not have any effect on the supply of power in Ontario. I've told you this three times. You can get the report and view it for

yourself.

Either you're choosing to ignore the facts or you're not understanding the facts. I think it's probably the latter rather than the former. Let me say as

clearly as I can again: the IMO study presumed the Pickering plant wouldn't be operating, and they still determined there would be an adequate supply of power for the province of Ontario -- end of

story; full stop.

CHILDREN'S HEALTH SERVICES

Mr Steve Peters (Elgin-Middlesex-London): My question is for the Premier. Last Thursday the Minister of Health announced he was shutting down

the pediatric cardiac surgery programs at the children's hospitals of both western Ontario and eastern Ontario. You stated later that day, "I believe that if you have the expertise and the ability

to provide those services in a regional centre, then you should be able to do that." Well, London had that expertise and that ability. Since October, with the threatened closure of the program in

London, there's been a tremendous outcry from patients, families and physicians.

The studies and numbers used in the report do not enjoy unanimous support. Please listen to all these experts and do not be selective. These same studies also

conclude that transferring from one hospital to another has a significant risk of mortality, and yet this is exactly what your minister is proposing to do for all sick children outside Toronto.

Premier, I'm asking you today to personally review this decision. Do not allow your minister to put the lives of children at risk. Will you intervene? Will you

commit to protect regional pediatric care for the children of this province?

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): The honourable member will be aware, I'm sure, of the remarks of Dr Tim

Frewen, chair of pediatric studies at University of Western Ontario, who in fact does not come to the conclusion that the member comes to with respect to this. Dr Frewen and others who served on

the review committee have the best interests of young people at heart. Surely that is the most important thing at the end of the day, as I said to his leader during an earlier question.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Final supplementary.

Mr Richard Patten (Ottawa Centre): Premier, you just mentioned that you would do a review. I would hope that in doing your review you have

certain information. Obviously, out of interest, we have certain information as well. We're doing studies, we're taking a look at studies that were done and we've read the report as well.

We've got professionals who are questioning this particular move. Dr Jamie Hutchison, who is in charge of our intensive care unit, is saying you will be

threatening the lives of children by the very nature of transporting children for five hours by car, or perhaps a little less.

You will remember Sean McCarthy, the little boy who drowned in a creek and was dead for two and a half hours. We reviewed that particular case, and you will

know the surgeon said that if CHEO had not been there and they had tried to transport that child to Toronto, he would have died. Sean is alive today because of that hospital and because of that

program. If you make this particular move, you will not just hurt the surgery unit; you'll hurt the whole cardiac unit.

So I ask you: when you do your review, will you allow us to provide some information on the arguments you put forward for your particular decision?

Hon Mr Eves: I obviously will take a look at any information he has with respect to a review. He makes a very important point, but we're not

talking about closing down all pediatric services at CHEO. We're talking about a specific type of surgery. In the case of CHEO, I believe it's elective surgery. But I'd be happy to look at the

information he has, and I'm sure the Minister of Health will as well, as we go forward.

AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): My question is for the Associate Minister of Enterprise, Opportunity and Innovation. No one understands better than

the MPPs from Durham region the importance of the automobile manufacturing sector to our economy, both locally and indeed provincially and nationally. This industry employs over 130,000 people in

our province, many of them at the GM assembly plant in Oshawa and related manufacturing centres throughout Durham region. This industry has given hundreds of families a high standard of living,

opportunities for advancement, education and a great way of life. I know this personally within my own circumstances.

A strong automotive industry is vital to the success of Ontario's economy. I'd like to know what our government is doing to ensure that the automotive industry

remains competitive and a strong part of Ontario's economy.

Hon David Turnbull (Associate Minister of Enterprise, Opportunity and Innovation): I would like to thank the extremely hard-working member

from Durham for this question.

The main task of the Ministry of Enterprise, Opportunity and Innovation is to ensure that we have a competitive and attractive business climate in which all

businesses, including the auto sector, can expand and create even more jobs.

The auto industry, as the member mentioned, is extremely important to Ontario's economy. That's why last Wednesday, Minister Flaherty hosted an automotive

round table with experts from the industry, including automakers, parts companies, academics and representatives from the CAW, as well as the federal government. This is the first step toward

strengthening the industry not only in Ontario but in Canada. It's also the first step toward laying the foundations for a long-term strategy for the auto industry. We will do whatever is needed,

as government, to facilitate new ideas and fresh approaches.

Mr O'Toole: Thank you very much for that response, Minister.

I was pleased to attend the round table myself, along with other industry leaders as well, as you've described. I indeed commend you and the minister for

spending the whole day in your leadership role consulting and listening to the people who work in the auto sector. I think it's important to listen to the ideas of those who work in the field and

to hear the thoughts they have on strengthening the industry.

There is, however, one concern about the follow-up to the round table consultations. Minister, what will be the outcome of the round table and what does it

mean for the men and women, not just at General Motors and the assembly line but the entire auto sector in the province of Ontario? What are the next steps?

Hon Mr Turnbull: As I mentioned, the round table was an important first step toward forming a long-term strategy to strengthen the automotive

industry. But as the member from Durham points out, it was just a first step, which is why we have committed to releasing a follow-up report, an action plan, on the many new and innovative ideas

that we've heard at the round table, by the middle of June. This action plan will address ways in which Ontario can continue to attract new automotive investment and jobs -- investment and jobs

that will help areas such as Durham region.

We've also committed to reconvening an auto advisory council as a way to work through some of the concerns raised at the round table and develop a long-term

vision for the industry. We also plan to meet the mayors and municipal officials and CEOs of the key companies.

The auto industry is one of the very important sectors of Ontario, and the government values the contribution it makes to our economy.

CURRICULUM

Mr Gerard Kennedy (Parkdale-High Park): I have a question for the Minister of Education. I have here a copy of your curriculum of a few years

ago -- a nice cover; and you like to talk about it a lot. But here's a newer report, the Bailey bridges project out of the Niagara board. The Niagara board has spent eight weeks looking at the

impact of your curriculum on struggling students. They call it the Bailey bridges report because that's what they did in the Second World War: they put up temporary bridges and helped them get out

to the other side. The problem is that this isn't about a natural disaster or war; it's about the disaster of your lack of commitment to these kids. They document thousands of kids who are

struggling. They say, "What has become very apparent is that the new curriculum, while in itself a necessary change, was hurriedly put together, poorly planned, implemented in an unworkable fashion

and grossly underfunded."

Minister, today what I want to find out from you is, are you prepared to build a Bailey bridge of your own? Are you prepared to help these kids in time for

next year? Will you announce today the kind of support you're going to extend to the thousands of kids in Niagara and elsewhere who are suffering because of your lack of support for the

curriculum?

Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Deputy Premier, Minister of Education): I appreciate the information that you've brought to my attention. I'd be pleased

if you would give me a copy of the report that has been done by the Niagara board.

As the member knows, our intentions are to provide the best curriculum for the students in Ontario. I certainly am aware that some of our students are having

difficulties, as students have always had. There is a need to provide them with remediation support. I'd be happy to take a look at the report. You can be assured we will do what is in the best

interests of students in order that they can succeed and achieve success.

Mr Kennedy: Minister, let's find out, because the Niagara board talked to almost 1,200 people for this report. I understand this is the first

comprehensive look at what's happened under your curriculum.

You have known, though, that 40,000 students failed math in grade 9. You've known about that. You've known about the absence of credits for almost 50,000 kids

in the same program. Randall Daly, the frontline principal who did this report, says, "The results show that students are frustrated beyond belief, parents have disengaged, teachers are overworked

and continue to feel unappreciated, books are scarce, and resources are few."

On February 8, you talked about the need for corrections. Your predecessor has known about this for a long, long time. Is your tenure as minister going to be a

protracted charade? Are you actually going to hear or just pretend to listen?

There's a report here. It's built on what's happening in this province. The evidence is there that there's an urgency to act for next year. All you have to say

today, Minister, to people like Mike and Kaley Mihalich, who live in Sarnia and are doing well but are finding it so stressful they can't hold down jobs, they can't live a normal life, partly

because of the lack of support for the curriculum -- Madam Minister, I have a very quick question. Will you be abandoning kids like the Mihalichs or will you today be telling them there will be

something extra for them, a Bailey bridge, some tangible support in the budget --

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

Hon Mrs Witmer: We are well aware of the fact that there are some students who are going to need assistance and support. I have already

started meetings with parents, teachers, educators, individuals who are well acquainted with the curriculum. Obviously we've already invested as well. We've provided $25 million for remedial

programs for students in grades 7 to 10 in 2001 and 2001-02.

But again, I would very much appreciate receiving a copy of the report. I do believe we need to take a look at the report and at the recommendations. I can

tell you we want to work with the Niagara board and with other boards in order that we can help the students in this province achieve success. That's our ultimate goal.

HIGHWAY 401

Mr Doug Galt (Northumberland): My question is directed to the Minister of Transportation. The people in Northumberland continue to lobby for

upgrades to Highway 401. As you're aware, Minister, in Northumberland the annual increase in the urban population is 3%. There's a thriving tourist industry and a dynamic economy.

County council is concerned about the number of detours on to County Road 2, previously provincial Highway 2. Northumberland needs a transportation corridor

that can meet the growing needs and provide increased road safety. Recently you and I jointly made an announcement.

Minister, can you please explain to my constituents and the business community in my riding of Northumberland how this project will indeed help?

Hon Norman W. Sterling (Minister of Transportation): I'm always glad to make announcements on roads that lead east. We understand the need for

good transportation links, particularly for the economy of the member's area in Northumberland. That's why I was pleased to announce most recently significant improvements to Highway 401. We're

spending $21 million to widen Highway 401 from four to six lanes between Northumberland County Road 2 and County Road 28. As well, we will be constructing a cement barrier down the centre of the

highway in order to provide enhanced safety for motorists going down that way. As I said last week, I do happen to travel that way quite frequently back and forth each weekend.

Supporting economic growth is important not only for Northumberland but for all of Ontario. Our transportation corridors like Highway 401 are essential to that

growth.

Mr Galt: Thank you very much, Minister. I appreciate that response. Also, the people of Northumberland appreciate that centre barrier. It has

certainly saved a very, very large number of lives.

Minister, as you are aware, there are a lot more lanes going out of Toronto to the north and to the west than there are going to the east. The limited number

of lanes on the 401 going east to serve eastern Ontario, particularly Northumberland, has limited the capacity of those areas. The limited number of lanes going east results in unnecessary traffic

jams and long delays. Will this $21-million investment in the 401 in the Port Hope area assist in the long-term investment in Northumberland county?

Hon Mr Sterling: It certainly will. This government is proud not only of what it's doing for roads and transportation east, but we've been

doing things all over this province. In fact, since 1995 we've invested $6.5 billion in improving our infrastructure -- unheard-of amounts prior to our government coming to power.

This is of course important to Northumberland; I understand that. As well, in the east we're building a considerable highway, 417, west of Ottawa; to the north

we're including Highway 69 and Highway 11; and we're doing the TransCanada Highway east of Sault Ste Marie, just to name a few of the projects. We're looking at improvements to our international

boundaries as well. We are investing. We have invested in the past and we will invest in the future in the infrastructure of Ontario, particularly with regard to transportation.

LONG-TERM CARE

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I have a question for the Premier. Today the Ontario Health Coalition released a report regarding Ontario's

long-term-care facilities. That report clearly shows that changes in policy made by your government to benefit for-profit long-term-care facility operators comes at the expense of seniors and

residents who need care in these facilities.

For example, since 1999 your government has eliminated the requirement to provide a minimum of 2.25 hours of care per resident per day in nursing homes;

eliminated the requirement to have a registered nurse on duty 24 hours per day, seven days a week; eliminated the requirement for nursing homes to submit staffing schedules to the Ministry of

Health; eliminated the requirement to reserve the majority of long-term-care beds as ward accommodation; and reduced by 40% the number of annual inspections of long-term-care facilities between

1996 and 1999.

The question, Premier, is: when is your government going to stop catering to the demands of the for-profit long-term-care operators and finally start

responding to the serious health care needs of residents in our long-term-care facilities?

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I refer this question to the associate minister of long-term care.

Hon Dan Newman (Associate Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): This report today is a report that was prepared for the Hospital Employees'

Union of British Columbia by the Ontario Health Coalition. In fact, I haven't had a chance to look at the report yet and I wonder if it indeed mentioned the fact that while the NDP was in

government, not one single new long-term-care bed was built in this province.

That aside, the questions that the member opposite raised today about the minimum requirement of nursing care in nursing homes in our province -- each and

every resident in a long-term-care facility is assessed according to his or her needs. That's the level of care required for each one of those residents in that facility.

The question that the member also raised with respect to having a registered nurse on duty -- the Nursing Homes Act states that a registered nurse must be

available to each long-term-care facility 24 hours a day, seven days a week. In fact, the ratios of private to not-for-profit and charitable homes really hasn't changed since their party was the

government.

Ms Martel: Minister, I suggest you read the report, because the facts in the report are very clear. The report goes back to a report

commissioned by your government that was released in January 2001, done by PricewaterhouseCoopers, which showed the results of a massive study that compared the situation in Ontario's

long-term-care facilities with others in Canada, the US and Europe. They showed that Ontario's long-term-care facilities have the lowest level of nursing care across all jurisdictions studied;

Ontario's long-term-care facilities have the lowest level of rehabilitation services across all the jurisdictions studied; and Ontario's long-term-care residents with behavioural problems receive

10 minutes of therapy per day, among the lowest levels across all of the jurisdictions studied. Your changes with respect to nursing care, with respect to the minimum level of care provided, have

had a direct, very negative impact on residents living in long-term-care facilities.

In light of the report released today, in light of the report funded by your government and released in January 2001, will your government now implement new

standards of care in Ontario's long-term-care facilities so that Ontario can finally be at the top instead of at the bottom of the heap when it comes to caring for residents in long-term-care

facilities?

Hon Mr Newman: Our government has demonstrated, without a doubt, that we are committed to providing quality, sustainable long-term-care

services in Ontario. We recognize that, as the population ages, increased demands on long-term-care services will be felt. That's why we moved forward in 1998 on an ambitious $1.2-billion plan to

construct 20,000 new long-term-care beds, as well as to refurbish up to 16,000 beds in the class D facilities in our province.

We have a strong commitment to long-term care. In fact, when the member opposite was part of a government for five years, not one single new long-term-care bed

was built in this province, at a time when everyone agreed that we had a growing and aging population. This government does not need to take a lecture from the NDP on caring for our seniors in

long-term-care facilities.

COMPETITIVE ELECTRICITY MARKET /

MARCHÉ COMPÉTITIF DE L'ÉLECTRICITÉ

Mr Jean-Marc Lalonde (Glengarry-Prescott-Russell): My question is for the Minister of Energy. Minister, last week the member from Scarborough

East said in this House that no one from his government signed an electricity contract. I ask you, could this be because your government has concerns about the legality of these contracts?

Ontarians have been misled, threatened, harassed and forced to sign contracts. Many seniors were told that their hydro would be disconnected if they didn't

sign the contract immediately, while others have had their signature forged on these contracts.

Here are a few hundred examples that I received from a Glengarry news clipping. The Quesnel family were told, "You have 20 minutes to sign or else we're

cutting your power off." I'll give you this copy. I have the Cloutier family. They were told that they had signed a contract, which they never did. They are still waiting for a copy. They've been

waiting for months. On my own contract, they forged my signature twice in a year. On this contract, the Marchand family from Embrun were approached by a gentleman at the door who was saying he was

from Embrun Hydro -- false again. They were from Direct Energy.

My question to you, Minister, is, are you prepared to cancel all contracts signed prior to today and bring in a standard contract to protect Ontario consumers?

Secondly, would you revoke the licences of retailers such as the Ontario Energy Savings Corp, who, I am told, are thieves who have misled, threatened, harassed and forged signatures on many of

their contracts?

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of Environment and Energy, Government House Leader): I think it's very fortunate he has made those comments in

this chamber rather than outside.

Interjection: Maybe not.

Hon Mr Stockwell: Maybe not. The fact of the matter is, if these are examples -- and I have no reason to doubt the honourable member; I know

him to be a very honourable and sincere man -- you should bring those to the attention of myself or the Ontario Energy Board. You're not even just talking about unethical practices, you're talking

about criminal actions with respect to forging signatures etc. This is well beyond the scope of even the energy board with respect to reviewing them. I'm sure they would, but this is a criminal

action that should be investigated by the police.

So yes, I will be happy to review those issues and certainly they can be dealt with by the Ontario Energy Board. As I said last week to your honourable friend

Mr Conway, these are exactly the kinds of things -- if you can bring them to the attention of myself and the Ontario Energy Board -- we'd like to look into. And yes, the energy board has the teeth

to withdraw licences if that's what is necessary.

Mr Lalonde: It's in police hands already. We need a stronger ruling at the present time. You are too weak.

Monsieur le ministre, selon l'information reçue d'un de vos membres, le député, votre gouvernement voudrait vendre Hydro One dû à sa

mauvaise gestion. Au mois de mars dernier, Hydro One faisait parvenir une lettre adressée à chacun des résidents et résidentes d'une ville de ma région qu'à compter du

1 er février 2002, le coût de l'électricité serait de 7,67 cents le kilowattheure. J'ai immédiatement appelé Hydro One pour des explications. Ils m'ont

confirmé que la lettre portait dans l'erreur et aussi à la confusion, mais je me suis aperçu que le lendemain, après qu'on a fait parvenir ces lettres, un des vendeurs d'une

filiale d'Hydro One cognait à chacune des portes pour faire signer un contrat avec une augmentation de 38,37 %.

Hydro One a commis une grave erreur. Je crois que vous avez une responsabilité. Comme certains députés de votre gouvernement reconnaissaient

qu'il y avait une mauvaise gestion au sein d'Hydro One, avez-vous l'intention de procéder à un --

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

Hon Mr Stockwell: Again, some of the allegations are in fact criminal by nature. I'm not suggesting for a moment that investigation isn't

proper, but I'm seriously suggesting to the member opposite that if you haven't reported these to the police, you should. Furthermore, if the allegations you're making have substance and weight, if

you provide that kind of information to the Ontario Energy Board, they are in fact entrusted with the responsibility of investigating circumstances exactly as you speak. They have the power to

fine, to roll back, to wipe out contracts altogether and to withdraw the licence.

I say to the member opposite, I suggest you avail yourself, through the legislation that was passed, of the powers of the Ontario Energy Board, because exactly

what you're asking me to do already rests with the Ontario Energy Board. If you seek through them some kind of reprisal, you will get it if your allegations prove to be true. I encourage you, I beg

you, to go and see them, put this stuff before them, and they will clean up this nasty bit of affair.

NORTHERN ONTARIO DEVELOPMENT

Mr Al McDonald (Nipissing): My question is for the Minister of Northern Development and Mines. I'd like to take this opportunity to

congratulate the minister on his new responsibilities. I know that northerners will be well-served by his appointment.

During my by-election in Nipissing, I met many people and had the opportunity to speak to many of them about their concerns. One of the concerns that seemed to

be consistent among the people of my riding is about the economic challenges that northerners so often face. I've also heard from residents regarding the recent census data that's showing the

population of the North is declining.

What initiatives are underway to bring prosperity to our northern communities?

Hon Jim Wilson (Minister of Northern Development and Mines): I, too, want to congratulate the honourable member, Mr McDonald, for his

by-election victory. I want to say, on behalf of all of us in caucus who campaigned with him, we saw first-hand that he's a man of integrity, of honesty and he already has an incredible track

record as the now former deputy mayor of North Bay of serving the people of northern Ontario. I say to the Premier that Mr McDonald or Mr Miller, who are both northerners, would make excellent

Ministers of Northern Development and Mines when I retire, because it's the best job in government.

We are working very hard to improve economic conditions in the north. In fact, the goal is to ensure that northerners have the same economic equal

opportunities that we have for jobs and prosperity here in the south. To do that we've increased the northern Ontario heritage fund, a fund that was gutted by the previous government: doubled it to

$60 million, $300 million in five years; $1.3 billion have been spent by this government since 1996 on improving the roads and highways in northern Ontario, which will help bring jobs --

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

Mr McDonald: I'm pleased to hear the good work our government has done for the north. But as the minister knows, there is more to be done.

On May 9, the government set out its priorities for the coming session in the speech from the throne. I would like to ask the minister what throne speech

commitments will benefit the north.

Hon Mr Wilson: The throne speech contained a lot of good news for northern Ontario, and for Ontario generally, for that matter. Mr Eves, the

new Premier, enshrined in the throne speech his commitment to northern Ontario to build full, equal campuses at the new medical school in northern Ontario in Sudbury and Thunder Bay.

The new Premier also enshrined in the throne speech -- "Promises made, promises kept" -- that we would introduce northern tax incentive zones. These tax

incentive zones will allow local northern and rural communities to attract new businesses, new jobs and prosperity for their areas by giving them a leg up and allowing those businesses to prosper

in an area of the province that traditionally has higher costs for businesses and therefore more difficulty in creating jobs. That will be a first for Ontario. It will be a first for much of

Canada. It is something that we're very proud of. I know it will bring new jobs to the north. It will help build upon the successful record that this government has had in increasing jobs. Even

though the population has been going down, the number of jobs has been going up for most of the north.

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

Mr Dominic Agostino (Hamilton East): My question is to the Premier. Your government six months ago signed a memorandum of understanding with

the federal government regarding affordable housing. This agreement would allow $245 million of federal money to come into Ontario to help with affordable housing.

Let me remind you that since you signed this deal, 14 homeless people have died on the streets of Toronto in the last six months.

The intent of this deal is specifically to put new provincial money on the table. The agreement says, "Provinces and territories will be required to match

federal contributions overall."

Premier, you're on the verge of signing this deal. A simple question: will you stand up and guarantee today that there will be $245 million in new provincial

dollars on the table to match the federal contribution?

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I refer this question to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Hon Chris Hodgson (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): Yes, we are getting very close to signing a housing agreement with the federal

government. It's something I had the honour of being the chair of at the provincial-territorial ministers' meeting last year. We worked it out in London and again in Quebec City in November.

Ontario's signing will take place in the near future.

You're asking me to match what the federal Liberals have done. It's the first time in 10 years that the federal Liberals are putting money into housing, but

let's not get carried away. I explained to the House last week that they make $400 million a year from CMHC. There are only two places that money comes from: it's passed on to tenants in the form

of the insurance premiums for rental accommodation, and also, for the people who can't afford the full down payment of 25% for the banks, they insure. So they make $400 million. They're putting

back $170 million a year. They are still netting $230 million. If you're asking Ontario to match that, I would have to cut the $879 million we spend annually and then figure a tax on poor people

for $230 million. Surely that's not the Liberal position in this House.

Mr Agostino: The minister would like to fool people to think this $875 million goes toward -- that's a shelter subsidy mostly for people on

welfare, and you know that, Minister. Not one cent of that money goes toward affordable housing.

The reality is that the federal government, in cahoots with you, has sold out homeless people in Ontario. This deal you're ready to sign is a bad joke. It's a

sham. You are to blame. The federal government is being irresponsible and gutless in signing this deal with you. This does not help homeless people in Ontario. This does not build low-income

housing. The reality of the deal is that you are not committing one new cent. What you are doing now is you're going to take municipal contributions, private sector contributions, and claim it to

be Ontario's contribution to this deal. That is a bad deal. The federal government should not sign this deal with you. You have let people down. You have let homeless people down in Ontario. Very

clearly, this government, if they are serious, will match the $245 million.

Frankly, I say to you, don't sign this deal unless you've put your money on the table, because you are not living up to the intent --

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

Hon Mr Hodgson: Through this rant, I seem to gather that the new McGuinty Liberal position for Ontario is to block federal money from coming

to the province of Ontario. So that's your position: block any federal money. That's not our position. Our position is to co-operate with the federal government and municipal governments to try to

alleviate the shortage of affordable housing.

If you're against affordable housing, say it. You've put it clearly on the record that the McGuinty Liberals are against federal money coming into Ontario.

On our side, we have to be responsible. We do not agree with you.

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

Mr Raminder Gill (Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale): My question is to the Minister of Labour. In the next couple of weeks the Lions Club,

where I'm a member, will be participating in a walkathon to raise funds for safe communities. Can you tell us more about the Safe Communities Foundation? How has your ministry partnered with this

organization?

Hon Brad Clark (Minister of Labour): The Safe Communities Foundation started about six years ago as a result of a tragic loss that affected an

Ontario family. In 1994, Sean Kells went off to work one morning, and it was his third day on the job, a part-time job. He was 19 years old. At work, Sean was pouring a flammable liquid when static

electricity ignited it and Sean lost his life. From that, Sean's father, Paul Kells, determined that other parents and families should not have to undergo such a devastating tragedy.

Paul Kells has a vision, a vision that we happen to share: changing our culture to a safety culture so that no one else would ever have to suffer like his son

and family did. His dedication and determination resulted in the creation of the Safe Communities Foundation. Safe Communities is a national, not-for-profit charitable organization. There are 22 of

them in Ontario. I'm proud to have one of them in Hamilton. The Ministry of Labour works as a partner with this foundation, as does the WSIB.

Mr Gill: Thank you, Minister. I understand that the Safe Communities Foundation is in the process of rolling out the passport to safety

program for young workers. Can you tell us more about this important initiative?

Hon Mr Clark: It's an educational program. We happen to believe, on this side of the House, that injuries are preventable, and so we work to

that end. A part of preventing injuries is through education. The passport to safety program is an education program and employment tool aimed at protecting our youth when they go to work.

While Ontario's work in the field of youth and health and safety has made great strides, last year approximately 16,000 young people suffered lost-time

injuries at work. Passport to safety has been successfully piloted in Peterborough and Safe Communities Foundations right across the province. Young people between the ages of 15 and 24 receive a

booklet, a passport, which they use just like travelling. The page gets stamped for every recognized safety course that that student successfully completes. Students are recognized by their

potential employers as being value-added employees of their corporation. Employers want employees to understand what safety is all about and to prevent injuries, and we work with them to that

end.

WATER QUALITY

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is to the Premier. In Mr Justice O'Connor's report, he makes it very clear that both the

Liberals in Ottawa and your government have failed virtually absolutely to ensure the delivery of safe, clean drinking water to First Nations. In fact, in his report, he spends a great deal of time

dealing with that particular issue, and he recommends that your government make available to First Nations, should they ask for it, not only assistance with training of water operators but also, on

a cost recovery basis, a number of other elements which go into the delivery of safe, clean drinking water.

Premier, your government is across the far north, telling First Nations you want access to the minerals on their property, you want access to the timber on

their territory. But it seems when it comes to another resource -- safe, clean drinking water -- you're not there. If you want the timber and you want the minerals, are you prepared to work jointly

with First Nations and perhaps the federal government to ensure that safe, clean drinking water is available?

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Yes, we are.

PETITIONS

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION FUNDING

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): This petition is from the College Student Alliance Partners in Learning and it's about the double cohort and

quality.

"Whereas by eliminating the fifth year of high school the government of Ontario has created a double cohort of students; and

"Whereas the government of Ontario has promised that there will be a space at a university or college for every willing and qualified student; and

"Whereas Ontario's universities and colleges have not received sufficient funding from the government of Ontario to accommodate these double cohort students;

and

"Whereas the quality of education at Ontario's universities and colleges has been declining in recent years; and

"Whereas the double cohort students will add an additional strain on an already fragile university and college system;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to: provide full funding for every new student entering Ontario's universities and colleges;

provide additional funding to increase quality at Ontario's universities and colleges; provide targeted funding to colleges for skills and innovation; and increase the per student funding to the

national average over the next five years."

I affix my signature to this petition.

ANIMAL PROTECTION

Mr Ted Arnott (Waterloo-Wellington): My petition is on behalf of the member for Guelph-Wellington, who is unable to present petitions because

she sits in the cabinet.

"Petition to the government of Ontario:

"Whereas it is immoral to use lost, stray and abandoned animals, most of whom are former pets, for the purpose of experimentation, particularly if it is not

done for their direct benefit;

"Whereas turning over unwanted animals for research is a misuse of tax dollars and undermines the public trust in municipal animal control systems;

"Whereas 11 US states and several countries, includeing Great Britain and Sweden, have prohibited the use of pound animals in research without any negative

consequences for human health and public safety; and

"Whereas over 1,000 cats and dogs from animal control facilities are used for experimentation each year in Ontario;

"We, the undersigned, petition the government of Ontario to amend the Animals for Research Act to ban the use of pound animals for experimentation."

HYDRO ONE

Mr Dave Levac (Brant): I have a petition to the Ontario Legislature:

"Whereas the Conservative government plans to sell off Hydro One and Ontario's electricity transmission grid -- the central nervous system of Ontario's

economy;

"Whereas the government never campaigned on selling off this vital $5-billion public asset and never consulted the people of Ontario on this plan;

"Whereas Ontario families want affordable, reliable electricity -- they know that the sale of the grid that carries electricity to their homes is a disaster

for consumers;

"Whereas selling the grid will not benefit consumers -- the only Ontarians who will benefit are Bay Street brokers and Hydro One executives;

"Whereas selling Hydro One and the grid is like selling every 400-series highway in the province to private interests -- selling the grid means the public

sector will no longer be responsible for its security and protection;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, petition the Ontario Legislature as follows:

"To demand the Conservative government halt the sale of Hydro One until the government has a clear mandate from the owners of Hydro One -- the people of

Ontario."

I sign my name to this and give it to Travis, our page.

MEDICAL SCHOOL TUITION

Mr Pat Hoy (Chatham-Kent Essex): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas medical school tuition was deregulated by the Ontario government in 1998; and medical school tuition has and continues to increase in excess of 300%

such that at some universities tuition is now $14,000;

"Whereas the physicians most likely to practise in a rural area are originally from rural areas themselves; and

"Whereas unaffordable tuition disproportionately excludes medical students from rural communities;

"Be it resolved that we, the undersigned, petition the Ontario government and the universities of Ontario to ensure that medical education be made financially

accessible to all qualified students; and

"Be it further resolved that we, the undersigned, request that medical tuition be capped and re-regulated at a level accessible to all Ontarians, and that the

Ontario student assistance plan/Canada student loan program be adjusted, in order to ensure that Ontarians from all communities are able to afford a medical school education."

This petition is signed by a number of residents from Leamington, Wheatley and Ruthven. I too sign this petition.

ONTARIO DISABILITY SUPPORT PROGRAM

Mr Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North): A petition to the Ontario Legislature:

"Whereas Ontario disability support program recipients have not received a cost-of-living increase since 1987; and

"Whereas the cost of living in Ontario has increased in every one of the years since, especially for basic needs such as housing, food, utilities,

transportation, clothing and household goods; and

"Whereas Ontarians with disabilities are recognized under the Ontario Disability Support Program Act, 1997, and as such have the right to have their basic

needs met, including adequate housing and a proper and healthy diet; and

"Whereas their basic needs are no longer being met because the Ontario government has not increased the shelter and basic needs allowances for the nearly

190,000 Ontarians on ODSP, and because increases in Canada pension plan benefits are clawed back;

"Therefore, we, the undersigned citizens of Ontario, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to provide a cost-of-living increase of 2% per year

retroactive to 1987, with a continued annual indexing at 2.4%, to give ODSP clients the dignity of a living benefit."

I'm pleased to add my name to this petition, signed by hundreds and hundreds of Ontarians.

CHILDREN'S HEALTH SERVICES

Mr Jean-Marc Lalonde (Glengarry-Prescott-Russell): I have a petition to stop the closure of cardiac surgery services at CHEO.

"To the Ontario Legislature:

"Whereas the Conservative government plans to close cardiac surgery services at the Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario;

"Whereas the Conservative government plans to centralize all cardiac services for children in Toronto;

"Whereas cardiac surgery at CHEO is an essential service for children in eastern Ontario;

"Whereas many children such as Shawn McCarty, the `miracle baby,' would not have survived had the cardiac surgery services not been available in Ottawa;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that the undersigned petition the Ontario Legislature as follows:

"To demand that the Conservative government halt immediately its decision to close cardiac surgery services in Ottawa."

I add my signature.

DOCTOR SHORTAGE

Mrs Leona Dombrowsky (Hastings-Frontenac-Lennox and Addington): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the residents of Centre Hastings are facing an immediate and critical situation in accessing physician services; and

"Whereas a retiring family physician has been unsuccessful in procuring a replacement physician, potentially leaving 5,000 patients without a doctor; and

transportation; and

"Whereas Centre Hastings has been designated as an underserviced area in need of five physicians;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to act immediately to establish a community health centre in Centre Hastings."

I will affix my signature to this petition.

EDUCATION FUNDING

Mr Ernie Parsons (Prince Edward-Hastings): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the funding for school boards is now based on student-focused funding legislative grants for the 2001-02 school board fiscal year;

"Whereas the Hastings and Prince Edward District School Board is in a period of declining enrolment, a trend that is projected to continue over the next five

years;

"Whereas application of the student-focused funding model for 2001-02 does not allow sufficient funding for the Hastings and Prince Edward District School

Board for secretarial support in schools, principals and vice-principals, transportation, or school operations;

"Whereas costs in these areas cannot be reduced at the same rate as the enrolment declines,

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

"To reassess the student-focused funding legislative grants for the 2002-03 school fiscal year to provide additional funding for those areas where funding is

insufficient and to adjust future student-focused funding ... to address the situation of declining enrolments faced by the Hastings and Prince Edward District School Board and other boards in

Ontario."

I will add my signature to this.

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

Mr Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas people with Alzheimer's disease deserve to have equal access to the full range of drugs, including Reminyl; and

"Whereas Reminyl has been proven to be a viable alternative to Aricept and Exelon and will provide an alternative for people for whom the other two other drugs

are not a good therapeutic choice; and

"Whereas there is a need to broaden the choice of therapeutic alternatives for persons with Alzheimer's disease; and

"Whereas without coverage under the Ontario drug benefit plan, many people for whom Reminyl is the most appropriate therapeutic choice will not be able to

afford this drug;

"Therefore, we, the undersigned citizens of Ontario and residents of northwestern Ontario, petition the Legislative Assembly as follows:

"To add Reminyl to the Ontario Drug Benefit Formulary at the earliest possible opportunity."

This is sent in by the Alzheimer's Society of Thunder Bay and I'm pleased to sign my name to the petition.

INSURANCE CLAIMS

Mr Dave Levac (Brant): This petition brings over 200 voices from the people of Ontario to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas it behoves us to ensure the practice of justice in all cases, and for all persons; and

"Whereas the statute of limitations applies in cases where it has been impossible to tell for many years what the truth of an insurance claim was;

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

"The laws concerning the statute of limitations for insurance claims should be suspended if it has been discovered that there was a possibility of evidence

tampering and/or it is discovered that the case was investigated poorly, causing hardship to those who were wrongly blamed" for car accidents in the province of Ontario.

I put my name to this and share this with Jean-Alexandre, our page.

HYDRO ONE

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): My petition is to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas Ernie Eves is planning to ram through the sale of Hydro One without a mandate from the people of Ontario; and

"Whereas an Ontario Court judge has ruled that the sale of Hydro One is illegal; and

"Whereas Ernie Eves's Bay Street friends will benefit from the sale of Hydro One at the expense of Ontario's working families;

"Therefore, we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to encourage Ernie Eves to take Dalton McGuinty's advice to put working families

ahead of his Bay Street friends by immediately stopping the sale of Hydro One."

I affix my signature to this petition.

AUDIOLOGY SERVICES

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): This petition is to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario and it's entitled:

"Listen: Our Hearing is Important!

"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."

I affix my signature to this petition.

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION FUNDING

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): This petition is regarding the double cohort and quality. It's from the College Student Alliance, Partners in

Learning, and it says:

"Whereas by eliminating the fifth year of high school, the Ontario government has created a double cohort of students; and

"Whereas the government of Ontario has promised that there will be a space at a university or college for every willing and qualified student; and

"Whereas Ontario's universities and colleges have not received sufficient funding from the government of Ontario to accommodate these double cohort students;

and

"Whereas the quality of education at Ontario's universities and colleges has been declining in recent years; and

"Whereas the double cohort students will add an additional strain on an already fragile university and college system;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to: provide full funding for every new student entering Ontario's universities and colleges;

provide additional funding to increase quality at Ontario's universities and colleges; provide targeted funding to colleges for skills and innovation;" and finally, "increase the per student

funding to the national average over the course of the next five years."

I affix my signature to this petition as well.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

TIME ALLOCATION /

ATTRIBUTION DE TEMPS

Hon John R. Baird (Associate Minister of Francophone Affairs): I move that pursuant to standing order 46 and notwithstanding any other

standing order or special order of the House relating to Bill 69,

An Act to protect victims by prohibiting profiting from recounting of crime, when Bill 69 is next called as a government order, 60

minutes shall be allotted to the third reading stage of the bill, to be divided equally among all recognized parties; and

At the end of that time, the Speaker shall interrupt the proceedings and shall put every question necessary to dispose of this stage of the bill without

further debate or amendment; and

That the vote on third reading may, pursuant to standing order 28(h), be deferred until the next sessional day during the routine proceeding "deferred votes";

and

That in the case of any division relating to any proceedings on the bill, the division bell shall be limited to five minutes.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr David Christopherson): Mr Baird has moved government notice of motion number 4. Is it the pleasure of the House --

Interjection.

The Deputy Speaker: I want to see if there's any debate. Do you want to speak? Fair enough. The member for London-Fanshawe.

Mr Frank Mazzilli (London-Fanshawe): Today we begin third reading of Bill 69, the Prohibiting Profiting from Recounting Crimes Act. Joining me

in the debate will be the members for Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale and York North. I also know members from across the way will certainly be joining the debate.

I want to say clearly that our government believes in debate on these very important bills. On this particular bill, to date there have been 7.4 hours in

debate in this Legislature over this matter. I know that my good friend from Niagara South, I believe it is, will be joining the debate, and he'll likely have some things to say about not having

enough time to debate this matter. But in fact, he's already spoken for 63 minutes, and I certainly value another 63 minutes of his contribution to this debate.

I'm pleased to participate in the debate on this very significant bill. Bill 69, the Prohibiting Profiting from Recounting Crimes Act, is an important part of

our government's commitment to help victims of crime and to take the profit out of crime. We need to protect vulnerable victims. In the Blueprint, we promised to support victims. We've kept that

promise and we're continuing to do even more.

We recognize that the victims of crime need help in coming to terms with traumatic experiences they are forced to go through because of criminal

activities.

We've also taken action, and will continue to take action, on taking the profit out of crime.

This legislation is linked to the Remedies for Organized Crime and Other Unlawful Activities Act, which was recently proclaimed into law. Let me take a moment

to comment briefly on the purpose of this law, because it complements Bill 69, which we are debating here today. The Remedies for Organized Crime and Other Unlawful Activities Act --

Excuse me, Mr Speaker. I certainly have a throat problem. If I could be excused from this debate for a moment.

The Deputy Speaker: It's not a problem. We'll stand down your time and I'll look to another government member. The member for York North.

Mrs Julia Munro (York North): I'm pleased to be able to rise today and speak to the Prohibiting Profiting from Recounting Crimes Act.

I think it's important to see this bill in context, a context that has been a government priority since 1995. We have recognized the importance of helping the

victims of crime, and in this bill then to go one step further and take the profit out of crime.

This bill would require criminals to forfeit profits that could be made from recounting their crimes. It would establish a fund from the forfeited proceeds

that would be made available to victims. If passed, it would obviously then stand as a testament to the continuing concern this government has in relation to helping victims of crime.

Our record on assistance and support to victims is a long and successful one. We are certainly proud of the continuing attention, and continue to provide this

support. For example, we have passed the Victims' Bill of Rights, which sets out the basic tenets regarding victims in the justice system. In June 2001, the government proclaimed the Victims' Bill

of Rights Amendment Act, 2000, to crea