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

November 23, 1998

36th Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

L057a - Mon 23 Nov 1998 / Lun 23 Nov 1998 1

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

BIRCHWOOD TERRACE

ASSISTANCE TO FARMERS

ADOPTION

APPRENTICESHIP TRAINING

NATIVE ISSUES

HAMILTON TIGER-CAT FOOTBALL CLUB

MEMBERS' INTEGRITY

AMBULANCE SERVICES

PEARL GOODALL

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

STANDING COMMITTEE ON GENERAL GOVERNMENT

STANDING COMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

TAX CREDITS AND REVENUE PROTECTION ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 SUR LES CRÉDITS D'IMPÔT ET LA PROTECTION DES RECETTES

ENVIRONMENTAL STATUTE LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 MODIFIANT DES LOIS EN CE QUI CONCERNE L'ENVIRONNEMENT

ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 SUR LES PERSONNES HANDICAPÉES DE L'ONTARIO

TOWN OF RICHMOND HILL ACT, 1998

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

COMPENSATION FOR HEPATITIS C PATIENTS

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES LEGISLATION

CHILDREN'S SERVICES

COMPENSATION FOR HEPATITIS C PATIENTS

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

CHILDREN'S SERVICES

ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES LEGISLATION

COMPENSATION FOR HEPATITIS C PATIENTS

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

CHILDREN'S SERVICES

ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES LEGISLATION

MEMBERS' INTEGRITY

LEGISLATIVE PAGES

ORAL QUESTIONS

GOVERNMENT ADVERTISING

ANTI-TOBACCO LEGISLATION

SCHOOL CLOSURES

SPECIAL EDUCATION

ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES LEGISLATION

POLICE STRIP SEARCHES

TELEMARKETING PRACTICES

PROPERTY TAXATION

ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES LEGISLATION

COURT FACILITIES

LONG-TERM CARE

ASSISTANCE TO FARMERS

WOMEN'S AND CHILDREN'S SERVICES

PROBATE AND ESTATE FEES

PETITIONS

HOTEL DIEU HOSPITAL

SCHOOL CLOSURES

PORNOGRAPHY

DENTAL CARE

PORNOGRAPHY

REGIONAL GOVERNMENT RESTRUCTURING

HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING

FIREARMS CONTROL

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

PRESENTATION OF PETITIONS

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING

ORDERS OF THE DAY

FAIRNESS FOR PROPERTY TAXPAYERS ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 SUR LE TRAITEMENT ÉQUITABLE DES CONTRIBUABLES DES IMPÔTS FONCIERS

The House met at 1332.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

BIRCHWOOD TERRACE

Mr Michael Gravelle (Port Arthur): For the past 25 years, Birchwood Terrace has been a home for the aged, serving the needs of the residents of Terrace Bay, Schreiber and other communities along the north shore of Lake Superior, enabling many people to spend their golden years in or near their own community. Sadly, as a result of the restructuring of the system, Birchwood Terrace is now closing. The last resident moved out recently.

However, this does not need to mean that this beautiful facility that overlooks Lake Superior must be torn down. The townships of Schreiber and Terrace Bay, along with the McCausland Hospital, have a proposal that will revitalize the building as a health care facility for seniors, which will allow people to remain in or near their own community. This is a wonderful proposal which will keep the community alive and thriving and it certainly deserves our support.

The only problem is that the government of Ontario will only return this facility to the community at the market value cost of the facility, a price that may be substantial and impossible for the municipalities to pay.

What makes this position by the province so upsetting is that Birchwood Terrace began as a private facility and was given to the province as a gift by Kimberly-Clark, the municipality's largest taxpayer back in 1973. In fact, I have a picture here of the plaque that proudly states that this is a gift to the people and the province, and I'd like to send it, if I may, over to the Chair of Management Board to take a look at.

It's difficult to understand why the province, which has decided it has no future use for this facility, will not return this gift to the municipality so it can continue to serve the seniors who have contributed so much to the growth of the region.

ASSISTANCE TO FARMERS

Mr Bud Wildman (Algoma): Recent economic disasters have put Ontario's and Canada's farm and rural communities in a crunch. Farmers in Ontario are struggling and attempting to address the farm income disaster which is now making itself felt in Ontario's rural communities on family farms.

Just last week, Ontario farmers and farmers across Canada presented a farm income disaster program proposal that would go a long way to provide a basic level of support required by Ontario farm families. The proposal would allow the program to be made available on an all-commodity, individual farm basis. It will not undermine the value of existing farm safety net programs. It is considered green in the world trade arena. It will narrow the gap in assistance available to farmers in the United States and other competing countries like Canada. It will help the farmers in Ontario to compete.

But most of all, it will protect the farm community's contribution to Ontario's economy now and in the future.

In order to work, the farm income disaster program needs a commitment of new money from the Harris government and his Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs in order to preserve farm families in Ontario. The Ontario farm community and farm leaders have heard the minister's praises; they have heard praise from the Premier and from the Ontario rural caucus of the Tories. Praise is not going to help farmers when their incomes have gone through the cellar and they have been given no ideas of this government's intentions. Good intentions will not buy seed for next year's crops.

ADOPTION

Ms Marilyn Mushinski (Scarborough-Ellesmere): I rise today to acknowledge November as Adoption Awareness Month. This is the month to celebrate families that have opened their hearts and homes to children who need a permanent and loving home in which to live and to increase awareness about adoption and children who are waiting to be adopted by a loving family.

It's a privilege to stand here today and express my gratitude to all the mothers and fathers who have adopted one, two or more children. I have seen at first hand the joys that adoption brings to a family.

One of my assistants, who has been with me for many years and who was working with me at the time she adopted her son, has told me many times that she has never regretted for a moment her decision to adopt. She has since given birth to a daughter and feels very blessed and lucky to have them both. When she looks at these children, she sees them not as her adopted son and birth daughter but rather as her son and her daughter equally - equally loved and cared for and equally wanted. She encourages everyone, anyone who loves children and wants to experience the joys of raising a child, to consider adopting.

"You will never look back," she says. She knows in her heart that she did the right thing.

APPRENTICESHIP TRAINING

Mr David Caplan (Oriole): As members of this House will know, we have concluded very brief public hearings on the apprenticeship legislation, Bill 55. The message to the committee members was very clear: The vast majority of participants spoke against the proposed changes, ironically even those presenters who were there at the request of Minister Johnson and the Harris government.

Here are the problems they outlined: The majority of changes to the apprenticeship system will be made in regulation by either yourself or your cabinet colleagues; you're stripping out the minimum educational requirements; you're creating a potential health and safety problem related to training standards and supervision; and you mean to undermine the employer-employee relationship that is the foundation of this system.

The presenters, employers and workers alike, also gave a clear message: This bill will not be a job creator but will in fact be a job killer. They said that you're going to make it harder for our workers to compete nationally and internationally and you're decimating the world-class apprenticeship program. The Premier heard this himself from apprentices when they toured the Air Canada Centre construction site earlier last week. They told him their concern about how this change will rip apart the system.

I hope the government will reflect on the presentations they heard at their very limited public hearings on this bill and will withdraw this bill entirely from consideration at their earliest opportunity. If they won't kill this bill, then I hope they will at least give amendments their most serious consideration, because passing this bill as is will be unacceptable to apprentices and employers and will do nothing to further the growth of skilled trades in Ontario.

NATIVE ISSUES

Mr Gilles Bisson (Cochrane South): I want to take this opportunity to report to the House what my colleague Len Wood and I found as we travelled on the James Bay coast over the past constituency break.

We found communities from Attawapiskat to Fort Albany to Kashechewan where families are forced to live in homes 30 per house. We found communities where buying the basic groceries in order to put food on the table is so expensive that people don't have that option and in fact are eating foods that are not good for healthy lifestyles. We found communities where fuel costs were exorbitant to the point that people could not afford to heat their homes. We've seen situations, such as in Fort Albany, where students are in a school that is substandard, that used to be the residential school, which we all know brings many bad memories.

We know that the federal government has dropped the ball on this issue. We know that the feds have not risen to the challenge of finding solutions for our First Nations people along the James Bay coast and other parts of Ontario to resolve many long-standing issues that need to be dealt with such as housing and other issues of importance.

I want to call on this provincial government to work with us, the NDP caucus, to go to the federal government and negotiate better agreements and better understandings on how both our levels of government are able to work with the First Nations communities to find long-term solutions to what are unique problems along the James Bay coast. We've seen that precedent in Manitoba where the Filmon government has negotiated with the feds. We ask this provincial government to work with us. Take some leadership and find solutions so those people can have hope like you and I have in the province of Ontario.

HAMILTON TIGER-CAT FOOTBALL CLUB

Mr Trevor Pettit (Hamilton Mountain): I rise today with a much heavier heart than I had originally intended, but with a great deal of pride nonetheless, pride, that is, in the outstanding performance of our beloved Hamilton Tiger-Cats in the 1998 Grey Cup game played yesterday in balmy Winnipeg.

In another one of a long line of nail-biting "in search of the coveted silver bowl" classics, the Tabbies, on a heartbreaking last-play field goal, fell by a whisker to the Cowboys from Calgary 26 to 24. But this last-second letdown can in no way, shape or form detract from the on- and off-field performance of this legendary football team in 1998. You see, the Black and Yellow made the greatest one-year turnaround in Canadian football history in 1998, going from 2 and 16 in 1997 to 12, 5 and 1 in 1998.

The resurgence and resilience of this classy band of Bengals is typical of the spirit of Steeltown itself. You can knock us down all you want but we will get back up every time. Just ask the Toronto Argonauts, who have been our playful whipping boys for years.

This amazing comeback story is due in no small part to the commitment and dedication of owners George Grant and David MacDonald. They believed in Hamilton and the Tiger-Cats and the populace responded. We can look forward to an even bigger and better year in 1999. I'm certain we'll be sipping from Earl Grey's magical bowl one year from now.

Congratulations to coach Ron Lancaster and his staff, all the players, equipment people, office staff and, most of all, the fans. Make no mistake, the Cats are back. On behalf of all -

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Statements.

Mr Gilles Bisson (Cochrane South): Point of order, Mr Speaker: We all appreciated the statement from the member for Hamilton Mountain, but it's the Calgary Stampeders, not the Cowboys.

MEMBERS' INTEGRITY

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): What was it? Was it a private trip? Was it a business trip? The people of Ontario want to know and they have a right to know. Was taxpayers' money used for the Premier's recent trip to New York?

With questions being raised over the nature of the Premier's recent junket to New York City and to the Grey Cup game yesterday, you would think the Premier would want to listen to what the people of Ontario want and provide them with ongoing accountability.

I have repeatedly asked the Harris government to call my private member's bill entitled the Ministerial Travel Accountability Act for second and third readings so that the people of Ontario will know without a doubt that their tax dollars are not being used by the Premier and being abused by his cabinet.

We all know the stink that was raised earlier this year when the leader of the NDP Howard Hampton's private member's expenses were made public. Why, then, won't the Premier and the cabinet consent to the same kind of scrutiny? Why won't the Premier and his cabinet agree to unanimous consent to have this bill debated immediately?

Later this afternoon, after statements by ministers, I will be asking for unanimous consent to have this bill debated in the House. Will the Premier have the courage and the integrity to agree and call my bill? Will his cabinet and caucus support my request so that the tarnished image of the Tories in power will start to subside in the minds of the people of Ontario? Will he have the courage and the integrity to be accountable?

AMBULANCE SERVICES

Mr Alex Cullen (Ottawa West): I am grateful for the opportunity today to be able to speak on a very important issue facing residents of Ottawa-Carleton, and that is the state of their ambulance system in Ottawa-Carleton.

As you know, ambulance services are part of the downloading package that this government has passed on to the responsibility of municipalities. However, such is the incompetence of this government that not only does the Ministry of Health still run the ambulance services in Ottawa-Carleton while forcing property taxpayers to pay for it, but it runs it so badly that people are suffering, indeed even dying as a result.

Recently, an independent audit of the ambulance services in Ottawa-Carleton run by the Ministry of Health found out the response time failed to meet ministry standards. The legislative standard, according to the Ambulance Act, is nine minutes or less 90% of the time. The independent audit found that the best response times in Ottawa-Carleton were 13½ minutes 90% of the time and the worst half an hour.

As one regional councillor put it, it is faster to order pizza in some parts of Ottawa-Carleton than to get an ambulance. This is absolutely unacceptable. People's lives are at stake. Will the Minister of Health do her job and take immediate steps to ensure that the legislative standards for ambulance response time are adhered to in Ottawa-Carleton, so that lives are not needlessly lost?

PEARL GOODALL

Mr R. Gary Stewart (Peterborough): I rise in the House today to speak of a fine lady from my constituency by the name of Pearl Goodall, who recently passed away at the age of 89.

It is most appropriate to speak of Mrs Goodall at this time of year when local Santa Claus parades are being held. In 1979, Mrs Goodall became the founder of the Lakefield Santa Claus parade.

As our local paper, the Examiner, noted, "If an event was intended to help children, and it happened in Lakefield, Pearl Goodall probably had a hand in it." Mrs Goodall was a member of the senior citizens' council, the Orange Lodge and St John the Baptist Anglican Church. She was an active volunteer at the Lakefield Fair for many years. Her good work was recognized in 1992 when she won the 125th Anniversary of Confederation of Canada Award from the Governor General. In 1977, when the Lakefield Chamber of Commerce chose their citizen of the year, the obvious choice was Mrs Goodall.

Mrs Goodall was a person who will be sadly missed by her family and the community of Lakefield, and I thank the Legislature for the opportunity to speak of this indeed fine lady.

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

Mr Doug Galt (Northumberland): I beg leave to represent a report from the standing committee on resources development and move its adoption.

Clerk at the Table (Ms Lisa Freedman): Your committee begs to report the following bill, as amended:

Bill 70,

An Act to engage the private sector in improving transportation infrastructure, reducing traffic congestion, creating jobs, and stimulating economic activity through the sale of Highway 407 / Projet de loi 70, Loi visant à intéresser le secteur privé à améliorer l'infrastructure des transports, réduire la circulation engorgée, créer des emplois et stimuler l'activité économique par la vente de l'autoroute 407.

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Shall the report be received and adopted? Agreed.

Pursuant to the order of the House dated November 2, 1998, the bill is ordered for third reading.

STANDING COMMITTEE ON GENERAL GOVERNMENT

Mr John O'Toole (Durham East): I beg leave to present a report from the standing committee on general government and move its adoption.

Clerk at the Table (Ms Lisa Freedman): Your committee begs to report the following bill, as amended:

Bill 38,

An Act to revise the law relating to condominium corporations, to amend the Ontario New Home Warranties Plan Act and to make other related amendments / Projet de loi 38, Loi révisant des lois en ce qui concerne les associations condominiales, modifiant la

Loi sur le régime de garanties des logements neufs de l'Ontario et apportant d'autres modifications connexes.

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Shall the report be received and adopted? Agreed.

The bill is therefore ordered for third reading.

STANDING COMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Standing order 62(

a) provides that "The standing committee on estimates shall present one report with respect to all of the estimates and supplementary estimates considered pursuant to standing orders 59 and 61 no later than the third Thursday in November of each calendar year."

The House not having received a report from the standing committee on estimates for certain ministries on Thursday, November 19, 1998, as required by the standing orders of this House, pursuant to standing order 62(

b) the estimates before the committee of the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, Management Board Secretariat, Cabinet Office, Ministry of Community and Social Services, and Ministry of Transportation are deemed to be passed by the committee and are deemed to be reported to and received by the House.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

TAX CREDITS AND REVENUE PROTECTION ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 SUR LES CRÉDITS D'IMPÔT ET LA PROTECTION DES RECETTES

Mr Eves moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 81,

An Act to implement tax credits and revenue protection measures contained in the 1998 budget, to make amendments to other statutes and to enact a new statute / Projet de loi 81, Loi visant à mettre en oeuvre des crédits d'impôt et des mesures de protection des recettes contenus dans le budget de 1998, à modifier d'autres lois et à en édicter une nouvelle.

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

Hon Ernie L. Eves (Deputy Premier, Minister of Finance): With the introduction of this bill, the government is proposing to fulfill and even exceed the commitments made in the budget last May. We have listened to the ideas and recommendations of Ontarians and made changes to improve the many budget initiatives.

If the bill is passed, the total number of tax reductions brought to individuals and businesses in Ontario by the government would be 67 so far. Tax credits in this bill will benefit working families and Ontarians with disabilities. Tax credits will make more capital available to businesses, especially small businesses, in communities throughout Ontario. Special credits will help to create well-paying jobs in the new-economy industries of digital imaging, computer animation and special effects. Tax credits will help the sound recording industry, which is the single biggest promoter of new Canadian musical talent.

Measures in this bill will help parents to get and keep jobs while ensuring their young children are well looked after, both by reimbursing parents for part of their costs and by encouraging construction and renovation of licensed child care spaces.

The legislation is a companion piece to the government's historic Ontarians with Disabilities Act, which is also being introduced today. Our bill provides positive fiscal measures to encourage and facilitate the participation of Ontarians with disabilities in the social and economic life of the province.

On the revenue protection side, this bill contains a number of provisions to improve compliance -

The Speaker: This is supposed to be a brief statement.

Hon Mr Eves: It is a brief statement. I will try to get through it as quickly as possible.

The Speaker: Thank you very much.

Hon Mr Eves: Thank you, Mr Speaker - to improve compliance with tax legislation and to motivate individuals and corporations to meet their tax obligations.

The bill also enacts a new act to establish a tax to replace the fees charged by the province on grants of probate or administration of estates. As members are aware, these fees were recently held unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of Canada.

ENVIRONMENTAL STATUTE LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 MODIFIANT DES LOIS EN CE QUI CONCERNE L'ENVIRONNEMENT

Mr Sterling moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 82,

An Act to strengthen environmental protection and enforcement / Projet de loi 82, Loi visant à affermir la protection de l'environnement et les mesures d'exécution à cet égard.

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

Hon Norman W. Sterling (Minister of the Environment, Government House Leader): Today I am pleased to introduce a new piece of legislation that would lead to more effective enforcement of the laws protecting Ontario's air, water and land. The Environmental Statute Law Amendment Act would clarify the rules, improve the Ministry of the Environment's ability to enforce them and increase the penalties for those who do not follow them.

The intention of these amendments is to be fair to those who comply with the law but tough on those who break it. Make no mistake: Ontario's environmental protection laws are strong, but these amendments will make them stronger, tougher on polluters, easier to enforce and fairer to the taxpayer.

ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 SUR LES PERSONNES HANDICAPÉES DE L'ONTARIO

Ms Bassett moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 83,

An Act to improve the identification, removal and prevention of barriers faced by persons with disabilities / Projet de loi 83, Loi visant à améliorer le repérage, l'élimination et la prévention des obstacles auxquels font face les personnes handicapées.

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

Minister?

Hon Isabel Bassett (Minister of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation): I'll be making a statement in ministers' statements.

TOWN OF RICHMOND HILL ACT, 1998

Mr Klees moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill Pr23,

An Act respecting the Corporation of the Town of Richmond Hill.

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

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

Hon Norman W. Sterling (Minister of the Environment, Government House Leader): I move that, pursuant to standing order 9(c), the House shall meet from 6:30 pm to 9:30 pm on November 23, 24, 25 and 26, 1998, for the purpose of considering government business.

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

All those in favour, please say "aye."

All those opposed, please say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

I declare the motion carried.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

COMPENSATION FOR HEPATITIS C PATIENTS

Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Minister of Health): I am pleased to advise the House that our government has today taken constructive action to address the suffering of all victims of the hepatitis C blood tragedy. At noon today, I announced details of a plan of financial assistance to provide immediate support to Ontarians infected with hepatitis C through the blood system prior to 1986 and after July 1, 1990. Today's announcement means that we are delivering on our Premier's commitment to extend compassionate financial assistance to all victims of hepatitis C.

Our plan will involve an information and outreach campaign starting this afternoon so that we can begin the process of delivering on our promise to help everyone who has contracted hepatitis C through the national blood system.

Our campaign includes a Canada-wide toll-free number, 1-877-222-4977, through which individuals will receive an information package on hepatitis C and an application form to apply for financial assistance. This line will also provide access to public health nurses in the event that a caller requires health information on hepatitis C.

Upon completion of an application and confirmation of eligibility, an individual can expect to receive a cheque for $10,000. This amount is based on our estimation of Ontario's contribution to the 1986-90 assistance package and a total number of claimants of up to 20,000. Should the number of claimants be lower or should the final level of assistance for the 1986-90 claimants differ, we will review this level of support. Our main objective today, however, is to provide the money and the support to the victims. Today we are delivering on our commitment.

The province of Ontario is committed to helping individuals infected with hepatitis C through the blood system to get on with their lives. We believe that financial assistance is necessary to help these people who, through no fault of their own, now have a debilitating condition that can lead to fatigue, jaundice and even liver cancer and death.

Beyond these physical conditions there is the tragic human toll of hepatitis C. People infected with hepatitis C can find themselves unable to work, pay their bills or even put food on the family table for their families. This is the tragic human consequence of hepatitis C. We believe it is time to turn the page and provide these people with immediate financial support to help them get on with their lives.

Justice Horace Krever reminded us with his commission's final report on the blood system one year ago that governments cannot deal with the future until they deal with the past. Everyone infected with hepatitis C through the blood system needs our help and support. Ontario is doing its part to give them the support and help that they need. Today we again call on Ottawa to do the right thing and we encourage them to join us.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

Hon Norman W. Sterling (Minister of the Environment, Government House Leader): The people of Ontario enjoy a high standard of environmental protection with tough laws to back it up. They deserve no less. The Ontario government will accept no less.

Ontario's environmental protection laws are strong, but the compliance and enforcement provisions always need to be updated and strengthened. We need greater ability to effectively deter and punish those who choose to operate outside the law and threaten our air, water and land.

This afternoon I am introducing a piece of legislation that would improve the Ministry of the Environment's ability to enforce the laws safeguarding our air, water and land. I might add that this includes many of the provisions that the member Bud Wildman included in his private member's bill, Bill 24. But it goes above and beyond that as well. This legislation, the Environmental Statute Law Amendment Act, will close loopholes that have enabled polluters to continue violating the law and avoid penalties imposed upon them. The intention of this bill is to be fair to those who comply with Ontario's environmental laws and tough on those who break them.

These proposed amendments will level the playing field for the public and businesses who are innocent victims of environmental offenders. In fact, since 1985 convicted polluters have gotten away with $10 million of unpaid fines. It's all well and good for members of the previous governments to talk about the fines levied when they were in office, but the simple fact is they often weren't collected.

Ten million dollars in uncollected fines: That's an offence against the environment and our justice system. Obviously, more effective mechanisms are needed and it is our intention to deliver by ensuring our environment is protected through the most effective and efficient means possible. This legislation will enable our staff to administer a fair, more consistent and efficient system on behalf of all Ontarians.

These proposed powers will ensure that Ontario's laws are consistent with compliance and enforcement provisions in other jurisdictions across North America. This government wants to ensure our compliance and enforce-ment powers are among the toughest. The Environmental Statute Law Amendment Act will see to that.

These proposals would allow us to go after those who break environmental laws and punish them. The act would give the courts more authority to impose jail sentences and stiffer fines. Courts would also be able to order convicted polluters to pay restitution for environmental damage. Polluters could also be forced to forfeit property and/or equipment used to commit environmental offences. Forfeiture could also be required if they don't pay their fines.

The Environmental Statute Law Amendment Act also will allow the ministry to seize licence plates and permits from vehicles used to commit environmental offences. It will allow them to streamline the process by which environmental officers issue compliance orders in the field. It will apply monetary penalties for minor environmental infractions. It will secure areas and facilities to ensure evidence is protected. It will extend provisions for control of illegal dumping and cleanup to people who broker illegal waste disposal.

It will use modern investigative aids and techniques; for example, under a court order, an electronic tracking device could be fixed to a truck carrying illegal waste to monitor its location by satellite and computer.

For too long the ministry has been handcuffed in dealing with many of those who flout the laws protecting Ontario's air, water and land. This new act sends polluters a message. The days of conducting operations at the expense of the environment are over. The Environmental Statute Law Amendment Act will take the handcuffs off the ministry and put them back where they belong - on the polluters.

ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES LEGISLATION

Hon Isabel Bassett (Minister of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation): Today is a milestone. It is a milestone because the proposed Ontarians with Disabilities Act is the first of its kind -

Mrs Marion Boyd (London Centre): It's going to be a millstone, not a milestone.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Order. Minister.

Hon Ms Bassett: It is a milestone because the proposed Ontarians with Disabilities Act is the first of its kind in Canada. If approved by the Legislature, the act will require every ministry to identify, remove and prevent barriers by systematically reviewing its legislation -

Mr Dwight Duncan (Windsor-Walkerville): It does nothing.

Ms Frances Lankin (Beaches-Woodbine): This is embarrassing.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Member for Windsor-Walkerville, come to order. Members for Beaches-Woodbine and Riverdale, come to order as well please. Minister.

Hon Ms Bassett: - policies, programs, practices and services; in effect, all government activity.

This mandatory review will be part of the annual business planning process of each ministry. This will, over time, affect the thousands of government activities that directly and indirectly impact persons with disabilities.

Ministries' annual disability access plans would contain (1) a list of government activities that would be reviewed in the planning year; (2) measures to be put in place to ensure that any new government activities are assessed for their effect on access; (3) steps to be taken in the coming year to remove and prevent barriers; and (4) a report on measures the ministry has already taken.

The proposed act is accompanied by a number of initiatives that I am also pleased to announce today:

(1) The government is establishing a Committee on Employment for Persons with Disabilities. The committee will promote access to employment in the private sector and advise the government on employment access issues. It will be composed of representatives of the disability, business and labour communities.

(2) The government is establishing an information and referral service to provide a point of access for business and for broader public sector service providers who need information and resources to make their services and workplaces more accessible.

(3) My ministry will administer an $800,000 incentive fund for barrier removal projects which have broad application. Leadership projects will encourage different sectors to work together to establish best practices in priority areas such as employment, access to buildings, transportation and education and training; and community projects will encourage local partnerships that remove barriers and improve access to local business and services.

Other ministries will also be working to improve access for Ontarians with disabilities. The Ministry of Transportation will enhance its community transportation action program to help communities meet the transportation needs of people with disabilities. The Ministry of Education and Training will enhance its Job Connect program to better help persons with disabilities find and keep jobs. The Ministry of Education and Training will also enhance its literary and basic skills program for persons who are deaf or persons who have a learning or psychiatric disability.

The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing will consult with organizations representing persons with disabilities, municipalities and the home building and development industries to identify priorities for improving barrier-free design standards in the Ontario building code.

Our commitment to preventing and removing barriers for persons with disabilities is government-wide. Today's announcements follow a province-wide consultation. I'd like to take this opportunity to thank all participants. While we heard a range of opinions, the goals of equal opportunity and barrier prevention and removal are clearly shared across the board. Ontarians agree that there is a need -

Interjections.

The Speaker: Stop the clock. Order. It's important to let the minister finish. The responses will follow.

Hon Ms Bassett: Ontarians agree that there is a need for better public understanding and increased awareness of the needs of persons with disabilities. Ontarians agree that government can and must foster information sharing, encourage partnerships, provide incentives for barrier removal and lead by example. This is what the proposed Ontarians with Disabilities Act and the new initiatives do.

I am confident that our proposed act, the measures I have just announced and the important initiatives this government has already put in place will improve access for persons with disabilities. This government believes that all Ontarians, and our province as a whole, stand to gain when every one of us has an equal opportunity to contribute to the social and economic well-being of our province.

CHILDREN'S SERVICES

Hon Margaret Marland (Minister without Portfolio [children's issues]): Today I rise to recognize the most important group of people to the future of our great nation and province: our children and youth.

As we all know, November 20 has been designated as National Child Day. As minister responsible for children, I am very happy to take

part in this celebration.

This day marks the anniversary of the United Nations' adoption of both the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of the Child, which took place on November 20, 1959, and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which was established 30 years later on November 20, 1989.

The convention states its goals clearly: the promotion to the fullest extent of the health, well-being and potential of all children, adolescents and youth.

This is an objective which I share. It is also an objective which our government shares and was tangibly demonstrated when Premier Harris appointed, for the first time in Ontario's history, a minister responsible for children.

Since being given that responsibility, I have toured many regions of the province, visiting a wide range of programs and facilities that assist children in need. I have listened to children, their families and community organizations that serve them. I am proud to say that this government is moving forward to enhance the lives and the futures of children.

This government believes the development of the whole child is vitally important. That is why our government is sponsoring a study into the early years of life, led by world-renowned expert Dr Fraser Mustard and child advocate and former Lieutenant Governor of New Brunswick -

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Can I ask the members to come to order in the opposition benches. I would like to hear the statement from the minister, and it's not easy to do.

Hon Mrs Marland: That is why our government is sponsoring a study into the early years of life, led by world-renowned expert Dr Fraser Mustard and child advocate and former Lieutenant Governor of New Brunswick the Honourable Margaret McCain.

This study will provide the government with options and recommendations on the best ways to prepare all of Ontario's children for success in school, in their careers and in their lives. The early years study will help us decide what we in Ontario can do to lay the basis for lifelong learning, behaviour and health of our children.

This is just one initiative our government has undertaken for children in Ontario, but it is only one of literally dozens.

For instance, more than 56,000 children across the province have also been helped through nutrition programs in partnership with the Canadian Living Foundation for Families.

We have developed the Learning, Earning and Parenting program to help single parents on welfare finish school and learn important parenting skills.

Through the Healthy Babies, Healthy Children initiative, each year all of Ontario's 150,000 newborns will be screened for risk factors and help will be provided through such services as home visits and case management.

The government has reviewed the child welfare system to see how we can better protect children. In 1997, we increased funding to allow agencies to hire 220 more staff. This year we announced an additional $170 million over the next three years to further increase staffing, improve training and revitalize foster care.

Our government has also introduced child welfare legislation to ensure that the well-being of children is always of paramount importance.

Students in Ontario will benefit from new province-wide quality standards our government has introduced to improve the education system. We have increased classroom spending by $583 million, introduced a new, rigorous curriculum, and developed new -

The Speaker: Responses? Minister, come to order.

Mr Bud Wildman (Algoma): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: In light of the fact that the minister was running on 33 1/3 instead of 78 rpm, it's obvious that she needs more time to finish her statement. In light of the large number of important statements - four statements today, all of import - I would ask for unanimous consent to give the minister time to finish her statement and to increase the time for responses for each of the opposition parties from five to 10 minutes each.

The Speaker: Agreed? I heard a "no."

Responses, official opposition.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. I heard a "no."

What are you up for?

Hon Norman W. Sterling (Minister of the Environment, Government House Leader): I'd like to speak to the -

The Speaker: You want a point of order? Point of order, government House leader.

Hon Mr Sterling: Mr Speaker, I'm quite willing to extend the time for response. As you know, during the minister of culture's -

The Speaker: All right. I want to hear your point of order.

Hon Mr Sterling: We lost about two minutes with regard to that.

The Speaker: I just want to know the point of order.

Hon Mr Sterling: I request unanimous consent to extend both the time for our speeches, the minister's statement, and by the same amount for each of the opposition parties.

The Speaker: However long it takes for the minister to finish, we will calculate that and we'll add that on to the five minutes they usually get.

Interjections.

The Speaker: No, hold it. I'm just getting that straight: to add that on to the five minutes they usually get. Agreed? Agreed. Minister.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Come to order, please. I don't know about you, but I've got places to be tonight. Minister?

Hon Mrs Marland: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. We have increased classroom spending by $583 million; we've introduced a new, rigorous curriculum; and we've developed new understandable report cards for the province.

We have also introduced a new early learning grant to ensure that young children benefit from either a junior kindergarten program or other early learning programs that best meet the needs of students in their local communities.

Three hundred fifty thousand children from low- and middle-income families will be helped through the Ontario child care supplement for working families. Moreover, since 1995 this government has created more than 14,500 child care spaces.

Furthermore, as many as 75,000 children will receive the speech therapy they require before they start school through the preschool speech and language services program.

As well, more than 5,000 at-risk families will receive the supports they need through the Better Beginnings, Better Futures program. This assistance will continue right through the primary school years.

This government has demonstrated its commitment to children time and time again. We have created important new initiatives for children and are putting these plans into action to help our children achieve success in school, work and throughout their lives.

This government will continue to work to improve the well-being of Ontario's most precious people: our children. By focusing on the healthy growth and development of children, we are focusing on the legacy we must leave for them. I hope we can all be a part of building that legacy for all Ontario's children.

The Speaker: For the responses, each party will be given seven minutes and 30 seconds. Responses, official opposition, the member for Scarborough-Agincourt.

Mr Gerry Phillips (Scarborough-Agincourt): I want to comment briefly on the new Mike Harris billion-dollar tax that he introduced today called the estate administration tax, retroactive, amazingly, to 1950. I would have thought that a new billion-dollar tax by Mike Harris might have been worthy of some ministerial statement, but I think the public will understand a billion-dollar tax retroactive to 1950 is the new Mike Harris.

COMPENSATION FOR HEPATITIS C PATIENTS

Mr Gerard Kennedy (York South): We want to congratulate the minister for finally having dropped her opposition and agreed with the Ontario Liberal Party on compensating all hep C victims. But we also want to say that when the minister talks about turning the page, that book isn't closed until a real tracking of all the victims of hep C has been done.

There is no cheap way out of this, Minister. This is not the final word in terms of what victims are looking for. You have to make a commitment to ensure that this is going to allow each victim to be compensated matching the severity of their illness.

Minister, we'll be watching; we'll be making sure.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

Mr Dominic Agostino (Hamilton East): I read with great interest the useless platitudes in this speech and comments by the Minister of the Environment when he introduced his legislation today.

He may put this feel-good, toughing up of legislation in place. However, what he fails to tell us is that he virtually doesn't have any inspectors left in his ministry to enforce these regulations. Charges have been dropped, every year they have gone down, prosecutions have gone down, fines have gone down and his budget as minister has been cut by 30% or 40%. The reality is that he has brought in all this new, supposedly tough legislation without any staff and without any new regulations in place.

You've put the mechanism in place to try to collect fines but you've totally wiped out the regulations. It's a smokescreen, Minister; it's a joke. We're still waiting for the Drive Clean program; we're still waiting for vehicle emissions testing; we're still waiting for some real action.

What we have today, Minister, is a feel-good, last-ditch attempt to save what little shred of credibility you have left as Minister of the Environment. Frankly, you've failed once again and you've polluted this legislation with your garbage.

CHILDREN'S SERVICES

Mrs Sandra Pupatello (Windsor-Sandwich): I have a response to the statement today by the minister responsible for children. I wish that this minister truly were for children. Instead of giving us fancy titles and fancy programs, we'd like to see you actually in the field working for children.

What we know is that today there are fewer services available for children who need help, via early intervention in the school system and in children's mental health agencies. More kids today need more help and that is help that this government is denying them.

I look forward to Dr Mustard's response, and we ask you, what do you think Dr Mustard will tell you? You're going to ask him about child care. What do you think he's going to tell you about child care? He is the premier advocate for child care in Ontario so we, of course, look forward to his report. I look at this as simply a delaying tactic for you to actually implement programs that would be helpful to children.

ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES LEGISLATION

Mr Dwight Duncan (Windsor-Walkerville): It's with absolute sorrow that I stand to respond to the cop-out by the Minister of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation.

I want to take a few minutes to talk about the minister's announcement. She hasn't provided the opposition with the bill and it's no wonder, because the bill says absolutely nothing. It's an absolute betrayal by this government, by that minister and by that Premier of persons with disabilities in this province.

The minister's statement says that the proposed features of her act will recognize the rights of persons with disabilities to equal treatment without discrimination in accordance with the Ontario Human Rights Code.

I should tell the minister that we've had that for 10 years. We have had that. It was a Liberal government that brought that in with Human Rights Code amendments 10 years ago. What we need are mechanisms for enforcement. What we need are mechanisms that can work to ensure that persons with disabilities aren't left out of economic recovery of this province and aren't left out of the life of this province.

Minister, you've abandoned the disabled community just as you did this summer when you didn't listen to them, when you didn't give them access to your public hearings.

Then the minister goes on to say that they're going to improve access to persons with disabilities through the identification, removal and prevention of barriers to their participation in the social and economic life of the province.

Minister, those barriers are well-identified. They are identified at the municipal level, they are identified at the provincial level, they are identified in the private sector, they are identified in the broader public sector. They have been identified for a number of years.

What you've done is simply given a little bit of Pablum, a few good words that mean absolutely nothing because you have not used the resources or strength of your ministry or government to help move forward the plight of people with disabilities in this province.

Those were done years ago. What your government hasn't done is move the process forward. Every ministry of your government has those plans. This Legislature has those plans. This is a sorry, sorry day, where the minister has abandoned the members of her own caucus who supported a resolution in this House that would afford the disabled a meaningful Ontarians with Disabilities Act.

What does that mean for people in this province? It means we don't have the same protections they have in Alabama. It means we don't have the same protections they have throughout the United States. It means this government is not prepared to do what their right-wing counterparts in the United States did a decade ago. It means that minister has no credibility on these issues. She did not listen to the disabled community. They're talking about voluntary compliance. When my resolution was passed, we discovered the Premier's office in North Bay wasn't accessible to the disabled. They had a ramp that they weren't willing to put out. That's what voluntary compliance is.

This government, that Premier and that minister have effectively abandoned the disabled community and have left it to the next government to bring in a meaningful Ontarians with Disabilities Act. All the advertisements in the world aren't going to make up for the fact that that Premier and that minister have abandoned the disabled and misled this province in terms of the traditions we ought to be upholding. You should be ashamed.

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): You have to withdraw that.

Mr Duncan: I withdraw the statement "misled."

COMPENSATION FOR HEPATITIS C PATIENTS

Mrs Marion Boyd (London Centre): I'd like to respond briefly to the statement by the Minister of Health. I think all of us are pleased that this government has finally moved and wish that the federal government, the federal Liberals, would move on real compensation for victims of hepatitis C.

But I must tell the minister how concerned I am about the form in which this announcement has been made. Quite frankly, what I see here is an effort to try to claim you're fulfilling your promises without in fact fulfilling the expectations of those who contracted hepatitis C in this province at all.

First of all, you have limited this compensation to $10,000; you have limited it to that and up to 20,000 claimants. That's $200 million, and it sounds like a lot, except that we know, those of us who went through estimates with your ministry, how proud you were to trumpet the fact that you had set aside $300 million to compensate hepatitis C victims. We wonder what happened to the $100 million, and we wonder what happens if more than 20,000 claimants come forward with concerns.

We also notice that missing from this is a guarantee that this $10,000 will not count towards social assistance. When we compensated those who had contracted HIV from the blood system, we were very clear that any compensation would not count towards the deductible for social assistance. There is no such guarantee in your statement. There was no such guarantee at the press conference this afternoon. Minister, I am surprised that you sound so proud of this announcement when that explicit commitment has not been made in this place.

A final word to the Minister of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation: I hope you are thoroughly ashamed of this so-called Ontarians with Disabilities Act. As the parent of a disabled child and on behalf of all the disabled people in this province, this is a disgrace. Frankly, Minister, I can't imagine you being part of this boondoggle.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

Mr Bud Wildman (Algoma): I'd like to reply briefly to the Minister of the Environment's statement. I appreciate his comments regarding my bill. He will know, as House leader, that Bill 24, a bill to crack down on the quick-buck artists who dump illegally across this province and pollute the province as a result, passed second reading unanimously in this House in May 1996, and it was referred to the resources committee and it has languished there since. The bill was reintroduced in May 1998 as Bill 13, and the government has just now moved with its own bill.

We obviously haven't had time to analyze the bill, but I would say my colleague the member for Riverdale welcomes the improved enforcement that he promises.

I would just say this one thing in closing: that it is impossible for the minister to enforce this when his ministry enforcement branch has been gutted and his budget has been gutted. If you don't have the inspectors, you're not going to be able to make strong enforcement regulations carried out.

CHILDREN'S SERVICES

Ms Frances Lankin (Beaches-Woodbine): First of all, to the minister responsible for children's issues, I can't count the number of times I've stood here and asked you to stand up for children in this province, and I didn't see today any results from that. Let me tell you why.

Very clearly, if we look at the children most at risk, those in poverty, your government took 22% of income from those kids, and you also have clawed back the national child benefit from the poorest children in this province. When you talk about child care, I'm shocked at your statement that you've created more than 14,000 spaces. That is an outright, bold-faced inaccuracy. You have not created one space. There may be some more private sector licences out there. You've not created one space or added one dollar to subsidies. In fact, you cancelled subsidies under Jobs Ontario programs that were there.

You took away capital funding for child care from budgets from the community and social services ministry. You cancelled the capital program for child care centres in schools. The mental health system that we've talked about so often for children - where's the legislation to mandate those services that your Premier promised me we could work on together? Where is the lifting of the freeze for funding for children's rehabilitation and treatment centres?

Minister, we look forward to Fraser Mustard's report. We know what he's going to say. The question is, will your government listen?

ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES LEGISLATION

Ms Frances Lankin (Beaches-Woodbine): May I say to the minister responsible for citizenship, the acts you introduced today - and I want to tell persons interested in the Ontarians with Disabilities Act, this is two pages. The first page is a

preamble. The only thing in this is a guarantee that ministries will have to do a systemic barrier review as part of their annual business plan. That is it.

For five years under our government every ministry had to do that. You cancelled that when you came into power. You fired the staff who were responsible for doing those reviews. You took away the dollars responsible for implementing the accommodation measures. You cancelled all of that. Now you're putting it in legislation. This is a betrayal of a million and a half persons with disabilities. All this act does is say, "Government, get your act together and show leadership." You should have been doing that already. What are you going to do for the private sector out there?

You're going to put together a joint committee. What are you going to do for the broader public sector, municipalities? You're going to put together an information and referral service.

Committees, information, referral: This is a cruel hoax. This doesn't come close to meeting one of the demands of persons with disabilities who participated in your hoax of a consultation this past summer. You heard from people right across this province who demanded and fought their way into your hearings when you at first wouldn't let them in. You heard what they wanted. You heard the principles that had to be contained in an Ontarians with Disabilities Act to really provide access.

Minister, this will not cut it. You will hear, blazing across this province, a response from persons with disabilities. An anger and a fire will be set that you will not be able to put out unless you scrap this act, unless you bring forward a real Ontarians with Disabilities Act that meets the needs to ensure that there is barrier-free access to all goods, services, programs, facilities, businesses.

This province can be a place for all people to participate in. If you had the will and the guts to stand up to what you promised in the Common Sense Revolution, it would be. We would be on our way to that in the legislation that we'll be debating in this House. I can tell you, Minister, this will not cut it. You will not be able to perpetrate this hoax, this sham, this charade on persons with disabilities in this province. They will not stand for it.

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: As I said earlier in my statement, I would be asking the House for unanimous consent to have second and third reading of Bill 64,

An Act respecting Accountability for Ministerial Travel. There are 19 cabinet ministers in the House today -

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): You can ask for that. You're seeking unanimous consent. Agreed? No.

MEMBERS' INTEGRITY

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): I beg to inform the House that pursuant to

section 30 of the Members' Integrity Act, 1994, I have today laid upon the table a request by the member for Rainy River to the Honourable Robert C. Rutherford, Integrity Commissioner, for an opinion on whether the member for Nipissing and the member for Willowdale have contravened the act or Ontario parliamentary convention.

LEGISLATIVE PAGES

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): I wish to welcome the 17th group of pages to serve in this 36th Parliament:

Phillip-Lee Barthelmes-Franchetto from Simcoe Centre; Kristin Burns, London Centre; Julia Chapman, Willowdale; Ryan Cookson, Riverdale; Morgan Fuller, Wellington; Amanda Galloway, Waterloo North; Brendan Greenslade, Kenora; Michael Kitchen, Kitchener; Shannon Lees, Muskoka-Georgian Bay; Matthew MacDonald, Oakville South; Mariko Mackasey, York East; Lynn Mastrocola, Mississauga West; Arvin Mohindra, Durham West; Jeremey Nelson, Mississauga South; Emilio Paesano, Etobicoke West; David Parker, SDG & East Grenville; Maggie Pearson, Peterborough; Chiara Van Hooren, Windsor-Riverside; Joshua Wales, Victoria-Haliburton; and Emily Wilson, Niagara South. Welcome. I hope you enjoy your stay.

ORAL QUESTIONS

GOVERNMENT ADVERTISING

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the Deputy Premier. You will know that there was unanimous and universal condemnation of your use of taxpayer dollars to fund Mike Harris's re-election campaign. We've raised that issue time and time again in this Legislature. Notwithstanding that condemnation, let's take a look at what's happened during the past two weeks.

There have been two new ads airing on Ontario TV, one for education, one for health care. They total $4 million. Last week there was another pamphlet sent to Ontario households. Today, apparently not being satisfied with the media's

interpretation of what you're doing, you put out your own paper. These two publications here cost $1 million. During the last two weeks you've spent another $5 million.

Have you no shame, Minister? Do you not get it? The public does not support this kind of expenditure.

Hon Ernie L. Eves (Deputy Premier, Minister of Finance): I'm sure the Chair of Management Board would be delighted to answer this question.

Hon Chris Hodgson (Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet, Minister of Northern Development and Mines): As the Leader of the Opposition knows, the government has an obligation to inform the public of what's taking place in this province. There's been a lot of change in the last number of years to make up for the lack of any progress in the preceding 10 years before our government was elected.

If you compare our advertising budget to your advertising budget, all governments spend money on it. If you're talking specifically about today's supplement in the national edition of the Globe and Mail, that's intended to draw attention to Ontario's attractive investment climate and try to encourage and attract other jobs to this province. Ontario is leading the nation in job growth; 440,000 net new jobs have been created since mid-1995. That's positive news and it's a positive message that we want to spread right across Canada and around the world.

Mr McGuinty: This is an obscene expenditure of taxpayer dollars. Everybody knows that you can stand up in this Legislature and try to couch it in whatever kind of language you want, but the public understands what's going on.

To date, you are spending $47 million in taxpayer dollars to put forward your message, designed specifically to have Mike Harris re-elected as Premier of Ontario. That's all it's all about. It's very, very clear.

Maybe you can tell us, Minister; please stand up: How much more money do you intend to spend between now and the time of the beginning of the election? How many more taxpayer dollars are you going to be spending in addition to the $47 million you've already spent in an effort to have Mike Harris re-elected as Premier?

Hon Mr Hodgson: The Leader of the Opposition knows that when his party was in government in 1990-91, you spent $50 million and there wasn't even a lot of change going on. In fact, some people said it was because of your lack of meeting the challenges that government should have been facing in order to have change take place over a longer period of time and more gradually that our government has had to take on some tough decisions around policy that your two governments ducked in the areas of education and health care.

In terms of advertising, you mentioned a number. There's a lot of change going on. The public have asked us to keep them informed. That's what we're doing.

Mr McGuinty: Let's just take a look at your priorities. We have the highest tuition fees in the country. We have the fewest nurses per capita in the country. We have 500,000 children growing up here in Ontario in poverty. Notwithstanding those very real and pressing challenges, what do you do? You find 47 million taxpayer dollars to invest in an effort to have Mike Harris re-elected as Premier.

Why don't you stand up, be honest, stop spending this money on an effort to re-elect Mike Harris as Premier, and call the election? Do what's right: Stop spending taxpayer dollars in this effort. Call the election. If you want to have an election, let's have an election.

Hon Mr Hodgson: I think everyone's aware that the Liberals have had a long tradition of calling elections after three years, but I just need to remind the Leader of the Opposition that when you did that last time you were at 55% in the polls; today you might be at 49%, but it's only in Toronto. So I ask him to show a little patience. We have to communicate. I realize he's worried about his support. We would encourage him to communicate what the Liberal policies will be as well.

In terms of the government's advertising, we have a responsibility to inform the taxpayers of the changes that are taking place.

ANTI-TOBACCO LEGISLATION

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): My question is to the Minister of Health. Smoking is the number one cause of preventable illness and death in Ontario. Every year 12,000 Ontario adults die from smoking-related illness, and every month 3,000 Ontario children take up the habit. What's more worrisome is the fact that Ontario's children are taking up that habit at an ever-faster rate.

Apparently there's all kinds of money, in fact $47 million worth, to advance Mike Harris's re-election campaign. My question to you is very simple: When was the last time you ran an ad on Ontario TV letting Ontario's children know about the dangers of smoking?

Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Minister of Health): The Leader of the Opposition knows that we have in this province a very comprehensive tobacco prevention strategy. We are very concerned about the number of young people who continue to smoke. I am very pleased to say that we have been a leader in Canada in enforcing tobacco control legislation. We have laid over 2,800 charges and we have issued an additional 2,700 tickets for offences under the provincial Tobacco Control Act.

We continue to do everything we can. In fact, our $17 million heart health campaign that we launched earlier this year is also committed to identifying tobacco-related health issues. We have a comprehensive strategy, we continue to move forward, and I am very proud of the initiatives that we have undertaken thus far. We will continue to do more.

Mr McGuinty: We'll just see how tough the minister is prepared to get when it comes to smoking and children in Ontario. BC has introduced legislation and has launched a suit against tobacco companies. You will be aware that several US states have recently achieved a settlement in the amount of approximately $200 billion - that's "b," billion dollars.

Minister, are you prepared to join the BC suit? Are you prepared to stand up for Ontario children who, notwithstanding all of your programs that you just talked about, are taking up smoking at a rate faster than they have during the past 10 years in Ontario? Are you prepared to join the BC suit?

Hon Mrs Witmer: First, let me say that unfortunately the BC suit will not do anything to reduce smoking among people in Ontario. However, it is certainly an issue we are actively taking a look at.

What we are going to do, beginning in January 1999, is review our total Ontario tobacco strategy in order that we can consult with all the researchers and the leaders in the health community to best determine how we can eliminate young people from ever starting smoking and how we can ensure that those who have started will stop.

But I can tell you, following the lead of BC will not do anything to eliminate these people in this province who have started to smoke. That is but one component of any strategy.

Mr McGuinty: It's most telling that the minister didn't hesitate, together with her caucus colleagues, to join the Alberta suit when that province decided it was going to fight against the implementation of gun control. She has done this notwithstanding the express wishes to the contrary of Ontario police. She's acting against gun control, for the gun lobby.

Now I am asking her to act against the tobacco lobby for Ontario children in the same way that several American states have and in the same way that BC is doing at present. The Yanks have stood up for their kids, BC is standing up for their children. I'm asking this minister, is she prepared to stand up for Ontario children and join a lawsuit and get whatever we can from those tobacco companies, but especially to ensure that we can put in place much more effective prevention programs, because those in existence at present obviously aren't working.

Hon Mrs Witmer: Maybe the member didn't hear what I said, but I indicated that beginning in January 1999 we were going to totally review our tobacco strategy in order to ensure that young people not embark on smoking or to encourage them to quit.

As far as standing up for people in this province is concerned, I am proud to say that today this government stood up for the victims of hepatitis C.

SCHOOL CLOSURES

Mr Howard Hampton (Rainy River): I have a question for the Minister of Education about the government's school closures policy. Earlier this month the Premier tried to buy you some time on school closures until after the next election. You've changed the school funding formula so that you won't force schools to close until after the election, but the problem is that your funding formula was wrong then, it's still wrong, and tinkering with it won't change it.

It's still the case, isn't it, that if you determine, according to your funding formula, that a school has excess capacity, meaning it's not 100% full, the school board in question will have to close schools before they get any money for new schools? That's still the case, isn't it?

Hon David Johnson (Minister of Education and Training): I'm glad the member raised the funding formula, because there's a good deal of excellent news which has been recognized by boards across Ontario.

The chair of the Toronto board, for example, says, "It appears that this is somewhat of a good-news story." Perhaps the leader of the third party doesn't consider it to be a good-news story, but the chair of the Toronto board considers it to be a good-news story.

The North Bay Nugget: "It is very good news for the Near North," says the chair of the Near North District School Board.

In Oshawa, trustee Susan Shetler has indicated that this is wonderful news that indicates the ministry is listening, and on and on it goes.

The new formula, as amended, will allow for schools with 20% below their capacity to receive operating funding as if they were at full capacity.

Mr Hampton: The question was about what happens to those boards that have a school that isn't 100% full according to your funding formula and yet elsewhere within their district they have an overcrowded situation or they need to build new schools and the funding formula is still the same. Those boards of education, according to your funding formula, and I give you Kitchener as an example, will have to close downtown schools before they get any money for schools that need to be built in the suburbs. That is still the situation, and that's why you refuse to answer the question.

Minister, you're not manufacturing widgets, you're supposed to be providing an education for our children, and there are still big problems with your funding formula. Will you commit to a review of the funding formula so that boards of education won't be forced to close downtown schools, needed community schools, in order to meet the needs of their suburbs? Will you do that, finally?

Hon David Johnson: I am proud of the funding formula, in the sense that for the first time ever in the history of Ontario money is allocated on a fair and equal basis to every student across the province. The school boards now are starting to recognize the fairness of the funding formula, indicating that this is a good-news story.

For the first time, whether a child is in an urban area, a rural area, an assessment-poor area or an assessment-rich area, the funds are allocated on a fair, equal basis, so that each and every child in Ontario will get the same opportunity for school resources, for books, for teachers within the classroom; the same opportunity for a decent school, for facilities, for transportation; equal opportunity across the province. I might add that the focus is on quality.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr Bert Johnson): Final supplementary.

Mr Alex Cullen (Ottawa West): I represent an area where the problems with your funding formula are clear. We're still waiting for the good news. The Ottawa-Carleton District School Board is a huge mix of urban, suburban and rural communities. The rural and suburban communities desperately need new schools. Forty per cent of rural and suburban students are in portables. This means that schools in the city of Ottawa, a community I represent, are still under the threat of closure if they're not operating at 100%.

Minister, why are you trying to solve the accommodation crisis in the rural and suburban communities by depriving the children in the city of Ottawa of their community schools. Why, Minister?

Hon Mr Johnson: First of all, let me congratulate the member for being now a member of the NDP caucus. I noticed there didn't seem to be too many claps from the Liberal backbenches.

In all of the rhubarb associated with the member's first question from the NDP ranks, I didn't hear all of his question, but I will say again that the funding formula directs the resources to where they are needed, directs the funding to the school boards which have the greatest need for new and permanent school space for their students, those school boards that have the greatest need, those students that have the greatest need. Within the school boards and within the schools it directs the resources to the classroom, to the teachers, to the school boards, to the other resources that go within the classroom, to the boards that need the money, to the schools that need the money.

SPECIAL EDUCATION

Mr Howard Hampton (Rainy River): To the Minister of Education again: The minister says that the objective of the funding formula is to get the money to the schools that need it and to the students who need it. No, Minister, the objective of your funding formula is to get the money out of the schools. People understand that. That was the whole idea behind school closures and it's the whole problem also with special education.

Minister, you know you've created a huge problem in the funding of special education. You know that the students who need individual support aren't getting it. In fact, you've had to set up an expert panel to review the criteria for individual funding of special education students. Can you tell us, has the expert panel you created reported and what are its recommendations with respect to special education?

Hon David Johnson (Minister of Education and Training): The ministry has undertaken a number of initiatives with regard to special education. Number one, we have set aside over a billion dollars - it turns out it'll be about $1.2 billion in special education - and protected that money for the first time ever so that those monies must be spent on special education and nothing else in Ontario.

The expert panel is undertaking a review for the ministry. I have not received their recommendations, but I expect them in the near future. In addition to that, there have been a number of experts reviewing the submissions of the various boards for their intensive support amounts, particularly in level 2 and level 3, across Ontario. Those experts, former superintendents or current superintendents, experts in education, have been giving the ministry good advice which we have heeded in terms of increasing the funding -

The Deputy Speaker (Mr Bert Johnson): First supplementary.

Mr Hampton: The experts told you your funding formula was wrong in terms of attempting to force schools to close. The experts are also telling you that your special education formula is wrong. You must know about the case of Harry Bellemare. This case was in the newspaper. He's 11 years old, he has cerebral palsy, he uses an electric wheelchair, and he has lost the full-time special education help he used to have because of your funding formula.

Then there's Andrew MacPherson, who used to get help at school. He's 10 years old, in grade 5. Under your new funding formula he's been denied any help this year. Your funding formula says he doesn't qualify for extra help that he needs to go to the washroom or to take his medication. His mother has -

The Deputy Speaker: Thank you. Minister of Education.

Mr Hampton: Minister, what are you going to do about these students?

The Deputy Speaker: The Chair recognizes the minister.

Hon David Johnson: I know the leader of the third party is alluding to a case that is in the newspapers today. I can't be specific about the particular case other than the ministry has indicated to me that the parents, last week actually, well before the

article appeared in the newspaper, did sit down with the local school board, the Limestone school board in this case, and sorted out that situation, I'm told, to the satisfaction of all concerned.

In terms of other situations, the Toronto school board, for example, on page 6 of its own brochure indicates that it needs $211 million. Guess what? With the assistance of the experts, we have provided $211.8 million.

Mr Hampton: This is a minister who always wants to talk about money but never wants to get down to addressing the real issues of the children in need. The problem is your individual support amount or ISA, as it's called, is set up to almost force children to be dependent on adult help. It doesn't allow boards to pool educational assistants.

We've heard from parents like Maureen Vance from Oakville. She found out that her daughter, who started kindergarten this fall, would not be getting an instructional assistant because of your funding changes. She says, "I would like to know how my daughter is supposed to reach her full potential when there aren't enough resources to have someone to take her to the bathroom, let alone help her with her classroom work?"

Minister, you finally listened on the funding formula when it came to closing schools. Will you listen now -

The Deputy Speaker: Thank you. Minister of Education.

Hon David Johnson: I'm glad there is an acknowledgement that in regard to the closing of schools issue that the boards initiated, the ministry has resolved that matter for them.

In terms of the intensive support amount, I will say to the leader opposite that this is something of deep concern for the Ministry of Education because we want to ensure that each and every student who has received and deserves to get attention within our classrooms across the province in fact gets those services. We set up a panel of 11 experts, 11 superintendents and former superintendents across the province, and they came back to us with recommendations as to what was required to support those students across the province.

I might also say that some boards have made their submissions to the ministry in terms of pooling resources, and on their behalf, I would support that sort of approach.

ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES LEGISLATION

Mr Dwight Duncan (Windsor-Walkerville): I have a question for the Minister of Citizenship and Culture. In your announcement today about your non-Ontarians with Disabilities Act, you've acknowledged improving access to persons with disabilities through the identification, removal and prevention of barriers to their participation in the social and economic life of the province. Given your implicit and explicit acknowledgement of those problems, can you tell me how your so-called Ontarians with Disabilities Act will do that in light of the fact that you've addressed neither questions of enforcement nor enforcement of penalties? Can you tell the House and the province -

The Deputy Speaker (Mr Bert Johnson): Minister.

Mr Duncan: I'm sure the minister would like to clarify the absolute inaccuracy. You forgot to mention that you cut the funding for those very things that went on before. You forgot to mention anything about that.

There is no provision for enforcement. There is no provision for penalties for lack of compliance. There is nothing in this so-called legislation that's meaningful. What do you say to persons with disabilities whom you've abandoned yet again? Another government that's abandoned them. What do you say to them today? They're going to be here tomorrow to speak to you and they're going to want to know why, having fought themselves into your closed hearings this summer, having been ignored by you and your government, they have now been given a patronizing bit of pablum that has no enforcement mechanisms, no penalties.

What are you going to say to them tomorrow? Having ignored them up to now, how are you going to convince them that there is any kind of enforcement or penalties for non-compliance with

an act that really doesn't work? What are you going to say to them tomorrow?

Hon Ms Bassett: I would say there are enforcement measures in place. What you are arguing is the fact that you want a new enforcement agency other than the Ontario Human Rights Code which is in place. This government has maintained funding to the Ontario Human Rights Commission. Under the thrust of this government, we have ensured that it is now hearing its cases and streamlining its complaints process. In fact, 80% of new cases sent to mediation are resolved in 90 days, and the commission's new case management system is considered a model process by other agencies that need efficient systems.

This government is not going to create an expensive new agency when we have a perfectly good one working right now.

POLICE STRIP SEARCHES

Mr Howard Hampton (Rainy River): I have a question for the Solicitor General. Over the last few weeks, a number of questions have been raised and there have been a series of highly publicized cases dealing with strip searches by the Toronto police force.

We know that strip searches may be necessary in some circumstances, but a number of very serious questions have arisen out of some of these searches and there are some real questions about visible minorities being singled out. For example, imagine if you were pulled over for a speeding ticket and then subjected to a strip search because of how you looked.

Minister, you have some responsibility here. You can pass regulations. When are you going to take on your responsibility and make sure this situation gets straightened out?

Hon Robert W. Runciman (Solicitor General and Minister of Correctional Services): Many police services across the province do have very strict policies in regard to strip searches of suspects. I think we've seen, in respect to the recent incidents that received a significant amount of publicity, that the Toronto Police Services Board has instituted a new policy to deal with it. So I think the tools are there to deal with this policy approach to dealing with suspects in a very different and effective way. It's really in the hands of the board, and I would suggest that the member speak to the Toronto board with respect to that specific concern.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr Bert Johnson): Supplementary.

Mr Peter Kormos (Welland-Thorold): That's a complete abdication of your responsibility. It's imperative that there be one standard across the province. You have a responsibility to act on this matter. I've got right here a letter that was sent to you by the Canadian Civil Liberties Association. They point out that you have a crucial role to play in this current and ongoing controversy. They've even provided you with a very basic and practical suggestion, and that is that there have to be common standards across the province. It can't just be up to municipalities.

The public and the police call upon you to be protected by the implementation of a universal standard across the province. It's imperative that you put into place a regulation that sets out exactly when the police should and should not carry out a strip search. It's in your court very much, Minister. Why won't you show some leadership and implement a regulation that's uniform across Ontario?

Hon Mr Runciman: I meet on a rather frequent basis with the chiefs of police from across the province, the police services boards, the police associations and many public groups that have an interest in policing. If we reach a determination that a standard is appropriate in this situation, we'd be quite prepared to move in that regard. Up to this point that case has not been made, but it's certainly not outside the realm of possibility.

TELEMARKETING PRACTICES

Mr Trevor Pettit (Hamilton Mountain): My question is for the Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations. A number of constituents high atop majestic Hamilton Mountain are telling me they are receiving calls from telephone solicitors who seem to be working from outside Ontario. I know you've cracked down on telemarketing fraud and loan brokers operating in Ontario, but what are you doing to protect consumers from scams that originate from outside Ontario?

Hon David H. Tsubouchi (Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations): Ontario has been a leader in fighting against scams and various frauds. For this I believe a lot of credit should go to Staff Sergeant Barry Elliott of the OPP, who is heading up a force called Phonebusters. Since we've initiated and worked with Barry Elliott and Phonebusters, we've had a reduction of around 46% in fraud in the province since 1995.

We've learned that much of this has emanated from outside the province. As a result of that, we've taken the lead again and initiated a program called Canshare. Canshare is a program that shares information between various provinces. For example, if someone is scamming people in Ontario, we will share that information through this Canshare scheme with other provinces, thereby preventing the scam artist from going to, say, Alberta or BC and starting up the same type of scam there.

We really believe this type of program, this sharing of information, will help prevent a lot of fraud and a lot of these people from getting started.

Mr Pettit: I can see how it would be very helpful for law enforcement agencies to have advance knowledge of any criminal activity coming into their area. However, my concern is about the public. What about the people of, say, Hamilton Mountain? Will they be warned about any new scams in their community?

Hon Mr Tsubouchi: I think warning the public in advance is an extremely important part of preventing fraud. We initiate many news releases and alerts to the public, and as a matter of courtesy many of the local newspapers carry these consumer alerts.

I'd also like to acknowledge that the MPPs have a very keen role to play in all this. I've talked recently with the member for Lambton, who advised me that they had a seniors' antifraud seminar that went on in his area and they had the OPP speaking to seniors. He alerted me as well to a recent scam. This is one where citizens will get a card that looks like it has been sent by Canada Post, by registered mail, and it indicates "Final notice to call" at the top.

When they call, they find themselves talking to someone who tells them they've won a set of knives or a trip, but in order for them to collect this prize they have to see a salesman. The salesman turns out to be a vacuum salesman. So this is nothing but a scam.

It's through these types of initiatives advising the public of these types of scams that we can prevent scams, particularly against seniors.

PROPERTY TAXATION

Mr John Gerretsen (Kingston and The Islands): My question is to the Deputy Premier. Today we'll be debating the seventh property tax bill, and that bill still doesn't get it right. You have created chaos throughout this province.

Let's just hear what some of the mayors around the province have to say. The mayor of Niagara Falls says that if the government wants to help small business, this is not the way to go. "You've created a mess."

In Sudbury: "This is the final straw. It blows the provincial government's credibility right out of the water."

Phil Leonard, chair of the Frontenac management board, says, "Why does the province not exempt those municipalities that did use the earlier legislation?"

Hazel McCallion in Mississauga is threatening to withhold $94 million in education taxes from you. She says: "We should send up a white flag. The province really has got us into a mess."

Why didn't you listen to the clerks and treasurers last February when they said, "Whatever you're going to do, wait until 1999 to implement it"? Why are you attacking the property taxpayers -

The Deputy Speaker (Mr Bert Johnson): Thank you.

Hon Ernie L. Eves (Deputy Premier, Minister of Finance): We are not attacking property taxpayers. If the honourable member wants to vote against an amendment that limits the amount of business tax increases in every community across the province, I welcome him to stand up and vote against it. You want increases?

While the honourable member's government was in power, if he wants to talk about tax increases, I can tell you what they were in every single municipality in those five years. Gerry Phillips is nodding his head over there, the member for Scarborough-Agincourt, if he'd like to stand up and tell the Legislature and the people of Ontario why he voted for these huge tax increases.

We are limiting tax increases and we're taking the bull by the horns. We are solving an unfair tax system in the province of Ontario, which he didn't have the intestinal fortitude to do.

Mr Gerretsen: You have created chaos and a mess throughout this entire province. Even some of the municipalities, like Halton, that used your tools, as did other areas of this province, must now go back to the drawing board and recreate tax bills, which is an administrative nightmare and an additional cost. The four chambers of commerce support what they did in Halton, as did the four MPPs from that area.

When will you admit that you have made a mistake with all these property tax bills? When are you going to stop doing what you're doing and create reasonable, sensible government for this province rather than your constant attacks on the taxpayers of this province and the municipalities?

Hon Mr Eves: Talking about constant attacks on the taxpayers of the province, this is the first government that has come along and done something about the unfair, inequitable property taxation system in Ontario. At the same time, we have provided municipalities, yet again, from November 1997 to December 31, 1998, some 13 months, the opportunity to adapt to tools to change the system. If that doesn't work, we have limited tax increases to businesses across the province. If he and his colleagues want to vote against that, they're more than welcome to stand up.

They may well want to, seeing as how when they were in government, municipal tax increases in the city of Toronto went up 30%; in Hamilton they went up 42%. You can take any one you want. In York region they went up 36.5%; in Brant they went up 27.2%; in Haliburton they went up 73.6%; and in Kingston, where he was the mayor, they went up 50%.

ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES LEGISLATION

Ms Frances Lankin (Beaches-Woodbine): My question is to the Minister of Citizenship. In 1990, as Chair of Management Board, I instituted a program of systemic barrier reviews, ministry by ministry. Ministries had to compile the reviews, include it as part of their annual business plan and submit it to Management Board and treasury board during their estimates. Management Board analysts reviewed those plans and provided independent comments to treasury board and Management Board as they reviewed them. There were resources allocated for the systemic barrier reviews.

There was a fund to accommodate changes within the ministries. Essentially, everything that you have announced today, which your minister and your government cancelled in 1995, was being done for five years.

What isn't in your legislation is any requirement for municipalities, the broader public sector or the private sector to do a single thing to remove barriers. Surely in the consultation you heard from members of the disability community that they wanted legislative guarantees that the private sector and the broader public sector, as well as the Ontario government, must accommodate and remove barriers. Why is that not included in your legislation?

Hon Isabel Bassett (Minister of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation): First of all, we certainly feel that we listened very intently to 282 groups across the province. We heard what they had to say. We set out the parameters at the beginning that we weren't going to impose mandatory means.

When you ask what we are doing for the business sector, we are having a committee on employment. We listened and heard that they wanted an information and referral service. Business after business told us and me personally that they want to do things about barrier design; they don't know where to go to find out about it. We are bringing that in. We are giving an $800,000 incentive that will allow small businesses to work on projects that have a broad application, that will remove barriers.

We are bringing in, in the education ministry, Job Connect program enhancements that will put people in touch with jobs, people with disabilities who have not been able to do that before. We as a government -

The Deputy Speaker (Mr Bert Johnson): Thank you. Supplementary.

Ms Lankin: Minister, you didn't listen to people. Don't say you listened intently. You ignored what person after person, group after group representing the community of the disabled came forward and told you.

Goodwill is not enough. Voluntary measures are not enough. This will not improve the situation for persons with disabilities in Ontario. All you've included in this meagre two-page bill is what was already being done in the province under the former government, the plan that you cancelled in 1995, and now in 1998 you're announcing you're going to reinstate it.

This is an abysmal failure. You have failed in your responsibility to advocate on behalf of people with disabilities. How are you going to answer to them?

Hon Ms Bassett: All I can say is that if you feel so strongly, you should have done more. You had five years in government and you did nothing. You would not even support your own member who brought forward a private member's bill, and he himself had a hearing impairment. If you feel so strongly about bringing in endless mandatory means, you had every opportunity to do it. We do have a mandatory measure requiring all government ministries to submit systemic plans.

COURT FACILITIES

Mr Jack Carroll (Chatham-Kent): My question is to the Attorney General. Minister, I know how you feel about the administration of justice at the local level, especially in areas of rural Ontario. I know you agree that because of the previous governments we've had in our province, all of our infrastructure has deteriorated, certainly our courthouse system. Could you give us an update on the progress your ministry has made in renewing our courthouse facilities in Ontario?

Hon Charles Harnick (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs): I thank the member for Chatham-Kent for the question. As you are aware, we have embarked on the most extensive courthouse redevelopment scheme in the history of this province. Over the continuing five-year period, we are spending an unprecedented $250 million to answer the promises that previous governments have made to build courthouses but didn't quite get around to doing.

We're building courthouses in Hamilton, Windsor and Welland, we're building a courthouse in Brampton and in Chatham, and we just opened the courthouse in Cornwall, all of which were courthouses that had been promised by previous governments and not built.

I give you the example of Brampton. This party planned to build the Brampton courthouse. They never got a shovel in the ground. We have kept our promises.

Mr Carroll: Minister, I had the opportunity to have you down to my community to visit what we used as a courthouse, and you agreed with me about the pitiful state it was in. You also know that because of local restructuring in our area, where we reduced from 156 local political positions to 18, we had a building come available, and you in your wisdom saw fit to provide us with the resources for a new courthouse.

We know what happened in the community of Chatham-Kent. Can you give us an update on some other specific areas of the province where you've been able to do some things to upgrade the courthouse facilities?

Hon Mr Harnick: As I was saying, we opened the courthouse in Cornwall on Friday, a promise that was made by the previous two governments. They never got around to building that courthouse. We built the courthouse facility that we opened on Friday at a cost of $7.5 million. This is one of the most modern, up-to-date courthouses in North America, technologically at the highest level for going into the 21st century. We watched the downtown deteriorate as the two previous parties formed governments. We came along and kept the promise to build the courthouse for the people in Cornwall.

We've done the same thing for the people in Windsor. We're doing the same thing of the people in Chatham. We're doing the same thing for the people in Brampton.

We have made promises to upgrade court facilities. We've kept those promises, unlike the previous two governments.

LONG-TERM CARE

Mr Dominic Agostino (Hamilton East): My question is to the Minister of Health. Last week your government announced 550 beds for the Hamilton-Wentworth region with regard to long-term care. First of all, this does not even meet the need. There are over 1,000 people on waiting lists. You're going to shut down 180 chronic care beds in Hamilton-Wentworth. Clearly your announcement falls way short of the need, but beyond that, what is more disturbing is your pattern of awarding long-term contracts to the private sector and to for-profit companies simply to make a buck.

In the announcement of the 550 beds, 85% of those beds went to private sector companies and only a small percentage went to LIUNA, local 837.

Clearly, this is the Americanization of health care that you're started on. This is a back-door way of awarding contracts to your friends. Minister, can you tell us why you ignored the non-profit sector with this announcement and gave all the contracts to private sector companies?

Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Minister of Health): I will refer that to the Minister of Long-Term Care.

Hon Cameron Jackson (Minister of Long-Term Care, minister responsible for seniors): I will advise the member what I told him and his community when I was in Hamilton last week to announce the first long-term-care beds in over a decade in Hamilton. We announced 550 new long-term-care beds in that city, about a 50% increase in the total number of beds, and we still have 758 more beds.

The member gets up in this House and talks about the fact that we're not building them fast enough. It was good enough for you and your government to turn your back for five solid years on the seniors in Hamilton-Wentworth, and this government is putting in those resources, adding to its total allocation of provincial dollars. It's unbelievable, because he campaigned in the last election on the Liberal red book, and the best we were going to get out of the member from Hamilton, Mr Agostino, was that they were going to create a long-term-care coordinating committee to study long-term care. That's all you were going to do. We're building the best.

Mr Agostino: I appreciate the answer, except that I think he's reading from the wrong briefing notes.

Minister, the question refers to the awarding of the contracts. I've told you that the shortfall already doesn't come close to meeting the needs. You ignored and stabbed in the back St Peter's Centre. Your own restructuring commission recommended that St Peter's Centre be used for this type of purpose. It was praised as a leader in caring for seniors. You and your commission and your cabinet stabbed them in the back and betrayed them by not awarding them one single bed. Not one single allocation went to St Peter's Centre. That is a disgrace. It shows the lack of clout that you have in cabinet, that you cannot deliver for Hamilton-Wentworth.

Minister, can you tell again me why you chose to deliberately ignore and knife St Peter's Centre after the restructuring commission told them they should be given some beds?

Hon Mr Jackson: Just for the record, it was the Liberal government under then Minister of Health Elinor Caplan who stabbed St Peter's in the back when it decided there were going to be no more chronic care hospitals in Ontario. It was the Liberal government that decided we were going to phase out chronic care hospitals. The NDP government agreed, and this government is putting together and responding to the Health Services Restructuring Commission's report to extend and build long-term-care beds in this province, an unprecedented 20,000 beds.

If the good citizens of Hamilton-Wentworth haven't any other example of why they should be scared of the Liberal Party as they present themselves to try to be the next government of Ontario -

Interjection.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr Bert Johnson): Member for Hamilton East, come to order.

Hon Mr Jackson: Dalton McGuinty puts out his stand on health care. I'll tell you what the citizens of Hamilton-Wentworth should be worried about: not one reference in here to seniors, not one reference to long-term care, not one reference to community care. Can the seniors of Ontario, let alone the citizens of Hamilton, really trust the Liberal Party?

ASSISTANCE TO FARMERS

Mr Howard Hampton (Rainy River): My question is for the Minister of Agriculture. The Minister of Agriculture will know that because of the Asian crisis, the price for wheat, for hogs and for many other commodities has dropped tremendously. In the United States, they're prepared to offer their farmers $16 billion in help. You know that farmers in Ontario have other challenges as well, because of the drought and because of increased input costs.

Minister, you've cut the ministry's budget; you've offloaded a whole lot of programs on to farmers. What are you prepared to do to help the farmers of Ontario now, in the midst of this crisis?

Hon Noble Villeneuve (Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, minister responsible for francophone affairs): I'd like to thank my colleague. Yes, I was at the OFA meeting today and I spoke with the farmers of Ontario, the Ontario Federation of Agriculture. We are working with the federal government. We have the safety nets, we have the market revenue and we have the NISA program in place. We are looking very closely at what we can do. I am and will be speaking with the federal minister, the Honourable Lyle Vanclief, later this afternoon. We are working towards some degree of alleviation.

As the member knows, the cycle in agriculture always goes up and down, and we happen to be at the very low ebb of the cycle in grains and hog production. The Asian economic flu has not helped that situation at all. We know about it and we're working on it.

Mr Hampton: Minister, you would know that the national safety nets committee has presented the federal government with a proposal for a national disaster relief program. It will guarantee farmers 70% of their individual farm income average over expenses. You also know that the NISA program won't even come close to helping the average hog farmer in this province, given what has happened, the dramatic decrease in prices and things like the drought.

I hope that you would stand up and say that you are going to fight for the national safety nets committee proposal. Nothing else will do. It's clear the federal Liberals in Ottawa are dragging their feet on this. What are you prepared to do? What is Ontario prepared to do to fight for Ontario farmers and to make sure they aren't put at risk, given everything that's happening in Asia and given the fact that the federal government is dragging its feet?

Hon Mr Villeneuve: We are working very closely with the federal government, with the federal bureaucrats. We are working on a national disaster program. We have some very difficult economic times in certain areas of agriculture, and I will be the first to admit that. We are working on that particular program, and it has to be a two-government initiative.

WOMEN'S AND CHILDREN'S SERVICES

Mrs Helen Johns (Huron): My question is for the minister with responsibility for women's issues. We all know that we're concerned about the safety of women and children in Ontario. I understand that as part of Wife Assault Prevention Month, the minister made an announcement in Sarnia on the Thursday that just passed. Minister, I was wondering if you could inform the House about this announcement.

Hon Dianne Cunningham (Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, minister responsible for women's issues): I'd like to thank my colleague the member for Huron, southwest Ontario, for the question.

The safety of women and children is a priority during any month of the year for the members of this Legislative Assembly and certainly for the people of Ontario. We have a grant program that was announced last week. In southwest Ontario, there were community-based programs, in partnership with others - Mr Speaker, your area of the province as well - that received over $57,000. Across the province, we gave out almost $700,000 to more than 50 community-based agencies in partnership with others to stop the violence.

At the Sexual Assault Survivors' Centre in Sarnia, we met with Pat Brooks, Jean Brady, Diann Gougeon, Val Pitt and Gayle Douglas. They're very eager to get started on a project to put together a booklet on teens and dating, because this is a problematic area at this time in young people's lives. They will also develop a protocol right across their area in partnership with Victims Services of Sarnia-Lambton and the sexual assault treatment centre.

Partnerships work, and they should be very proud of their great accomplishments.

Mrs Johns: I know that you have introduced a number of initiatives within your ministry, Minister, and I was wondering if you would outline some of those initiatives to the House so that we can consider how we might be able to utilize them in our own constituencies.

Hon Mrs Cunningham: There are a number of initiatives. In fact, we had a conference in London, Ontario, on Thursday and Friday, where we were talking about ways we can stop sexual harassment in the workplace, because harassment is the beginning of violence, and it isn't funny, the joke's over, to harass your friends.

With teenagers, it's very important that they have both education and training. One of the resources that we're very proud of is called Peace Breaks. These Peace Breaks are very small vignettes that are used by classes. They were produced in partnership with TVOntario. It's a series of nine three-minute program shorts designed to stand alone or be shown as a series. The Peace Breaks are broadcast on TVO during TVO Kids, a program that many of us know about, and they've been created for youth in elementary schools.

PROBATE AND ESTATE FEES

Mr Gerry Phillips (Scarborough-Agincourt): My question has to do with the new Harris tax that was introduced today that I think will raise about $1 billion.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr Bert Johnson): Who's your question to?

Mr Phillips: It's to the Minister of Finance. It is retroactive, I gather, back 48 years, so it's a new tax introduced today going back 48 years, designed to raise $1 billion.

My question is this to the minister: I gather from your bill that the Harris government has decided that the fees that were imposed by the previous NDP government on estates are now going to be adopted by Mike Harris and that it is your plan to adapt those fees in the form of a tax, the same fees that were adapted by the NDP government in the form of a tax. Is that your intention, to impose the same fees as the previous government in the form of a tax now and for the future?

Hon Ernie L. Eves (Deputy Premier, Minister of Finance): It's the intention of the government to maintain the status quo with respect to fees surrounding probates from 1950 to now. I might point out, if the government were to pay back that money, it would amount to roughly $1.5 billion in principal, plus interest on that money.

I might also point out to him, by the way, that Management Board of Cabinet's decision to change the fee structure was made in 1988 and 1989 by the David Peterson government. I might also point out to the honourable member for Scarborough-Agincourt that while he was in government and sat in cabinet, his government collected over $120 million in these fees during that period of time. Surely, if he thought they were illegal or unconstitutional, (

a) he wouldn't have taken

part in a government that raised the fees in 1988 and 1989, and (

b) he wouldn't have collected $120 million to boot.

PETITIONS

HOTEL DIEU HOSPITAL

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

"Since the Hotel Dieu Hospital has played and continues to play a vital role in the delivery of health care services in St Catharines and the Niagara region; and

"Since Hotel Dieu has modified its role over the years as part of a rationalization of medical services in St Catharines and has assumed the position of a regional health care facility in such areas as kidney dialysis and oncology; and

"Since the Niagara region is experiencing underfunding in the health care field and requires more medical services and not fewer services; and

"Since Niagara residents are required at present to travel outside of the Niagara region to receive many specialized services that could be provided in city hospitals and thereby not require local patients to make difficult and inconvenient trips down our highways to other centres; and

"Since the hospital restructuring committee of Niagara used a Toronto consulting firm to develop its recommendations and was forced to take into account a cut of $40 million in funding for Niagara hospitals when carrying out its study; and

"Since the population of the Niagara region is older than that in most areas of the province and more elderly people tend to require more hospital services;

"We, the undersigned, request that the government of Ontario keep the election commitment of Premier Mike Harris not to close hospitals in our province, and we call upon the Premier to reject any recommendation to close Hotel Dieu Hospital in St Catharines."

I affix my signature as I'm in complete agreement.

SCHOOL CLOSURES

Mr Rosario Marchese (Fort York): I've got a petition from approximately 100 people, and there are more coming, that speak against closures of many schools in Toronto, and it reads:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"We, the undersigned, are categorically opposed to closure, consolidation of St Raymond Catholic school or any school in the city of Toronto."

I've signed my name to this petition.

PORNOGRAPHY

Ms Marilyn Mushinski (Scarborough-Ellesmere): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

Whereas children are exposed to pornography in various stores and video retail outlets;

"Whereas bylaws vary from city to city and have failed to protect minors from unwanted exposure to pornography;

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

"To enact legislation which will create uniform standards in Ontario to prevent minors from being exposed to pornography in retail establishments; prevent minors from entering establishments which rent or sell pornography; restrict the location of such establishments to non-residential areas."

I agree with this petition and I will be affixing my signature to it.

DENTAL CARE

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

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas a new

schedule of dental services for children and people with disabilities was introduced by the government under the Ontario Works Act and the Ontario Disability Support Program Act;

"Whereas the new

schedule fails to meet the special needs of children and people with disabilities, reduces services, places barriers to accessing care and creates an environment for various different dental programs across Ontario;

"Whereas the move away from an emphasis on prevention under the new dental

schedule brings significant health risks for children and people with disabilities who are often least able to practise good oral hygiene;

"Whereas the new dental

schedule interferes with the patients' rights to consent to treatment by requiring administrators, and not patients or substitute decision-makers, to authorize and deny dental treatment;

"Whereas there is no method for the patient to appeal a decision by a plan administrator to deny dental treatment;

"Whereas pre-authorizations, called predeterminations in the new plan, will require that a higher level of confidential patient health information be disclosed to dental plan administrators;

"Whereas the Ontario government has caused confusion among patients by introducing the plan without prior consultation and has not included any affected patient groups in consultations after releasing the new dental plan;

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

"Delay full implementation of the new dental plan until the requirement for predeterminations is removed, patient confidentiality is protected, the plan emphasizes prevention in oral health care, and the government consults directly with affected patients to ensure the new plan will meet the special needs of children and people with disabilities."

I affix my signature as I'm in complete agreement.

PORNOGRAPHY

Mr Bob Wood (London South): I have a petition signed by 120 people.

"Whereas children are exposed to pornography in variety stores and video rental outlets;

"Whereas bylaws vary from city to city and have failed to protect minors from unwanted exposure to pornography;

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

"To enact legislation which will create uniform standards in Ontario to prevent minors from being exposed to pornography in retail establishments; prevent minors from entering establishments which rent or sell pornography; restrict the location of such establishments to non-residential areas."

REGIONAL GOVERNMENT RESTRUCTURING

Mr Toby Barrett (Norfolk): I present further petitions calling for the elimination of regional government, over 10,000 now. The petition is signed by Mayor Marie Trainer, Mayor Rita Kalmbach, Councillor Gary Nichols and others.

"Whereas the Haldimand-Norfolk region has downloaded a 17% tax hike on residents, without attempting to cut its own costs; and

"Whereas for the past 25 years, there have been meetings, petitions, referenda and studies calling for a restructuring of regional government; and

"Whereas 80% of the residents did not want regional government in the first place, and in recent referenda 75% of the residents of the city of Nanticoke and 60% of the residents of the town of Simcoe voted against retaining regional government; and

"Whereas residents in the region do not want and clearly cannot afford two levels of municipal government;

"We, the undersigned, respectfully request that provincial legislation be passed to freeze taxes and eliminate regional government in Haldimand-Norfolk, and institute a form of restructured local government in keeping with the wishes and the financial means of the local residents."

HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING

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

"Whereas the hospital restructuring commission established by the Mike Harris government deliberated in secret about the future of hospitals in the Niagara region and has reported in the autumn of this year;

"Whereas the St Catharines General Hospital, the Hotel Dieu Hospital and the Shaver Hospital, along with the Niagara rehabilitation centre, have in the past provided excellent medical care for the people of St Catharines;

"Whereas the Niagara-on-the-Lake hospital, the Douglas Memorial Hospital in Fort Erie, the Port Colborne hospital and the West Lincoln Memorial Hospital in Grimsby have been key centres of health care in the Niagara Peninsula;

"We, the undersigned, petition the government of Ontario to maintain existing medical services provided at these hospitals, restore the proposed $43-million cut from operating funds for the Niagara hospitals; and

"That the Ontario Ministry of Health provide additional funding to expand health care services available in the Niagara region for residents in the Niagara Peninsula."

I affix my signature as I'm in complete agreement with this petition.

FIREARMS CONTROL

Mr Marcel Beaubien (Lambton): I have a petition that reads as follows:

"Whereas we welcome real gun control and support those portions of Bill C-68 which provide tougher penalties for the criminal use of firearms, new offences related to firearms smuggling and trafficking; and

"Whereas existing laws requiring the registration of handguns have done little to reduce the number of crimes committed with handguns or lower the volume of handguns smuggled into Canada; and

"Whereas the national gun registration provisions of Bill C-68 will result in a massive misallocation of the limited resources available to law enforcement agencies, with no practical effect on the traffic of illegal firearms or the use of guns by violent criminals; and

"Whereas the gun registration provisions of Bill C-68 will take police officers off the streets and involve them in bureaucracy other than fighting crime and will make the task of real gun control more difficult and dangerous for police officers;

I'll sign my name to the petition.

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): This is to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas the Conservative government of Mike Harris has announced its intention of dumping the financing for ambulances, social housing and public health care services on to the backs of municipalities; and

"Whereas this irresponsible action will create a shortfall of more than $18 million for local governments in St Catharines and the Niagara region; and

"Whereas local representatives in St Catharines and the Niagara region will be forced to either raise property taxes by as much as $200 per household or cut services, or both; and

"Whereas Mike Harris called municipal representatives `whiners' when they tried to explain to him that his proposal was unfair and would create gaps in important services such as the delivery of public health care; and

"Whereas the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing accused local representatives of being opportunistic simply because they attempted to point out that Mike Harris's proposal was unfair and primarily designed to fund his ill-advised tax scheme; and

"Whereas the Conservative government of Mike Harris refuses to listen to the representatives who work most closely with their constituents, that is, the municipal representatives;

"We, the undersigned, call on the Conservative government of Mike Harris to scrap its downloading plan, which will cause either an increase in property taxes or an unacceptable cut to important services, or both."

I affix