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

November 29, 2001

37th Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2001-Nov-29 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Thursday 29 November 2001 Jeudi 29 novembre 2001

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

CHARITY FUND-RAISING

ACTIVITIES ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LES ACTIVITÉS

DE FINANCEMENT DES ORGANISMES

DE BIENFAISANCE

CELEBRATION OF PORTUGUESE

HERITAGE ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LA FÊTE

DU PATRIMOINE PORTUGAIS

CHARITY FUND-RAISING

ACTIVITIES ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LES ACTIVITÉS

DE FINANCEMENT DES ORGANISMES

DE BIENFAISANCE

CELEBRATION OF PORTUGUESE

HERITAGE ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LA FÊTE

DU PATRIMOINE PORTUGAIS

CHARITY FUND-RAISING

ACTIVITIES ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LES ACTIVITÉS

DE FINANCEMENT DES ORGANISMES

DE BIENFAISANCE

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING

CHILDREN'S MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES

AGRICULTURE PROGRAMS

GEORGINA ISLAND

FAMILY RESOURCE CENTRE

HOME CARE

COMMUNITY FAMILY RESOURCE CENTRES

ANNE BERRY

BAY OF QUINTE WALLEYE FISHERY

ANNIVERSARY OF OSCARDO

COMMENTAIRES D'UN DÉPUTÉ

MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS

ANNUAL REPORT,

PROVINCIAL AUDITOR

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE

ON GENERAL GOVERNMENT

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

DEMOCRACY IN ONTARIO

DAY ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LA JOURNÉE

DE LA DÉMOCRATIE EN ONTARIO

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

AMENDMENT ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 MODIFIANT

LA

LOI SUR LA SANTÉ

ET LA SÉCURITÉ AU TRAVAIL

GOVERNMENT ADVERTISING

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

HIV/AIDS PREVENTION

AND TREATMENT

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH

AND SAFETY LEGISLATION

HIV/AIDS PREVENTION

AND TREATMENT

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH

AND SAFETY LEGISLATION

HIV/AIDS PREVENTION

AND TREATMENT

VISITORS

CONTEMPT OF PARLIAMENT

ORAL QUESTIONS

FOOD INSPECTION AND SAFETY

WOMEN'S SHELTERS

FOOD INSPECTION AND SAFETY

WOMEN'S SHELTERS

MINISTRY OF HEALTH SPENDING

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

HIGHWAY SAFETY

TRAVEL DEFICIT

GOVERNMENT STANDARDS

HEARINGS ON ONTARIANS

WITH DISABILITIES LEGISLATION

PREMIER'S RESEARCH EXCELLENCE AWARDS

MUNICIPAL WASTE DISPOSAL

CORRECTIONAL SERVICES

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

PETITIONS

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

CHILD CARE

ORDERS OF THE DAY

COMMUNITY CARE ACCESS

CORPORATIONS ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LES SOCIÉTÉS

D'ACCÈS AUX SOINS COMMUNAUTAIRES

Thursday 29 November 2001 Jeudi 29 novembre 2001

The House met at 1000.

Prayers.

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

CHARITY FUND-RAISING

ACTIVITIES ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LES ACTIVITÉS

DE FINANCEMENT DES ORGANISMES

DE BIENFAISANCE

Mr Crozier moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 26,

An Act to amend the Safe Streets Act, 1999 and the Highway Traffic Act to recognize the fund-raising activities of legitimate charities / Projet de loi

26, Loi modifiant la Loi de 1999 sur la sécurité dans les rues et le Code de la route pour reconnaître les activités de financement des organismes de bienfaisance

légitimes.

The Acting Speaker (Mr Michael A. Brown): The member for Essex has up to 10 minutes for his presentation.

Mr Bruce Crozier (Essex): I'm pleased to have with me some moral support this morning. I would like to introduce to you Richard Metzloff, who is

client of the year in Ontario for muscular dystrophy. He's in the Speaker's gallery and I'm pleased to have Richard with me.

As well, I have George Henderson, the national manager of firefighter relations and communication for the Muscular Dystrophy Association of Canada, and Yves

Savoie, the national executive director for muscular dystrophy. They are in the members' gallery.

As well as their support, I would appreciate the support of my colleagues, the members of the third party and, most importantly of course, the members of the

government caucus.

This bill is short and sweet and is needed. Just a very brief explanation of what this bill does: it is to amend the Safe Streets Act so that charities that are

registered under the Income Tax Act and have been permitted by bylaw of the municipality or a resolution of the council of the municipality may conduct their fundraising activities on or beside

roadsides, in parking lots and the like.

To give you just a brief history, what happened of course was that when the Safe Streets Act was passed in 1999, it was intended for, I believe, and has been

effective when it comes to, squeegee kids, as they're referred to, mainly on the streets of Toronto, and I have no argument with that. The bill, as I said, has been effective. But what happened was

-- and I don't think this was expected when the bill was drafted -- that it had a much broader effect. What it did and what it has done and who it has hurt are those charities that, historically,

have entered upon our streets to raise money. Most notably, ones that we would recognize right away would be the firefighters of Ontario and their support of muscular dystrophy and perhaps

Goodfellows in your cities where they sell their Christmas papers.

What has happened is this: when it was first pointed out how broad the Safe Streets Act was and how it was going to affect these charities, the reaction of the

minister of the day was, "Charities won't be bothered. They'll still be able to carry on their activities." Then there was a later reaction from the Attorney General of the day that fundraising

events in any of these venues are illegal and they would have to abide by the law.

I will admit that in some areas these activities have been able to be carried on because police services have simply looked the other way, but that hasn't been

the case everywhere. There have been instances, and we have them documented, where either there has been a complaint by a citizen on which the police services then had to act, or there are

municipalities where the police services quite rightly have said, "You just can't carry on this type of fundraising activity." It's put the police services in a bit of a spot. You might say this

law has handcuffed them.

What we want to do is abide by the law. I think everybody wants to do that. We simply want to change the law so that registered charities will be able to conduct

these activities if they go to their town councils and receive permission through a bylaw or through a resolution.

When I refer to the bind it puts our police services in, Staff Sergeant Dave Rossell, a spokesman for the Windsor Police Services, stated this in regard to the

debate around the Safe Streets Act: "We can't pick and choose which laws we want to enforce and those we don't. We may be put in a position where we have to enforce." This small amendment to the

Safe Streets Act and the Highway Traffic Act will allow our police services to abide by the law and not have to pick and choose.

As an example, a firefighter fundraiser was shut down in Welland on August 25 of this year after a complaint was lodged under the Safe Streets Act. This has been

reported across the province and perhaps many of the members in the Legislature have read about it.

Firefighters have been doing roadside events for over 50 years, and not once in those 50 years has there ever been a report of an accident or an injury resulting

from these activities. Firefighters are safety professionals and they really don't need, I suggest, legislation to tell them how to keep safe.

The intent of Bill 26, I emphasize, once is to allow registered charities to solicit where municipal bylaws allow, and that's all it is. It makes a slight

amendment to the Safe Streets Act and the Highway Traffic Act because, technically, many kinds of roadside solicitation could be interpreted as illegal under the Highway Traffic Act, but there was

never any problem until the Safe Streets Act came along.

I also point out that not only does the Safe Streets Act ban fundraising activities on the roadways, but it also bans them in parking lots, near banks, bus stops

and pay phones. This has proved to be very problematic for the charities.

I want to give you some idea of what the effect has been from a monetary standpoint. The Muscular Dystrophy Association has predicted that this may cost them as

much as $700,000, because one of their main fundraising activities, if not the main one, has been through firemen's boot drives. This has had a very detrimental effect on that. We can also point

out that there are other charities. I've already mentioned the Goodfellows; many of us in this Legislature have stood on street corners and in roadways at traffic signals selling Goodfellow

newspapers at Christmastime. You and I don't want to do anything that's illegal, do we, Speaker? The Kinette clubs in Ontario, the Canadian Cancer Society, Ontario Students Against Impaired

Driving, and even the Windsor Regional Hospital burn unit in my area have been affected by this Safe Streets Act and would be assisted immensely by the amendments to that act.

I'm asking today for the support of everybody in this Legislature, and beyond that, if we can have this pass second reading, as it did in the last session --

Speaker, you will recall that it passed second reading and unfortunately died on the order paper. I won't give up, so I think what you could do best today is to support me, but, more important,

support those on whose behalf I'm speaking: the Muscular Dystrophy Association, the Goodfellows, the Kinettes, the students in universities. They all want your help by supporting this legislation,

and I respectfully ask my colleagues in this Legislature to support this bill and pass its second reading today.

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): New Democrats support the bill. We're going to vote for it. The fact is, the so-called squeegee bill, the Safe

Streets Act -- oh, give me a break. It's a stupid bill. It was a stupid bill to begin with. It never should have been passed. I understand the motive of the author of this bill in trying to narrow

it down to the narrowest issue, to perhaps give it some more currency with the government members, but the squeegee bill was a stupid bill and still is.

When I go home from Toronto down University Avenue or down Spadina, there are still people at the end of University and Spadina, except, you see -- and I'm good

for a loonie or toonie, and it doesn't offend me at all. The fact is that the squeegee bill didn't eliminate homeless people in the city of Toronto, except now they're at the end of University and

Spadina without a squeegee, because that's a dead giveaway. Do you know what I mean? So I don't get my windows cleaned. I'm being very candid that on a slushy winter day, like the days we're

approaching, I welcomed the squeegee kid, person, at the end of University Avenue or Spadina so I could get at least a clean windshield before I hit the Gardiner. I wish there were a couple down at

the area of the Burlington Skyway. I'm serious. They're still there -- again, they're still being forced to panhandle -- except they can't carry squeegees. They can't perform that service because,

as I'm sure the parliamentary assistant for the Attorney General will explain to us, it would be evidence of the offence of squeegeeing.

Let's not forget the other parts of this silly bill. The parliamentary assistant may want to comment on the stats, because this Safe Streets Act was about

squeegee kids; it was also about throwing away used condoms. It was designed to permit a charge to be laid if you threw away a used condom. At the time I reflected on the fact that I wouldn't want

to have to be the police officer collecting the evidence. I'd like the parliamentary assistant to tell us exactly how many used condoms have been recovered and are in evidence lockers or storage at

police stations either in Toronto or anywhere else in the province.

Please. The bill is about this government trying to -- it wasn't just imagery; it wasn't just puffery. One of the things that this government has done -- very

American-style and very frightening -- has been, rather than to specifically address issues like poverty and homelessness, they simply wanted to obliterate the evidence of it. They wanted to clean

up the streets, which means sweeping the streets clean of poor people and of panhandlers. You can bust as many panhandlers as you want; it doesn't change the fact that there are thousands of

homeless people in this city who are forced to revert to begging for alms, quite frankly, a historical and honourable thing in and of itself.

Let me tell you what happened in Welland. We all remember the "Oh, don't worry" admonitions by the Attorney General who authored the squeegee bill. "Oh, don't

worry. Oh, the bill's not designed to interrupt bona fide fundraising." I recall at the time -- check the Hansard -- saying that all you need is one wacko, one nutbar, to complain, and then the

police have to go there even though the police were prepared to use their discretion. One wacko, one nutbar, will compel the police to intervene. Well, in 2000 I was out on the streets proudly

breaking the law, because the bill was in effect. I was proudly breaking the squeegee law, along with volunteer firefighters. We were right outside the Welland Tribune on East Main Street.

Mr David Tilson (Dufferin-Peel-Wellington-Grey): You were a squeegee kid.

Mr Kormos: You bet your boots. I was out there with firefighters with the boots. We were stopping cars. We were soliciting contributions. The

Welland volunteer firefighers have always been -- you tell me if I'm wrong -- number one with their boot drive. You bet your boots. They've always been around number one in terms of the amount of

funds they raise. I was with them in 2000. We were ready for anything. If they were going to cuff us, print us, mug-shot us and throw us into the cells, let `er go.

In August of this year -- because, again, this happens just before Labour Day; it is part of all that fundraising activity that takes place around the Labour Day

weekend or just preceding it. I had to tell the volunteer firefighters -- Steve Pandur should be here today talking to this bill, because he would leave a distinct impression on you. He lives up on

Highway 58, on Merrittville Road. He's on the east side there just before Hurricane: an incredibly hard-working guy and also an enthusiastic volunteer firefighter. He's out there all the time as a

volunteer firefighter, in fundraising activities. If there's a charity event going on, Steve Pandur is there. I don't know where he finds the time, but he does. Steve Pandur is there because he

plays a major role. Again, he would caution me not to refer only to him, because there's a whole bunch of people, women and men. Firefighters come in from Port Robinson, from Thorold, to

participate in this street corner fundraiser.

This year they knew I couldn't be with them. I was out of the country. I was on that human rights tour that I told you about before. They knew that. I get back

to town and find out that sure enough, it took one wacko, one nutbar, to call the police, and the police are apologetically telling the firefighters out there on the corner, "Look, guys, we don't

want to do this. Our attention had been diverted in previous years, but unfortunately, this wacko compelled us to come out here," and the firefighters had to shut down their fundraising

campaign.

I tell you that I estimate that out of that campaign alone in Welland, just at that street corner opposite the Welland Tribune office, MD lost a few thousand

bucks. You know what a few thousand bucks can do, especially when it comes from community after community after community, and especially when you've got a government that's less and less

interested in funding the sorts of things -- the research and support -- that these associations provide? I'm looking over here, because here are some of the folks who know bang on. They know. They

live it.

At the end of the day, don't blame the Welland cops. Don't blame number 3 division and the division commander. They did everything they could. Don't even blame

the wacko who called them; we're never going to rid ourselves of the kind of nutbar who would complain about -- well, you can't. It's volunteer firefighters doing a fundraising campaign. I've got

to commend my friends who were out there. They demonstrated pacifist tendencies, because they knew who called the police. They demonstrated great discipline and restraint; their Ghandian sentiments

prevailed. It's just as well that I wasn't there because, although I'm a peace-loving person, I think I would have shared the incredible anger they had.

The fact is that this was all put to the Attorney General and the government in the debate around this stupid bill -- not the bill we're debating today; the bill

we're amending. It's a stupid bill. It doesn't solve any problem. In fact, what it has done is create problems, because now we've got courtrooms, overtaxed here in the city of Toronto, as they are

across the province. I've raised, over the course of the last week and a half, incident after incident of plea bargaining where, because of the backlogs, because of the incredible jams in the

courts, second-degree murder charges are being plea bargained down to manslaughter with six-year sentences. We saw another one this morning. Did you read that? Once again, second-degree murder

sounded pretty good to me. I mean, you've got a dead body, you've got a confession and it was a domestic murder; in this case it was two men. A gay man was murdered, and his life was worth six

years in a plea bargain?

I know the crown attorney in that case. He's a good crown attorney, a very competent one, a very skilled one. That makes it all the more telling, because when

skilled, competent crown attorneys feel compelled to plea bargain second-degree murders down to mere manslaughter and then agree to six-year sentences to boot, it means that it isn't an

idiosyncrasy, it isn't one disinterested crown here or there. It means there's a systemic problem. It means the courts are in serious trouble. It means the criminal justice system is in serious

trouble because it's backlogged.

So how does this government address that? Well, they create a new law so now cops can occupy their time busting kids with a lot of earrings and green hair and a

squeegee in a bucket and load up the courts with that stuff, as if the police aren't already overly taxed in terms of the sorts of things they've got to do. The squeegee bill is a stupid bill. It

hasn't solved any problems; it's created problems.

The bill before us today starts to solve some of those problems. But let me put this to you. If I have any concerns at all -- and I say this to the author of the

bill in the most benign way, and I hope the bill does pass, I really do, because I qualitatively can't distinguish between, yes, a legitimate charity and a poor person who's homeless asking for a

loonie. I support the bill today. I agree with it. It's the beginning of the repeal of the squeegee bill. Again, I don't quarrel with the author of the bill at all. I have a private member's bill

that would repeal the whole squeegee bill and get rid of the whole stupid mess the government has created. If we're going to deal with homelessness, let's deal with homelessness in a pragmatic way

of addressing the issues of poverty. But I have as much regard for a sad soul on our streets pleading for a loonie so they can feed themselves that day as I do for the great work done by the

volunteer firefighters.

That's why I'm supporting the bill and that's why I'm encouraging all of us -- all of us -- to step back for a minute and understand that our job is not to

create more problems; our job should be to help solve problems. If Steve Pandur were here today, he would make a distinct impression. I suspect he'd want to talk to the parliamentary assistant

privately, and they'd have a good conversation. He'd be talking, not to MPPs -- don't forget, the minimum wage here is $78,000-plus a year, and there is but a handful of people who don't make more

than that because of the way perks are added on to the salaries here. There's nary a volunteer firefighter who makes that kind of income -- there may be some who do; I won't quarrel with that.

There's nary a person living with muscular dystrophy who makes that kind of income, and there are thousands of homeless people in this province whose reality, whose lives and whose circumstances

don't even permit them to dream about that kind of income.

Let's understand that it's hard-working, good folks out there who do the good things like the boot campaign by firefighters, like Goodfellows, as has already

been talked about, like any number of -- like university students who are out there too raising money, doing clever stunts, stunts that attract attention. Cut the crap about this being a public

safety bill. Please. The Highway Traffic Act deals with any issue around public safety and the use of the roadways. It has nothing to do with public safety. It was this government's attack on

homeless people and on squeegee kids, and at the end of the day they threw a net so wide that they picked up volunteer firefighters and muscular dystrophy campaigns as well.

Mr Tilson: I'd like to speak to the bill as introduced by Mr Crozier, the member from Essex. I will be speaking against the bill.

Mr Crozier: Why doesn't that surprise me?

Mr Tilson: Well, there are always people for and against, and I have to be against this particular bill. However, I do admire the determination

by the member from Essex. He introduced this bill, as he stated, about a year ago, in April 2000, I believe. I expect it will be controversial today, as it was then. The vote was tied, and you, Mr

Speaker, in your capacity as Speaker, broke that tie on second reading, which was quite appropriate for you to do, and I think the bill was assigned to the general government committee; I don't

know whether it ever reached the committee. I agree, it did die on the order paper. Although I will be speaking against it, I again congratulate the member on his determination to bring this issue

forward.

I'd like to remind the House what the intention was. My friend the member for Niagara Centre gave his

interpretation of the Safe Streets Act, and I'd like to now

give the government's

interpretation of the Safe Streets Act. Its main purpose is to keep our streets safe. It's to prevent car accidents. It's to prevent motor vehicles from colliding with one

another. It's to prevent motor vehicles from colliding with pedestrians.

The Safe Streets Act, as well, responds to requests for government action from municipalities, police, business and residents. The member over there doesn't like

this, but if he does recall the history of the Safe Streets Act, we did receive a number of requests from municipalities all across this province on the problems that he has reiterated. It responds

to requests to curb aggressive solicitation on Ontario streets. Aggressive solicitation, often experienced as squeegeeing and panhandling, had been reported as a problem across this province.

The act fulfills a promise that was made by this government in its Blueprint, a promise to stop aggressive solicitation and squeegee activity and to protect

people's ability to use public places in a safe and secure manner. The act regulates certain activities by creating new provincial offences and amending the provisions of the Highway Traffic Act.

It gives police the power to arrest and the courts the ability to fine offenders and sentence repeat offenders to jail.

The Safe Streets Act bans aggressive solicitation, soliciting in situations where people are not free to walk away -- it bans those situations -- it bans the

disposal of objects, such as hypodermic syringes and needles, without taking reasonable precaution in parks, schoolyards and other public spaces.

Bill 26, as introduced by the member for Essex, Mr Crozier, as he has indicated, wishes to amend

section 3 of the Safe Streets Act to provide an exemption from

the act's prohibition against captive-audience solicitation. That's solicitation that would occur in situations where people are not free to walk away, for example -- and the member won't like the

example -- solicitation in a phone booth. That's another intent of what the bill is, and, of course, Mr Crozier wishes to change that somewhat.

This exemption under Bill 26 would apply to fundraising activities by registered charities which would also be permitted by municipal bylaws or by a resolution

of that municipal council in that particular municipality.

Bill 26 also proposes a similar exemption to

section 177 of the Highway Traffic Act, which currently prohibits a person on a roadway from soliciting persons in

motor vehicles.

It's the government's position that there's no reason why this Legislature should treat persons who are soliciting for a third party, even a charity, any

differently than persons who are soliciting for themselves. If the soliciting is carried out in an aggressive manner or if the person is soliciting in a captive-audience situation, including

soliciting a motorist stopped in a car on the roadway, then public safety, including that of the solicitor, may be put at risk. The Safe Streets Act is concerned with the ability of the public to

use Ontario streets in a safe and secure manner. In fact, under the Highway Traffic Act, it has always been an offence for someone on a roadway to stop or attempt to stop any vehicle to offer or

provide any commodity or service to anyone in a vehicle. That's always been the law. The Safe Streets Act does nothing to change that. Such activity raises safety concerns.

With regard to the Highway Traffic Act, the Safe Streets Act simply amends it further and prohibits a person from approaching on a roadway a stopped vehicle for

the purposes of solicitation.

It should be noted that the Highway Traffic Act does not prevent someone from soliciting money if the person soliciting is on a sidewalk, shoulder, boulevard,

median or other place that is not a highway. The Safe Streets Act doesn't prevent this either.

Raising funds for charities and increasing public awareness of charitable causes are important and worthwhile tasks. We all know that. I know the intent of the

member for Essex is to help charities, and we want to help them too. I know he's sincere in that effort. It's my hope, and indeed this government's hope, that charities will work with their local

police service boards and police officers in planning charity events that are in compliance with the Safe Streets Act and the Highway Traffic Act. Many charities are already doing this.

It must also be noted that there is currently a constitutional challenge with respect to the Safe Streets Act before the courts. Some people who had been

arrested for violating the provisions of the act challenged the legislation, and that went to court. The Safe Streets Act is intended to address aggressive squeegeeing and soliciting activities and

to protect the people's right to use public places.

On August 3 of this year, the Ontario Court of Justice released its ruling and upheld the constitutionality of this legislation. The court found all of those

accused guilty. On August 14 of this year, the appellants appealed this matter. I expect it will be heard in March. As we all know, because this matter is before the courts, it would be

inappropriate for anyone in this House, particularly anyone on the government side, to comment further on that particular case, but it is under appeal.

With regard to this bill, I would respectfully submit that it's unnecessary, that current legislation not only protects the people's right to use public places

and ensures the safety of Ontario's roadways, but also ensures that charitable organizations can continue to conduct fundraising activities. They can do so by working with their local police

services in planning charitable events that are in compliance with the Safe Streets Act and the Highway Traffic Act.

So again, I remind all of us in this House that the safety of the streets is most important. When you're voting for that bill, I ask that you remind yourself as

to what the intent of the Safe Streets Act, as I have outlined, is. I would therefore suggest that all members of this House defeat, with respect to the member for Essex, his bill.

Mr Michael Bryant (St Paul's): Congratulations to the member for Essex for his perseverance. This bill is a big legislative squeegee brought in

here to help wipe the egg off the face of this government for plowing ahead with a squeegee bill that is hurting charities in Ontario. This bill has received the support of this House before. I say

to members who are maybe watching this debate, and I hope you are, I hope that you have the courage of your convictions to come back and support this bill again for the sake of these charities.

Right now I look out into this Legislature and I see only, with an exception, the reservoir dogs of the phony crackdown caucus in the government. That causes me great concern.

We told this government during debate and during committee hearings that this bill, the sweep-it-under-the-rug law, was going to negatively impact charities. The

government was told and yet they said, "We know better." Check the Hansard.

Attorney General Flaherty initially denied the fact that it was going to make any difference and then he changed his tune. He said, "No, no, no, everybody must

obey the law," I guess even stupid laws.

Staff Sergeant Dave Rossell, a spokesperson for Windsor Police Service, said, "We can't pick and choose which laws we want to enforce and those we don't." The

government was told this law was going to crack down on charities, and yet they said, "We know better," and they proceeded further.

Then, of course, it hit the fan. The government thought that police and crown prosecutors would exercise discretion and not prosecute charities. That was their

assumption. They thought, "Ah, well, whatever. Maybe that's what the law says. We'll just proceed anyway" -- the dogmatism of these reservoir dogs in the phony crackdown caucus. But what did

happen, that they didn't expect, was that municipal town councils would be advised by their municipal lawyers that they can't give permits for charities to conduct this activity for the simple

reason that it's against the law. So we saw it happen.

In London, the University of Western Ontario was told that they would have to find alternative means in their efforts to raise money for charities. Then we found

out, of course, that the Shinerama was not going to be able to proceed with charitable activities. Firefighters across Ontario who conduct boot drives to raise funds for research into neuromuscular

disorders were told that their fundraising activities were banned by the bill. Toronto's Hospital for Sick Children, which raised $5,000 for the Herbie Fund before this sweep-it-under-the-rug act

came in, was told that the boot drives would have to end and that they'd have to find other alternatives. We know the Muscular Dystrophy Association of Canada is expected to lose something along

the lines of three quarters of a million to a million dollars every year. You were told that by these charities.

Then the Attorney General did something which I think he thought was quite clever. The Attorney General wrote a letter -- as if they could take that letter to

the bank; as if the charities could take the letter to the municipal councils and say, "Look. The Attorney General has ruled on this matter." I know because I talked to many of them. They thought

this was some very significant event, that the Attorney General had ruled on the matter. What they didn't know was that the Attorney General is just a litigant, is just one voice in our judicial

system and not infallible. Win some; lose some. If the Chief Justice of Ontario made a ruling -- or any judge, for that matter -- that this would not impact charities, that would be different. That

would be the law. I think it was a little bit pernicious, at best, for the Attorney General to try and paper it over with that letter. They took that letter to those councils and they took it to

those charities and they found that it was basically not worth the paper it was printed on. Yet the government said, "We still know better. We've now been told several times -- it's now been proven

-- that charities are being negatively impacted, but we're going to proceed with this anyway" -- those dogmatic reservoir dogs in the phony crackdown caucus.

Then along comes the member for Essex's bill. Everybody knows this is a big booboo for this government, "So let's fix it." So the members came in here and said,

"We're going to fix it." The government continued with its dogmatism, but that's what we've come to expect of the Harris government.

But the members of this House came in and said, "We're going to fix it," and they did. Of course it got on the order paper, and now we have the opportunity to

tell the executive, I say to you members of this House, yet again, that this problem must be fixed.

I asked a question of the Premier -- it may be the only time I ever got to ask Mike Harris a question: "Premier, you know very well that clause 3(2)(

f) of the

squeegee bill means that Shinerama, the muscular dystrophy association, and all other charities that raise money on street corners cannot solicit for charitable donations." The Premier denied it.

He denied it. That was April 10, 2000. We have people here in the gallery, and we have a multitude of evidence presented by the member from Essex which makes it clear, and we all know it's clear,

and I didn't hear a word from the parliamentary assistant to the Attorney General to deny the fact -- the fact -- that these charities are being cracked down on by this bill. Nobody is denying it.

I haven't heard it. The Premier denied it in April, but then of course he found out that it's true. Yet the government still continues to take the position that they're not going to admit a mistake

has been made and they're going to continue to punish charities to fulfill some phony crackdown promise.

Then it happened again. We had an event in Welland on August 25, 2001, where a fire fundraiser was shut down. So we're back. The member for Essex is back. He's

back to say to you, "The problem persists. The charities continue to be punished, and it's an opportunity now for us to fix this."

If you want to vote against this bill, then what you are saying is that we're making this up, that the member for Essex is just making this up, that the members

in the gallery are just making it up. If you vote against this bill, I want you to cast your eyes over to Messrs Henderson, Savoie and Metzloff. Think upon those who receive the benefit of these

charitable activities and tell them that they're just making this up. Tell the firefighters that they're just making this up. Tell the town councils that aren't providing the permits that they're

just making it up. Tell the police that they're just making it up. This government continues to make it up as they go along.

Hon Rob Sampson (Minister of Correctional Services): You're making it up.

Mr Bryant: I'm told I'm making this up. I've been told by the Minister of Correctional Services. I say to the Minister of Correctional

Services, are you telling me that the muscular dystrophy association is lying? Are you saying that they're lying? You're lying, I say to the minister of corrections. You're lying.

The Acting Speaker: Order. The member will have to withdraw.

Mr Bryant: I withdraw.

I say to the members of this House, don't listen to these reservoir dogs. Don't listen to these reservoir dogs championing this phony crackdown. Do the right

thing, in the name of the firefighters raising money for these charities and support this law.

Mr Wayne Wettlaufer (Kitchener Centre): On a point of order, Speaker: Since when is the phraseology "reservoir dogs" parliamentary in this

House?

The Acting Speaker: It may cause some discomfort. I don't think it's out of order, however.

Mr Kormos: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: If I could ask the member to withdraw that. For him to refer to these people as "reservoir dogs"

is an insult to Quentin Tarantino.

The Acting Speaker: Order. The member for St Paul's.

Mr Bryant: In the rush of my closing, as I said, I ask members of this House to accept the submissions of those charities that in fact we need

to change this bill. For the sake of those who benefit, do it. I ask this House to support the bill.

Mr Joseph N. Tascona (Barrie-Simcoe-Bradford): I'm very pleased to join in the debate this morning. I understand what the member from Essex is

trying to accomplish. But in my riding of Barrie-Simcoe-Bradford, I fully witnessed the Georgian College students out doing their Shinerama activities earlier this year and I can say that we had no

problems whatsoever because they weren't out on the roadway. If they'd been out on the roadway, impinging and getting in the way of traffic, everybody would have a problem. But they respected the

law and conducted their activities in a safe manner.

I can understand what the intent of the member is here, but the practicalities of it do not make sense in terms of a mechanism to make sure that this can work

for the police in administering it, in terms of enforcing it. The Highway Traffic Act does not prevent someone from soliciting money if the person soliciting is on a sidewalk, shoulder, boulevard,

median or other place that is not a roadway. The Safe Streets Act doesn't prevent this either.

What we're dealing with here is to make sure that the activities of anyone are not conducted on a roadway. Quite frankly, I cannot for the life of me

understand what the members opposite are complaining about in terms of safety and what the Safe Streets Act and the Highway Traffic Act are dealing with. The Highway Traffic Act has always

prevented activity of any nature that would impede traffic flow and put the public in danger. What the member is proposing here is exempting certain groups from that type of activity. I don't think

any group wants to be involved in charitable activities or any type of activity that puts them in danger and puts them on a roadway.

It must be said that this government appreciates the good work voluntary organizations do by raising money for charitable organizations. We recognize how much

these activities contribute to the well-being and strength of Ontario communities, and it's this government's hope that charities will continue this good work by co-operating with their local

police services to plan charity events that are in compliance with the Safe Streets Act and the Highway Traffic Act. Many charities are already doing that.

Certainly in my riding I see a lot of charitable activities going on. I'm involved in a lot of them. But never would you see activities being conducted out on

the roadway. So why would we be proposing something reckless, I would say, and certainly not in the public's interest in terms of safety? We don't want to put people at risk and nobody wants to put

themselves at risk by conducting any kind of activity out in a roadway. Why would you exempt any activity that would put the public at risk and that at best you could say is a reckless piece of

legislation, just pure political politicking?

The intent of the Safe Streets Act, in terms of what it was trying to do, it has accomplished in terms of aggressive panhandling and squeegeeing activities.

The Highway Traffic Act has always prohibited activity in a roadway. So why would we support this legislation, which would permit such activity in a roadway? That's what I'm going to continue to

emphasize: why would you exempt any group and why would you permit any activity to be conducted in a roadway?

Depending on the community and depending on what type of activity is being conducted -- I have had no problems in my riding, none whatsoever, in terms of the

charitable groups and how they're conducting themselves in a safe manner to reach out to the public and make sure they're --

Mr Bryant: You should get out sometime.

Mr Tascona: I'm out a lot, Mr Bryant, a lot. I can tell you, all you're talking about is nonsense, total nonsense, member for St Paul's.

You've got to work together with your local police and respect your local police, and that's what we do in our riding.

Hon Mr Sampson: On a point of order, Speaker: I would not like us to proceed any further today without knowing that there are some students

from two schools who have journeyed quite a distance to come and watch today: in the west gallery, Pineland Public School, from Wellington, I think -- that's what I've been told -- and in the east

gallery, Ventura Park, from Thornhill.

The Acting Speaker: That of course is not a point of order, but welcome.

Mrs Leona Dombrowsky (Hastings-Frontenac-Lennox and Addington): First I want to commend my colleague for his determination to continue to

bring forward good amendments that would make better laws in this province. He certainly has championed this cause and is recognized, in his own community certainly and across the province, for his

very worthwhile efforts in this matter.

I want to speak this morning about the impact the Safe Streets Act has had in rural Ontario, legislation that in my community really was not expected to have

very much of an impact at all, but in fact it has. I have heard from the firefighters in my communities who have been affected. I just want to make reference to an example.

The member for Barrie-Simcoe-Bradford indicated that in his riding he hasn't heard of any negative impact. Because maybe in his part of the world it hasn't

happened, the fact that it may be happening in other parts of province really doesn't matter. Well, it matters to me. On the Labour Day weekend, when the firefighters typically hold their boot

drive for muscular dystrophy, I drove through the community of Roblin and saw two firefighter boots sitting on the side of the road, in the hope -- and there are signs to explain -- that people

going the speed limit will pull over, stop their car, get out and run back to the boots and put in some money. There is a gas station across the road, and I pulled over just to observe how many

cars actually did that. In perhaps five to seven minutes, there was none. The boots sat there without the benefit of people stopping to make donations to that very worthy cause. And that has an

impact. As my colleague from Essex explained earlier this morning, it has had an impact with the firefighters who raise money for muscular dystrophy, in that they have not been able to raise the

over $700,000 they once did because they are no longer able to stop people on the roadway, people who were always very happy to support the efforts of firefighters.

Yesterday in this Legislature we were the recipients of some very fine hospitality of the firefighters of the province of Ontario. I know there was more than

one conversation about this bill and the fact that it was going to be debated today. The firefighters in Ontario continue to support the member for Essex's initiative in this regard -- the

firefighters, the people we admire and depend on and thank for their tireless efforts not only to keep our community safe but also the work they do to ensure that children with muscular dystrophy

will have what they need. Their very good efforts have been hampered.

When the government members say they cannot support it, it begs the question why. How is it that it will have any impact on their intention with the Safe

Streets Act? My colleague has indicated that anyone who would exercise such an activity on a roadway would have to be a registered charity and they would have to have the permission of the local

municipality. I think those are two very reasonable qualifications.

If this bill is passed, it's not going to enable the squeegee kids, the targets of the government bill, to come out and engage in their activity again. Quite

the contrary. That's not the intent of this bill. So when the member for Barrie-Simcoe-Bradford says the members of the opposition are just complaining, that's not what this exercise is at all. You

need to understand that we are here representing the many people who've contacted us -- and we know they've contacted members of the government -- to say that this law needs to be made better

because it is impacting people in a way that was not intended. The member for Essex has brought forward a bill that will enable those people who have been adversely affected not to be. It's not a

matter of just complaining.

We have received petitions from thousands of people in the province of Ontario. It's not just our idea. It's not just the idea of 36 people here in the

official opposition party. We are speaking on behalf of thousands of Ontarians who want to see the member for Essex's bill supported because it will be a better law for them, for the communities

and for the charities in Ontario.

The Acting Speaker: The member for Essex has two minutes to respond.

Mr Crozier: I want to thank my colleagues from Niagara Centre, Hastings-Frontenac-Lennox and Addington and from St Paul's for their support. I

also want to thank the charities like muscular dystrophy, the firefighters, Kinette clubs, the Canadian Cancer Society and Ontario Students Against Impaired Driving for their support.

I don't really think that when the Safe Streets Act was drawn, those who drew the bill, who were consulted on the bill, sat there and said, "You know, in

addition to the squeegee kids in the streets of the city of Toronto, we want to keep Ontario's charities off the roads." I don't think they did that. I think what happened was when the bill came

out and we pointed out to them that that's going to be the result of it, there was a knee-jerk reaction. At first it was, "Well, they needn't worry about that. We'll be able to work around that."

Then the reality of it hit, that it would be against the law for them to do that and "We can't allow them to do that."

So all I'm asking for, if this isn't the bill to do it and if it doesn't say it in the right way, then amend the bill and say it in the right way. If you don't

even want a private member's bill, for God's sake, government, do something to help these charities. They're losing hundreds of thousands of dollars and you can't just say, "Well, go up on the

sidewalk and do it." It won't work. They've had a 50-year proven record of raising money and you've wiped it out. So why don't you do something to help them?

The Acting Speaker: Thank you. This completes the time allocated for debate on this ballot item. I will place the questions related to it at

12 o'clock noon.

CELEBRATION OF PORTUGUESE

HERITAGE ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LA FÊTE

DU PATRIMOINE PORTUGAIS

Mr DeFaria moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 120,

An Act to proclaim a day and a month to celebrate Portuguese heritage in Ontario / Projet de loi 120, Loi proclamant un jour et un mois de

fête du patrimoine portugais en Ontario.

The Acting Speaker (Mr Michael A. Brown): The member has up to 10 minutes for his presentation.

Mr Carl DeFaria (Mississauga East): It is an honour to stand in this House today to debate Bill 120, the Celebration of Portuguese Heritage

Act, 2001. I believe that by the end of this debate members from all sides will recognize that the deep historical roots and the ongoing contributions to Canada by Canadians of Portuguese

background make the case for this special recognition, a law commemorating Portuguese heritage and its contribution to the mosaic of our Canadian society. The reason it is important that we pass

Bill 120 into law today is so that the Portuguese community may carry on its historical celebrations exactly 500 years after the arrival of Portuguese navigators in Newfoundland and Labrador.

I urge all members to give their unanimous consent to second and third reading of this bill today so that we can honour history, so that we can honour those

brave navigators and explorers who crossed the Atlantic Ocean with all the uncertainties involved in that era of discovery, so that we can honour Gaspar Corte Real, who, together with Giovanni

Caboto, was one of the earliest discoverers of Canada, so that we can honour and recognize Canada's beginnings as a multicultural nation, so that we can honour the half a million hardworking

Portuguese men and women who work hard every single day to literally build this wonderful country from the ground up.

Portuguese people are people who strongly believe in honour. Let's not deny them the honour to have this bill passed on the exact anniversary of their

ancestors' arrival in Canada.

The Celebration of Portuguese Heritage Act is a bill that does two simple but very important things. It proclaims the month of June as Portuguese History and

Heritage Month and the 10th of June as Portugal Day. I want every member to know that our actions and words today will leave an everlasting mark. Today's Hansard will be reviewed in every

Portuguese-speaking press in Canada and read over by the half a million Canadians of Portuguese background around this province. Make no mistake: it was not by accident that Ian Urquhart in the

Toronto Star yesterday named me as a key member whose influence could spill over the boundaries of my riding during our leadership process.

We have strong communities in Toronto and the GTA, 905 and 416 areas, exceeding a quarter of a million people in Leamington, Windsor, Sarnia, Chatham, Harrow,

Wallaceburg, Woodstock, Brantford, London, Niagara region, Hamilton, Kitchener, Cambridge, Oakville, Burlington, Milton, Guelph, Listowel, Strathroy, Brampton, Wasaga Beach, Bradford, Markham,

Richmond Hill, Uxbridge, Oshawa, Elliot Lake, Sudbury, Thunder Bay, Kingston, Cornwall, Ottawa and, of course, in the great city of Mississauga, whose people honoured me with their trust, electing

Canada's first parliamentarian of Portuguese descent.

As you can see, every member of this House has a stake in the quick passage of this bill. There are Canadians of Portuguese background who settled in some of

our communities even before the Loyalists. They are proud Canadians who participate fully in Canadian society without any bone to grind and are forever grateful to Canada for the warm welcome they

received through the centuries.

I'd like to briefly review the history for the record. In the 15th century, Prince Henry of Portugal -- whose mother, by the way, the Queen of Portugal, was a

British princess -- better known as Prince Henry the Navigator, established a school of navigation in Sagres, in the Algarve region of Portugal. That school of navigation, in those days, would be a

state-of-the-art school of navigation. It was the first of its kind in the world. It set the stage for the great feats of Portuguese navigators and explorers. They include well-known explorers such

as Bartolomeu Dias, who explored the Cape of Good Hope in Africa. It was called the Cape of Good Hope because, by crossing the southern tip of Africa, the Portuguese saw the way clear to make it to

India. They were followed a couple of years later by Vasco da Gama, who discovered the sea route to India; Pedro Alvares Cabral, who discovered Brazil; Magellan, who was the first navigator to

circumnavigate the Earth; and Gaspar Corte Real, who left Portugal under a charter of King Manuel to discover and claim jurisdiction over lands in the new world.

Corte Real arrived in Newfoundland in the year 1501, exactly 500 years ago. He explored the northeast coast of Terra Nova/Newfoundland. He sailed up the coast

of Labrador and named the land Labrador, which means "farmer" in Portuguese, in honour of John the Farmer, who was one of the Portuguese explorers credited with being the first explorer to set foot

in Labrador.

Canada, in 16th-century cartography, was often described as the Land of Corte Real and as Terra d'el Rey de Portugal, land of the King of Portugal.

But this debate today is not a claim of jurisdiction but a debate about the celebration of the great cultural and historical heritage that the Portuguese bring

as a piece of the mosaic that makes this Canada of ours so great and wonderful.

Did you know that when mail service was first established in Canada in 1693, it was a Portuguese man, Pedro da Silva, who transported and delivered mail by

canoe between Montreal and Quebec City?

Did you know that Portuguese fishermen started fishing cod off the coast of Newfoundland and Labrador in 1504 and have continued to do so for 500 years?

One has only to talk to the people of Newfoundland if you want to hear the folk stories they tell about the white fleet -- the Portuguese fishing fleets.

There was a CBC documentary I once saw narrating the story of a boy, 12 years old, who arrived in Newfoundland as a stowaway in a fishing ship and stayed at

the docks until someone took him in. His last name was Silva but the local people thought it to be Silver, so he kept the name Silver. He married there, had a large family and became a celebrity in

St John's, as his door was always open for any fisherman who arrived in St John's. He made them feel as if they were part of his family. The children of the Silver family still live in

Newfoundland. Mr Silver himself died without ever returning to see the family he left behind in Portugal.

The Portuguese community is a vibrant community in Ontario and Canada, and continues to make significant contributions to Canadian society and to enrich it

with its history, language, culture and work ethic.

The month of June, and the day of June 10 in particular, have always been a great time of celebration by the Portuguese community. Celebrations honour the life

of Luis de Camões and his famous epic poems, the Lusiads. June 10 is the anniversary of the death of Camões.

I would like to acknowledge here the leading role of ACAPO, the alliance of Portuguese clubs and associations, in the celebrations that take place in the month

of June in Ontario, year after year.

In conclusion, I want everyone in this House to know that Canadians of Portuguese background are proud of their culture, history and heritage -- proud of their

heritage but proud of being Canadians. I know Portuguese people pray every day to thank God and ask God to bless Canada. On behalf of the half a million Canadians of Portuguese background, I want

to say today, obrigado Ontario, obrigado Canada, thank you Canada.

Mr Bruce Crozier (Essex): I'm pleased to rise today and speak in support of the bill of the member for Mississauga East, Mr DeFaria. I'm also

speaking on behalf of many constituents I have in the area of Leamington, outside of Leamington and in the community of Harrow. We have a significant number of Portuguese residents in our

communities, as well as in the city of Chatham and the area of Wheatley. It's on their behalf I'm standing today to support this legislation.

I've paraded with my amigos in those areas on many occasions and helped them celebrate their heritage, and it's always been a pleasure. I might add -- I hope

this is taken in a lighter and more humorous way -- I've even paraded with them on streets and highways, much the same as I wanted to be able to raise money in my own bill.

I visited Portugal this year, one of the first times in, I think, about 15 years that my wife and I have been out of the country and off the continent of North

America. We chose to visit Portugal because of the number of constituents I have who have encouraged me to visit Portugal. I found it to be a beautiful country. I visited the Algarve and the point

at which Henry the Navigator -- or Prince Henry of Portugal, I guess, more formally -- created many of the methods by which the Portuguese were able to go out into the world and discover new

horizons.

I've always thought, colleagues, that it must be a difficult decision to make -- one that I've not made -- when someone leaves their homeland, like the great

Canadian citizens who have immigrated from Portugal, and comes to another country. Thank God they chose Canada. We have welcomed immigrants with open arms. They have come to our country and they

have made it a richer place.

I think we should do this type of thing and recognize those citizens who come from other countries and bring with them their rich heritage. They still want to

maintain that heritage and live it in our country and share it with us. I think this is one way we can do that, by recognizing them, by recognizing their history and by thanking them for coming to

our country and making it a richer place.

When this bill, I hope, is passed into law, I'll very proudly go back to my community on your behalf and say to the Portuguese immigrants, as well as the many

who have now been born in Canada, how much we appreciate their heritage and what they've contributed to Canada. This in some small way recognizes that.

I wish the member well. I hope the bill passes and I certainly will be in my seat to support it.

Interruption.

The Acting Speaker: Unfortunately, people who are in the galleries are not allowed to participate in these proceedings, including applauding.

I appreciate your sentiments, but that is not permitted.

The member for Toronto-Danforth.

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): It's true that I'm the member from Toronto-Danforth, but I don't know if people here recognize that I

hail from Newfoundland and Labrador, so I have a special connection with the people of Portugal. I'm very pleased to stand today in support of this bill, and certainly I believe it will pass into

law.

My mother comes from a place we call Bay de Verde, but it's actually a Portuguese name. It means Green Bay. I would not be surprised if I have some Portuguese

blood in me. My mother's family goes way back in this town of Bay de Verde. It's a most beautiful town. I wish I had a picture to show people.

We have a great affinity in Newfoundland and Labrador with the people of Portugal. Still today people speak very fondly of the Portuguese White Fleet of 1930.

Many people married Portuguese fishermen. People from Newfoundland go to Portugal. We have very much in common.

The other connection I have is that I grew up in Labrador, although I was born on the island of Newfoundland. Most people probably don't know but the name

Labrador itself came from a Portuguese word which I understand means farmer or worker.

It's my pleasure today to stand here and support the bill before us. The people of Newfoundland, as I said, for many years have seen the ships in the harbour

of St John's and around the coast of Newfoundland and Labrador. There's a lot of poetry and music that we share in common.

The Portuguese people have contributed so much, not only to Newfoundland and Labrador but to all of Ontario. We have a large Portuguese population here in

Ontario who contribute greatly. As a person coming from Newfoundland and Labrador and because of the great relationship Newfoundlanders have with the Portuguese people, it gives me great pleasure

and it is a great honour to be able to stand today and support this bill before us.

Mr Frank Mazzilli (London-Fanshawe): I know my colleague from Thornhill would want mentioned that the second shift from Ventura Park school is

here from Thornhill. I want to welcome them.

I'm proud to rise and support the member from Mississauga on a bill that I know he and I spoke about in the past. The reason we spoke was some of the history

about the discoveries and some of the unresolved issues around who discovered what. I'm glad the member from Mississauga incorporated both of those issues into this bill. Gaspar Real, together with

Giovanni Caboto, was one of the earliest discoverers of Canada. He's combined that, and I think, together with the Portuguese community and the Italian community, we can live with that, knowing

that we both had an enormous role in the discovery of the New World.

On a more personal note, I know we all have Portuguese communities in different cities across the province, and in London we have an exceptional community. The

home church for the Portuguese community is Holy Cross, and the Portuguese Club is on Falcon Street right off Trafalgar Street. For people today who think that's not a big deal, it is a big deal.

Twenty years ago these communities purchased pieces of land, and those clubs started from nothing; they started from a shack. It started with people going door to door raising money to have a

community centre or a club. It was no different from the church. Holy Cross church was one that had to be purchased by the Portuguese community, and at some point when the community expanded,

additions had to be put on. How was it done? It was done by the Portuguese community going to other people within their own community and raising money.

This is what the Portuguese community has done in all of our cities, along with other communities, the Italian community and so on. I just want to say that I'm

proud of all those communities. They're hard-working people who contribute enormously to our economic output in this province and to our social fabric. I think this act should be passed as soon as

possible, recognizing their hard efforts.

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): This is one of those pieces of legislation that tend to bring support from all political parties, and I

think without any qualification or conditions on that support.

I see the member for Kitchener here today. He had a special day that he brought forward recognizing people of German descent and the role and responsibilities

they had in Canada. That was approved by members of this House, and we're pleased, I think, as members to give official recognition in the form of the legislation that we see here today to people

of Portuguese ancestry who have played such a significant role in our country.

I used to be a history teacher a number of years ago, and of course we were all students at one time. We remember well the many stories that were told of

people from Portugal who had travelled to North America, to Canada, had made some initial contacts here -- indeed who had travelled across the world -- and spread the Portuguese culture and

traditions and shared them with others.

In Canada we're fortunate -- because every country in the world isn't like this -- that we welcome people from various backgrounds. Very early on, the country

was a British colony and a French colony. We had a large French component, a large British component, and they are still extremely important parts of our country. People, however, came from other

countries in the world to join us, initially from Europe and of course after that from other parts of the world, all joining the First Nations people who were here before any of us happened to

arrive from any of our ethnic backgrounds.

The people of the Portuguese community have contributed immensely in so many of our communities across Ontario. We note a large community obviously in the

Toronto area and, as the member has pointed out, in the greater Toronto area. We refer now to these exchanges, which tells us we're a little bit captive of our electronic gadgetry now, because we

refer to it as the 905 and the 416 areas. We have to add some, by the way, now that there are more exchanges. But there's a large number of people in the Toronto area and well beyond the borders of

Toronto who are of Portuguese background. My friend Bruce Crozier from Essex North mentioned the fact that he has a large community of Portuguese people in his area.

We were pleased as a country to welcome people from Portugal to Canada. I understand there was not all that large an immigration from Portugal initially. It

has increased significantly over the years, and to a positive effect for those of us in Canada.

In Tony Ruprecht's new millennium edition book, Toronto's Many Faces --

Mr David Tilson (Dufferin-Peel-Wellington-Grey): He's got a new book out?

Mr Bradley: Tony Ruprecht, the author and the member for Davenport, indicates something that I think a lot of people probably don't realize.

He says, "There was little immigration to Canada until 1953, when 85 Portuguese men arrived in Halifax aboard the Saturnia." He goes on to talk about how, over the years, many people have come to

Canada. "The First Portuguese Canadian Club was incorporated in 1956 and began organizing early festivals and soccer teams. Portuguese-language services were first held at St Michael's Cathedral in

1955, while a group from the island of Madeira frequented St Elizabeth's Church at Spadina Avenue and Dundas Street West." What he goes on to say of course is that --

Mr Tilson: That book would make a good Christmas gift.

Mr Bradley: "A good Christmas gift," says my colleague from Wellington and many other places. There is some good information in there.

What's important in our country is that we've been enriched by people coming from various parts of the world. You would find it very difficult not to find in

any of our communities right across Ontario the influence of people from Portugal. We've been so fortunate, because people have come from various parts of the world. If you look at the names you

find in this Legislature -- by the way, somebody did a survey the other day; I think it was Graham Murray who did it. It talked about the number of people who were born outside Canada who are

members of the House of Commons and members of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. There are many, and we welcome people from around the world.

Sometimes when people arrive they have a bit of a difficult time initially, and they have experienced that over the years. Jim Coyle wrote an excellent column

in the Toronto Star about what they said about each of us as we came -- the Irish, the British, the French and so on -- and they weren't always complimentary remarks. What we find, however, as

people become part of this country, is that they bring their cultures, their tradition and the richness of that culture and tradition to Canada, and Portuguese Canadians certainly fit this

category. Portuguese Canadians are good Canadians first, who want to maintain the traditions they bring with them and share them with others.

I welcome this legislation. I'm sure it will get unanimous consent in this Legislature this morning.

Mr Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): I want to congratulate Carl DeFaria, the member from Mississauga East, for bringing this bill forward

today in this House and for being the first Portuguese Canadian MPP in this place. It's true. New Democrats have no problem supporting this bill and giving it speedy passage, as he suggested.

There's obviously no one in this caucus or any other party, I don't think, who would want to delay it or oppose it in any way.

I wanted to say that at the outset, and say as well that the consul general of Portugal is here today in this assembly. I want to publicly say that I'm very

proud of the work he does here with the Portuguese community. He is very engaged with all the community associations. In fact, he goes to more meetings than the rest of us combined. I don't know

how he does that, but he does, and he represents the community very well. I welcome the people here watching this debate today, because I think it's an important one.

I want to give some background of my relationship with the Portuguese community. You see, I've lived in the downtown area most of my life. I grew up on Shaw

Street. That was, I wouldn't say the heart, but it was the area of Italian Canadians for many years. Most immigrants came to the area of College Street, between Dovercourt and Bathurst to the lake,

literally, all the way north. Now of course most Italian Canadians have left my riding. They've gone away -- we've got a couple of senior citizens, God bless them. They're all in the ridings of

Mississauga East, West, North, good heavens, in the Woodbridge area. They're everywhere except in my riding. I am the lone holdout in my riding.

But I grew up with Portuguese Canadians, so we have a shared history. Italian Canadians and Portuguese Canadians are like cousins -- primus -- in terms of

history and in terms of where we come from and with respect to my history growing up side by side. In fact my closest friend is Lawrence Teixeira, a friend of mine at Harbord Collegiate. It was in

his family home that I tried for the first time the pistoês, a very delicious shrimp-patty-like thing that's hard to describe, but I liked it a lot. And homemade is better than what you get in

any restaurant anywhere.

Interjection: Where? At your place?

Mr Marchese: No, the Teixeira family. Of course other families make them at home, and I'm sure they're tastier than what you will buy

anywhere.

Interjection: Are you inviting us?

Mr Marchese: Mr Sampson, sit down here. Join us here. Come on.

Interjection.

The Acting Speaker: Order. If the Minister of Correctional Services wants to participate, he needs to be in his seat.

The member for Trinity-Spadina.

Interjection.

Mr Marchese: If Mr Sampson, the member for Mississauga Centre, wants to be invited to a meal of pistoês, Carl DeFaria can arrange that,

and I'm coming.

Interjection.

Mr Marchese: No, I said if you're coming, I'm coming. We can do it together with Carl DeFaria.

Interjection: I want to know the date and time.

Mr Marchese: We can set a time and date any time Mr Sampson wants.

Portuguese Canadians have a proud history in this country. Mr DeFaria, of course, has outlined the history of Portuguese Canadians with respect to them, as

they say, discovering that -- I'm a bit careful, because aboriginal people don't like it to be said that they were discovered. We have to be very careful, because aboriginal Canadians were in this

land before we came -- Portuguese, Caboto and whoever else followed. They argue they weren't discovered, because they were here. In that regard we have to be very careful, but it is true that

Portuguese and Italian navigators travelled all over the world, criss-crossed the world, not just with their boats but eventually they immigrated to many countries across the world.

They have a proud history, not just in Canada but indeed in Portugal. It isn't just the great Camõens that we celebrate on June 10. There are many other

people of note: the wisdom of Jose Saramago, the writer who won the Nobel Prize in 1998; the groundbreaking narratives of Fernando Pessoa. In visual arts, I am told there is nothing quite like the

work of Vieira da Silva and Paula Rego. The architectural splendour of Alvaro Siza's buildings, I'm told, is a wonder to witness. The piano player Maria Joao Pires -- people wonder why she isn't

much more renowned beyond her own borders. The point is, there's great culture, not just in Portugal but what Portuguese Canadians have brought to this country.

We know they work hard. We don't dispute the fact that Portuguese Canadians are great, hard-working Canadians. No one doubts it. No one disputes it. Like

Italian Canadians, they have brought to this country a pride in the work ethic. We see this displayed in all the work -- at least at the clubs I attend and the work of the Federation of Portuguese

Canadian Business and Professionals Inc and their attempts to reach out to young people through the scholarships they provide. We see the work of the Alliance of Portuguese Clubs and Associations

of Ontario, which bring together hundreds of people from various clubs and associations across Ontario. They not only display their own culture but reach out to other Canadians as a way to have

Canadians of non-Portuguese background understand what Portuguese Canadians bring to this country. We have thousands of clubs and organizations across this province. We have professional radio and

television programs. We have newspapers and publications that don't fit in the hands, so many there are, reflecting the history, the work and the pride of Portuguese Canadians. No one disputes

that, and we want to acknowledge and recognize it.

What some of us talk about, however, is that to make multiculturalism meaningful, we should do a little more than just talk about how proud we are that we have

Portuguese Canadians in this country. As I speak to Portuguese Canadians, they say to me, "How come we don't have the same opportunities as others to be part of the boards, agencies and

commissions?" I'm sure Carl DeFaria on a regular basis mentions that to the ministers in that cabinet, and I'm not quite sure what kind of hearing he's getting. I know that many Portuguese

Canadians are saying, "We are just as able as anybody. Why are we not nominated as fast as the others in those countless boards, agencies and commissions?" I know it seems perhaps trite to some or

a trifle to others, but it's important. It's important to make sure that we reflect everyone in this country in every board, agency and commission, and not just there, but in boards of education,

boards outside of these agencies, in any professional organization you can think of.

I know it's troubling to some people to hear these things. They don't want to hear it. Some argue, "Because we've made it here in this place individually,

others can too if they want to." Well, yes, it's true. Some do, but many are striving to get those doors open so they can be let in, and they're finding barriers.

We held an assembléia popular the week of September 24. We had a two-day hearing in my riding where we worked with the agencies in my area to identify

issues of concern to the Portuguese Canadian community. We talked about how Portuguese Canadians can organize in such as way as to make sure that when they have concerns, they are heard by local

politicians, provincial politicians and federal politicians, and are heard by governments. It's critical that communities not feel that they are just immigrants but feel that they are citizens who

have a say and can and will be heard when they organize actively. So we organized that forum, that popular assembly, with the aim to say to people, "You have power if you use it, and you can make

politicians hear you if you use that power."

We talked about health and their fear of the two-tier health care system. They are very afraid of that.

We talked about education, and while many of our young people in the Portuguese Canadian community do very well and get top grades, there are other students

from that community who are not doing very well. Carl, you know that. So what we talked about in that popular assembly is, "How do we make sure we get the Minister of Education to come to our

community meetings?" I'm convinced that we would be able to work very well with Carl -- myself and others who are interested -- to get the Minister of Education to such a meeting to say, "What are

the barriers that make it difficult for some of our students to succeed?" so that the Minister of Education is seen and the government is seen to be breaking down barriers and seen to be raising

the level of academic achievement that we all want. So if there are problems, we can't just whine and complain about those problems. We have to organize in such a way that we will be heard.

We had the help of CIRV radio, a Portuguese radio station in my riding on Dundas Street close to Dovercourt and Ossington. They in the beginning were very good

in organizing a series of programs to talk about the issues that affect Portuguese Canadians. I was proud of that initiative and proud that CIRV radio said, "We want to serve our community."

We then followed up on our assembléia popular, the popular assembly, and invited the media people to come. CIRV radio came, with CHIN radio, and they said

they would continue to help promote the issues, disseminating information as a way of making sure the public is informed and is involved. We hope that commitment of CIRV radio and CHIN radio will

continue, because with their help, people will be better informed when they're given the tools and the information.

These are the things we need to do. We need to talk about the pride of our heritage, which I support strongly, and we need to talk about barriers that exist in

our society that keep some of our communities from achieving to the fullest, not because they don't want to, but because the doors often are not open. So that's what we need to do as politicians,

as governments, and if governments don't listen, that's when it is our job as a community to make sure they listen to us, and they will, because communities have power.

Carl DeFaria, I thank you for this bill you have brought forth. We will be supporting it, as New Democrats, and we do it proudly.

Mr Gerry Martiniuk (Cambridge): I'm pleased to rise and support my good friend Carl DeFaria's act to proclaim a day and a month to celebrate

Portuguese heritage in Ontario. The Portuguese have a rich and adventurous heritage. Who among us has not heard of the brave seafaring explorers Prince Henry the Navigator, Vasco da Gama and

Magellan, heroes all? Corte Real, with Giovanni Caboto, discovered what is now Newfoundland in 1501, nine short years after Columbus discovered the New World. It was Corte Real who named Labrador

in honour of one of his shipmates. The year 2001 celebrates the 500th anniversary of this discovery.

My riding of Cambridge has close to 17,000 citizens being descendants of these brave explorers, primarily from the archipelago of the Azores, an autonomous

region of the Portuguese republic. The Azores are one of the few regions in Portugal that have their own Legislative Assembly and government in addition to the Portuguese National Assembly. The

archipelago is 1,500 kilometres from Lisbon and 3,900 kilometres from Newfoundland, and consists of nine varied and beautiful islands. The islands are the home of distinctive and unique folk music,

literature and culture.

There is the eastern group of Sao Miguel, the largest island, settled not only by the Portuguese but also by Madeirans, Jews, Moors, and French, and Santa

Maria, the place of first landing in Europe by Christopher Columbus on his way back from the discovery of the New World; the central group of Terceira, the island of Jesus Cristo, Graciosa and its

windmills, Sao Jorge with its festival of the holy spirit -- I look forward each year personally to partaking in the holy spirit bread soup -- Pico, with its volcanic cone crowned by the Pico Alto

crater, and Faial, the blue island; and the western group of islands: Flores, with its seven lakes, and tiny Corvo, the smallest island and the most westerly part of Europe.

Cambridge is a richer place because of the Portuguese heritage. We have two Portuguese cultural centres in Cambridge: the Portuguese Club and the Oriental

Club. Spiritual needs are provided at Our Lady of Fatima church, presided over by Father Antonio Cunha. We have a Portuguese newspaper, O Lusitano, published by my good friend Jerry Bairos.

Every year I have the privilege and pleasure of taking

part in numerous and colourful festivals and celebrations. Cambridge is enriched by these industrious

descendants of world explorers.

What better way to recognize the contribution of our fellow citizens of Portuguese descent than setting aside June 10 and the month of June to celebrate

Portuguese heritage in Ontario? I urge all members to support Mr DeFaria's bill.

Mr John Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands): I'm very pleased to join this debate and congratulate the member for bringing this bill forward.

I too was not born in this country and am a very proud Canadian of Dutch descent. I know that I come from an area of the province, Kingston, which at one time was a very Anglo-Saxon place. It has

only been within the last 30, 40 or 50 years that there has been quite an influence of immigrants from all over the globe. Certainly the Portuguese in the Kingston area have made a tremendous

contribution.

Like the situation in Cambridge, most of the Portuguese in the Kingston area come from the islands of the Azores. Many of them arrived in the 1950s and 1960s.

I was surprised to learn that there are only about 3,400 Portuguese in the Kingston area, because certainly their influence within the community is much larger than that. We have in Kingston also

an Our Lady of Fatima church, a Catholic church and a Portuguese cultural centre. There is also Portuguese radio programming done on a weekly basis by Eduardo Pereira, who's the program director.

Also on Cogeco cable television, we have a weekly show put together by Tito Santos, who has been looking after that for many years.

What is the reason that Portuguese Canadians have had such a tremendous influence in the Kingston area? Two families come to mind. One family is a family

headed by an individual by the name of Joe Melo. Joe came from Portugal about 40 or 45 years ago. He eventually ran a small restaurant and small gas bar. He was able to expand that into what's now

known as the Ambassador Hotel. I'm sure many people from this Legislature, who may have gone to various conventions, have been at the hotel because it is the largest convention hotel in the

city.

One of the reasons Joe was so successful over the years is that the total enterprise became a complete family affair. At one time I would dare say that up to

30 to 40 members of his own individual family worked at the hotel. As a matter of fact, just recently he opened another hotel in the Kingston area -- namely, the Four Points Sheraton Hotel in the

downtown area. What you get with I think most families of immigrants here is that they totally work together. In bad times they perhaps don't take the salary that they will take in good times. They

work together to make that enterprise a success. Certainly Joe and all of the members of this family are to be congratulated.

But he isn't the only one. We have an individual by the name of Jack Sousa, who was able to start a very successful construction company. He's built just about

every second sidewalk in the city of Kingston over the last 40 years; another very successful individual.

People like Bill Raposo, who owns Bill's Bakery, come to mind. The Portuguese are well known for their many different flavours of bread and different baked

goods that they make.

We in the Kingston area are extremely proud of the heritage and culture that the Portuguese community has brought to an area that at one time was very much of

community can in effect taste a little bit of the heritage, culture and goodies that the Portuguese community has made.

I think it is good for us to recognize the tremendous contributions made by new immigrants, our forefathers of French and British descent and also the First

Nations. Certainly I totally support the member in this bill and congratulate him. Yes, let us celebrate, on June 10 of every year, the fact of the tremendous contributions that the Portuguese have

made to our Canadian society. Thank you very much.

Mr Wayne Wettlaufer (Kitchener Centre): It gives me a great deal of pleasure to be able to stand and support this bill brought forward by Carl

DeFaria, who is the first Portuguese Canadian to have ever been elected to this place. Carl, congratulations and thank you for bringing this forward.

I want to thank the member from Barrie-Simcoe-Bradford for giving me his time this morning. He had to leave the House and he asked me if I would explain his

interest, because I know of the great interest that he has and the great support he has demonstrated for the Portuguese community in his riding. He definitely has attended a number of their

functions and he attends the Portuguese Canadian club in his riding. He's most supportive of the Portuguese community.

I want to speak also of my interest. Everybody in this place knows of my interest in things cultural, in peoples cultural.

I have to say that my first exposure to the Portuguese community came in early 1963 when I had gone into the insurance business. I was a youngster at that

time. I was in my late teens or early twenties. One of my first calls was a Portuguese man who was newly arrived to this country. He bought a car, and I was referred to him by the car dealership. I

sat down at 7 o'clock at night in his place, with all my insurance paraphernalia in front of me. I had my automobile insurance manuals and my applications. He said, "Excuse me a minute." He went to

a cupboard and brought out a bottle of wine and set it on the table and said, "Now we do business."

I learned something then because I was always business, business, business. My approach was totally different. It wasn't built on friendship, on warmth, like

this man. Anyway, he --

Mr Crozier: It still isn't.

Mr Wettlaufer: It still isn't. Thank you very much, I say to the member from Essex.

This man, we had a little glass of wine and we talked and we did our business. We had another glass of wine. One thing I learned was you don't go --

Interjection.

Mr Wettlaufer: No, we stopped at two. One thing I learned was that you don't go and visit other clients after you have been drinking

someplace. I learned from then on that when I would write up insurance for a Portuguese citizen, for a new immigrant from Portugal, I would make it my last call in the evening.

From that man, I received thousands of referrals. I wrote up thousands of Portuguese in the Kitchener-Waterloo area. I even wrote them up in Cambridge. We

heard Gerry Martiniuk, the member for Cambridge, talk about the 17,000 Portuguese citizens, Portuguese Canadians, in Cambridge. In Kitchener-Waterloo, we have thousands of them as well. They made

me feel very warm; they made me feel part of their community. I have to say that my own sister-in-law is Portuguese. My brother married a Portuguese girl -- what a lady she is. She's a princess. Do

you know that I could have survived in the insurance business just on the referrals that I received in the Portuguese community? They are a very together community. They're a very friendly

community, a very warm community. I have a very, very deep respect for the people from Portugal. I say to the consul general here today, you should be very, very proud of your culture.

I get to go to a number of citizenship courts. While we don't have as many new people from Portugal coming to this country now as we did 30 or 40 years ago,

nevertheless, from time to time, I still do see some. Their culture that they have brought to this country has made us so rich. I get to go and enjoy Portuguese foods at restaurants and the

Portuguese Canadian club on Westmount Road in Kitchener from time to time. I get to enjoy their music.

This makes us what we are today, whether it be Portuguese, Italian, German or many other cultures. We are so lucky to live in this country, where we are not a

melting pot of cultures but where cultures can enjoy and celebrate their own cultures and we can enjoy and celebrate them with those people. We are so lucky. The nice part about it is that we have

an opportunity in this country, and perhaps it's because these cultures have come and encouraged their young people to participate in and to prolong their culture in this country. We get to enjoy

their culture and our children get to enjoy their culture. Without the understanding they demonstrate, without the understanding we also demonstrate to them, we wouldn't have this interplay, and

I'm so grateful that we do.

There is a fair amount of pressure on any new immigrant. The new immigrant experiences culture shock. They have gone from a totally different culture to what

we have here today. Imagine, however, the culture shock to their children, who want to be all-Canadian, who would love to forget, in some cases, the language or the culture of their forebears. It

is only through the warmth of the people of the Portuguese community that they have been able to encourage their young people to hold on to that culture, to hold on to that language, and to share

it with the rest of us in this country.

I have to give you a little anecdote, at my expense. I was in the insurance business. In the 1960s, I was seeing a lot of variety stores cropping up in the

Portuguese community in Kitchener. It's near the downtown area, the extended downtown area. In a number of these stores, I kept seeing Toreense Confectionary or Toreense Variety Store. So I went to

one friend and asked him, "What are all these Toreenses? How many people are in that family?" He started laughing. He said, "That's not a family. That's Portuguese for "variety store." I said,

"Oh."

It demonstrated that a number a number of them had started up in these small businesses. Many of them went on. They went into the tool and die industry. They

went into other businesses. They became lawyers and other professionals. Their children have become professionals. They have become fantastic citizens of our country.

The Acting Speaker: The member for Mississauga East has two minutes to respond.

Mr DeFaria: I am really touched by the speakers this morning. It seems clear from all speakers that we have made the case for the special

recognition of this law commemorating the Portuguese heritage and its contribution to Canadian society.

I want to thank all members who participated: Mr Frank Mazzilli, London-Fanshawe; Mr Gerry Martiniuk from Cambridge; Mr Crozier from Essex; Ms Churley,

Toronto-Danforth; Mr Gerretsen, Kingston and the Islands; Mr Wayne Wettlaufer from Kitchener Centre. I particularly want to thank Mr Bradley, who has indicated that his party will be agreeable to

have the bill ordered for third reading, and also Mr Marchese, who on behalf of his party indicated that his party will be prepared to have the bill ordered for third reading today.

On behalf of the Portuguese community, I want to thank all members of this House. I want to thank the members of the Portuguese community, the schools that

were here this morning, and the consul general, for their representation. I see one of our elders, Mr Sousa, who is one of the pioneers in our community. I thank you all, and I thank all members

for their support.

CHARITY FUND-RAISING

ACTIVITIES ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LES ACTIVITÉS

DE FINANCEMENT DES ORGANISMES

DE BIENFAISANCE

The Acting Speaker (Mr Michael A. Brown): We will now deal with ballot item number 35.

Mr Crozier has moved second reading of Bill 26,

An Act to amend the Safe Streets Act, 1999 and the Highway Traffic Act to recognize the fund-raising activities

of legitimate charities.

Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry?

All in favour will say "aye."

All opposed will say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

We will take the division following our dealing with ballot item number 36.

CELEBRATION OF PORTUGUESE

HERITAGE ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LA FÊTE

DU PATRIMOINE PORTUGAIS

The Acting Speaker (Mr Michael A. Brown): Mr DeFaria has moved second reading of Bill 120,

An Act to proclaim a day and a month to celebrate

Portuguese heritage in Ontario. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

Pursuant to standing order 96, this bill will be referred to the committee of the whole House.

Mr Carl DeFaria (Mississauga East): Mr Speaker, I would ask that the bill be ordered for third reading.

The Acting Speaker: Mr DeFaria has asked for unanimous consent that the bill be ordered for third reading. Agreed? Agreed. The bill will be

ordered for third reading.

We will now call in the members; it will be a five-minute bell.

The division bells rang from 1201 to 1206.

CHARITY FUND-RAISING

ACTIVITIES ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LES ACTIVITÉS

DE FINANCEMENT DES ORGANISMES

DE BIENFAISANCE

The Acting Speaker (Mr Michael A. Brown): Mr Crozier has moved second reading of Bill 26. All those in favour will stand and remain standing

until their name is called.

Ayes

Agostino, Dominic

Arnott, Ted

Bartolucci, Rick

Bountrogianni, Marie

Bradley, James J.

Bryant, Michael

Caplan, David

Churley, Marilyn

Cleary, John C.

Colle, Mike

Conway, Sean G.

Cordiano, Joseph

Crozier, Bruce

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duncan, Dwight

Gerretsen, John

Gravelle, Michael

Hoy, Pat

Kormos, Peter

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Marchese, Rosario

McLeod, Lyn

Parsons, Ernie

Patten, Richard

Peters, Steve

Phillips, Gerry

Pupatello, Sandra

Ramsay, David

Sergio, Mario

Smitherman, George

The Acting Speaker: All those opposed will stand and remain standing until their name is called.

Nays

Baird, John R.

Barrett, Toby

Beaubien, Marcel

Chudleigh, Ted

Clark, Brad

Clement, Tony

Coburn, Brian

Cunningham, Dianne

Dunlop, Garfield

Ecker, Janet

Elliott, Brenda

Galt, Doug

Gilchrist, Steve

Gill, Raminder

Hardeman, Ernie

Hudak, Tim

Jackson, Cameron

Johns, Helen

Johnson, Bert

Marland, Margaret

Martiniuk, Gerry

Maves, Bart

Mazzilli, Frank

Miller, Norm

Molinari, Tina R.

Munro, Julia

Mushinski, Marilyn

Newman, Dan

O'Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Runciman, Robert W.

Sampson, Rob

Snobelen, John

Spina, Joseph

Sterling, Norman W.

Stewart, R. Gary

Stockwell, Chris

Tilson, David

Tsubouchi, David H.

Wettlaufer, Wayne

Wilson, Jim

Wood, Bob

Young, David

Clerk of the House (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 31; the nays are 43.

The Acting Speaker: I declare the motion lost.

All matters relating to private members' public business now being complete, this House stands adjourned until 1:30 of the clock.

The House recessed from 1209 to 1330.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING

Mrs Sandra Pupatello (Windsor West): Today the Provincial Auditor dropped his report in this House, and it's quite interesting to me, as we

continue to lobby on behalf of our local hospitals. In Windsor, the Hotel-Dieu Grace stands $17 million in deficit and the Windsor Regional Hospital stands $9 million in deficit. What we see today

in the Provincial Auditor's report is the Ministry of Health admitting to the Provincial Auditor that they're having a little bit of difficulty dealing with all those hospitals undergoing

restructuring.

Here's what the ministry advised the auditor: "Current funding does not allow for ministry staff to conduct a thorough and complete review in each hospital."

Of course, that was under the headings of "Reimbursement of Restructuring Expenses" and "Implementation of Capital Projects." The most significant change to our health system in years, and the

ministry itself does not have the capability to move forward and assist our hospitals with this change.

We say, no wonder our hospitals are dying on the vine. No wonder hospitals like mine incur additional financial obligations to their banks in order to finance

capital construction, because the Ministry of Health itself does not get its own act together. It's galling to see our Minister of Health stand up and say, "Give it some time. Maybe we'll see what

happens." People in Windsor are waiting, Minister.

CHILDREN'S MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES

Mr Ted Arnott (Waterloo-Wellington): During constituency week, I attended a round-table discussion in Waterloo on children's mental health,

which was sponsored by Lutherwood Community Opportunities Development Association. As I listened and spoke with professionals and volunteers from Waterloo region, I gained a better understanding of

the care they provide and how that care benefits all of us. Their method speaks to these benefits, for it is Lutherwood's goal to keep children and families together and to support parents while

helping children overcome their difficulties.

I was astounded to learn that 80% of young offenders suffer from some kind of mental illness. We also discussed the fact that a child not treated in time will

often require intervention welfare services such as those provided by children's aid societies later on. The earlier you help children, the better it is for them, for their for families, for our

communities and for the social service net that helps keep our communities together.

To continue to do this job effectively, mental health care providers need our help. I was advised that in Waterloo region and Wellington county there are

unacceptably long waiting periods for some children's mental health services, which is one of the problems stemming from funding shortages.

I have also met recently with Mr John Jones, executive director of the Wellington-Dufferin branch of the Canadian Mental Health Association. He advised me that

acute care beds are needed for patients in Wellington. At present, children must be sent to London for in-patient care, some two hours from home in many cases.

I ask that the Minister of Health investigate the need for enhanced funding so that care providers in Waterloo-Wellington have the resources they need to

deliver these essential services. I want to thank the professionals and volunteers in Waterloo-Wellington for their excellence and dedication to mental health care.

AGRICULTURE PROGRAMS

Mr Steve Peters (Elgin-Middlesex-London): I have a statement to the Minister of Agriculture. At the recently held Ontario Federation of

Agriculture annual meeting, the minister announced with great fanfare that cabinet had given them the authority to negotiate with the federal government for a made-in-Ontario safety net program. My

question is quite simple: what has this minister and the ministry been doing for the past nine months? Proposals have been on the table for months. We thought you were already negotiating. The idea

that you're now just starting seems so absurd.

This is late November. The final payment for market revenue, for what it's worth, has been announced. The program is over, yet there are no further

announcements. Farmers must be able to plan for their future. Farmers have just come through a disastrous season. Some cannot even afford crop insurance. Yet you say you are only now ready to start

negotiating. The federal contribution to safety nets is no secret, but where does the province stand?

The United States House and Senate bill is calling for doubling of the last decade's subsidies. At the OFA convention you refused to talk in dollars. So I ask

you, how many dollars do you bring to the table? Your finance minister just can't put a handle on how much the deficit will be from one week to the next. So how much money are you committing,

Minister? You're responsible for the farmers of Ontario.

Quebec and Alberta have contributed well over their 40% share for their respective programs, and I'm urging you to do likewise, Minister. Assume your

responsibility and ensure the provincial contribution is at least 50% or 60% of the safety net programs.

GEORGINA ISLAND

FAMILY RESOURCE CENTRE

Mrs Julia Munro (York North): A new family resource centre will open soon on Georgina Island in my riding of York North. The purpose of the

centre is to nurture a strong and supportive community and to encourage pride in the island's native heritage. The centre will be for all ages and will be home to many different activities such as

parent-child and elder drop-ins, a supper club for new parents, a toy-lending library, counselling services, parenting courses and a community kitchen.

The centre's name in Ojibway means, "We come together." A strong benefit of the centre is that it will be able to offer early developmental screening and

referral services to other agencies.

Coming to a resource centre on the mainland is often time-consuming and expensive. During the winter with the deep freeze, and again in late winter and early

spring with the ice breakup, transportation is extremely difficult.

There will be a specific focus on native culture at the centre. Many aspects of native culture will be incorporated into the programming. Native stories and

nursery rhymes will be told in Ojibway at circle time. Elders will be brought in to do storytelling and pass on their heritage. There will be a focus on every season. Every season is special in

native culture, whether it's maple syrup time, strawberries, or corn in the late summer.

Congratulations to all those who have worked very hard to ensure the Georgina Island resource centre will be open in the near future.

HOME CARE

Mr Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North): To say that funding cutbacks to the home care sector in the Thunder Bay district are causing

an extraordinary level of hardship and pain to hundreds of vulnerable, fragile people in the communities I represent is nothing less than a gross understatement of the facts.

If ministers Clement and Johns want to understand the impact of these cutbacks, I would ask them to speak to Mr Burton Brown, a remarkable 92-year-old man

whose 89-year-old wife, Mae, a woman with very limited mobility, is no longer able to receive even the most minimal home care; or Dave and Lori Pencoff, the proud parents of Thomas, a sweet

nine-year-old with cerebral palsy who lives in a wheelchair and who will be losing the occupational therapist who helps him prosper at Balsam Street school because of your cuts.

If Minister Johns truly believes the $9-million increase the area CCAC has requested for this year's funding is unrealistic or pulled out of the air, as she so

cruelly put it last week, then I must ask her how she can pull out of the air the justification for a $3-million decrease in funding this year. She knows there is almost a 50% caseload increase in

our district, and she also knows that her hardline approach is depriving people of the care they need and deserve.

So today I stand here virtually begging the minister to compromise on this vital matter. Will she not consider providing at least the same funding this year as

last year's funding total? Inadequate as that will still be, it will at least mean no further cutbacks as presently scheduled. It will mean a continuation of the school support program that Thomas

Pencoff and hundreds of other children need, and it will mean some level of home care for top-priority cases that are now being told there is no care available.

Minister, will you please open your heart to the plight of these desperate people and find a way to provide the care they so clearly need?

COMMUNITY FAMILY RESOURCE CENTRES

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): The government of Ontario recently made it known to the public, although they're trying to hide it,

that licensed regulated child care and family resource centres across this province are in jeopardy. A leaked document talks about taking millions of dollars out of the system. At the same time

that they are doing this, family resource centres are underfunded as it is today. I met with somebody from South Riverdale Child Parent Centre this morning, and a coalition of groups across Toronto

last week, to talk about the possible demise of the local community family resource centres in the city of Toronto.

What the government is doing is announcing Early Years centres. They're talking about giving $500,000 for each centre in each riding. That sounds like a good

thing, and in some small communities perhaps it is. But for the city of Toronto, where we have, in some cases, more than one family resource centre, and drop-ins that are not even included in the

list of criteria that this funding would fund -- in many communities across the province the Early Years centre is going to be awarded to non-family resource programs, despite their obvious

underfunding and expertise right now.

There are a lot of problems with this new system that they're going to bring in. We're going to be standing up and fighting this. We're going to stand up in

support of families and children and communities across this province.

ANNE BERRY

Mr Ted Chudleigh (Halton): A large measure of the success of a politician is obviously due to his or her staff, and in particular, I might say

to our constituency staff, the volume of information that staff deal with and are required to retain is unbelievable. Changing rules, changing procedures and the pace of change are difficult

enough, but add to that the need to recall details at a moment's notice, at the request of an affected constituent, and many people would crumble under the strain. With the demands of these jobs

and given the hectic pace, I am very fortunate to have some staff who have been with me for many years.

I rise today to congratulate my constituency assistant, Anne Berry, on her retirement tomorrow. She will be missed. Anne has taken on one of the most difficult

jobs in politics, that of dealing directly with case work in the constituency. She has handled this job so well, in fact, that my constituents continually have good things to say about her and her

ability and manner. She frequently receives cards and letters and there has been at least one full bouquet of flowers. A native of England, she uses her natural accent and cheerful demeanour to

disarm even the most vehement complaints.

Anne is here today in the members' gallery. She is witnessing the business of this House first-hand for the first time. Anne, I wish you and your family all

the very best in the future. As a representative of constituency staff on both sides of this House, we wish you well in future endeavours and much happiness in your well-earned retirement. Thank

you, Anne.

BAY OF QUINTE WALLEYE FISHERY

Mrs Leona Dombrowsky (Hastings-Frontenac-Lennox and Addington): Yesterday, the Minister of Natural Resources finally confirmed in this

Legislature that there would not be a ban placed on the walleye fishery in the Bay of Quinte on January 1, 2002. He also referred to a public process that would include stakeholder groups.

Well, the consultation that the minister has planned thus far is a joke. The ministry has scheduled December 8 and 9 to host invitation-only meetings. While

the list of participants will include more people than the October 25 invitation-only meeting, the format again prevents broad public access and participation. When ministry officials were pressed

to consider a more open format, the response was that these officials do not have the mandate to change the format.

What makes these meetings even more of a sham is the fact that they will take place in Dorset, some 300 kilometres away from the Bay of Quinte.

What the stakeholders in the Bay of Quinte pickerel fishery want is an open and public process in the communities that will be affected by whatever decision

the minister makes. Dalton McGuinty and the Ontario Liberals believe they deserve that consideration.

ANNIVERSARY OF OSCARDO

Ms Marilyn Mushinski (Scarborough Centre): Recently, I had the honour of attending the 14th anniversary open house party of a business in my

riding called Oscardo, founded by two Mexican-born brothers, Eduardo and Oscar Lulka.

In 1987, the Lulka brothers acquired a neckwear company that was established in 1959. Oscardo's winning collections of elegant neckwear and associated products

have since been a staple at menswear establishments in Canada. Oscardo also provides the world with unique souvenirs featuring designs inspired by native art and stunning Canadian images.

Collectively, Oscardo goods can be found from the smallest family-owned establishments to the largest of department stores. They are present in retail environments, in private and public companies

and in museums, and they're currently exporting to over a dozen countries.

The Ontario government has laid a solid foundation for small business growth by cutting taxes, balancing budgets, eliminating red tape and removing barriers to

business. These measures have made Ontario's economy and small businesses more competitive and better able to weather the economic downturn. In short, entrepreneurs have to be more shrewd to keep

pace with the growing competition. Once again, congratulations to Eduardo and Oscar Lulka on their 14th anniversary and continued success.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): The member for Mississauga East on a point of order.

Mr Carl DeFaria (Mississauga East): On a point of order, Speaker: I wish to thank the official opposition and the third party for their

support of my private member's bill.

I seek unanimous consent of the House to move third reading of Bill 120,

An Act to proclaim a day and a month to celebrate Portuguese heritage in Ontario.

The Speaker: Is there unanimous consent? I'm afraid I heard a no.

Mr DeFaria: Mr Speaker, I understood there was unanimous agreement.

Interjection: Try again.

Mr DeFaria: I'll try it again, Speaker.

I seek the unanimous consent of the House to move third reading of Bill 120,

An Act to proclaim a day and a month to celebrate Portuguese heritage in

Ontario.

The Speaker: OK, we will ask one more time. Just so everybody's clear, I'll also have the table listen. Is there unanimous consent? We did

hear some noes, so we are very clear on that. I apologize.

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): On a point of order, Speaker: I seek unanimous consent for Bill 120 to be called for third reading and voted

upon without debate.

The Speaker: No, we can't continue to have everyone in the House do that. It has been asked twice. We were very clear. Just so there was no

mistake, I did look to the table, so it was very clear. As you know, when you ask for unanimous consent sometimes with the noise it's hard to hear, but in both cases definitely somebody had said

no. I'm afraid unanimous consent means unanimous. It was not there and we did ask twice.

Mr Dwight Duncan (Windsor-St Clair): On a point of order, Speaker: I should say that the official opposition supports this bill, every member

of our caucus. We applaud the member for Mississauga East. If I might, I would suggest perhaps the House leaders meet behind the Speaker's chair to discuss this issue so that hopefully we can deal

with this today, recognizing all of our desires to pay tribute to the Portuguese community in this country and in this province in time for their celebrations next week, I believe.

The Speaker: An excellent idea. Meetings between House leaders are often very fruitful and hopefully this one will resolve it. If there's

anything I can do, I'd like to assist, but the direction of the House is very clear.

The Speaker: On a point of order, the member for Niagara Centre.

Mr Kormos: On a point of order, Speaker: I seek unanimous consent for all three caucuses to address the matter of World Aids Day.

The Speaker: Is there unanimous consent? I'm afraid I heard some noes.

The member for Timmins-James Bay.

COMMENTAIRES D'UN DÉPUTÉ

Je veux amener l'attention de l'Assemblée législative sur le fait qu'hier, dans le débat sur le budget qu'on a eu sous l'attribution de temps,

M. Spina, le député de Brampton-Nord -- je crois que c'est son comté -- a fait des commentaires qui étaient tres honteux, quant à moi comme député, contre la

était négatif dans son opinion.

La manière dont il l'a fait, c'était vraiment insultant. Comme francophone, et en tant que député de cette Assemblée, je trouve

ça vraiment insultant de l'entrendre parler contre la communauté francophone comme il l'a fait. Je demande qu'il donne son --

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): The member will know that any member can correct his statement. If something was said, we weren't here. I'm sure

all members will reflect, and if something was said, I'm sure all members are honourable and they would withdraw.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS

Mr Dwight Duncan (Windsor-St Clair): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I did want to have the opportunity as the House leader for the official

opposition to address to you the question of ministerial statements versus unanimous consents.

The tradition of this House has been to allow matters where there are not substantive policy decisions to be made to be dealt with by way of unanimous consent.

Effectively, sir, that allows the opposition parties and the government to have an equal amount of time to deal with issues that there is general agreement on.

The associate minister of long-term care is about to do a statement on World AIDS Day. We were provided with the statement several minutes ago. It does

reannounce certain things the government has already announced. But, sir, our understanding was, and we agreed earlier today, that we would do unanimous consent in order to allow the parties to

have equal time.

You'll be aware, sir, that the rules provide up to 20 minutes for ministerial statements and five minutes for the opposition to respond to those statements.

Today, there are two ministerial statements, which means effectively we are left with 2.5 minutes to respond to two rather substantial issues.

We welcome ministerial statements on the introduction of bills, on new policy, and I recognize that the standing orders, which don't distinguish between new

and old, do give the government the opportunity to address policy issues as it sees fit. We had offered earlier to allow third reading of another bill in order to protect our ability, sir, to have

an equal amount of time on World AIDS Day, which I think all members agree is a significant day.

I don't believe the standing orders, as we drafted them in 1999, were designed to give the government the opportunity, as clearly the minister wants to do

today, to deny the opposition. We'd be prepared to time-limit that response. The minister clearly wants to deny us the opportunity to have an equal opportunity on a matter which is, I think, of

universal agreement. The people who sent every one of our members here, sent every member of the New Democratic Party here, sent every member of the government, I think feel this equally.

The kind of pettiness associated with that really, in our view, doesn't reflect well either on the minister or on all of us, for that matter. We offered

something earlier today in order to do this. I ask you, sir, to impress upon the government the importance for all of us, on matters of this nature -- World AIDS Day is significant to all our

constituents, all residents of the province -- to please not play political games with this issue. Please don't try to take away our opportunity to respond on something like this.

We had agreement earlier today. We're quite prepared to keep our statements down to five minutes. It seems an unnecessary bullying in order not to allow us to

respond or have the same amount of time as the minister does in recognizing World AIDS Day and HIV in all of our communities.

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): On the same point of order, Speaker: I want to join in on the comments made by the official opposition House

leader. I refer the Speaker as well once again to standing order 35. Appreciating that there's some significant leeway as to the content of a ministerial statement, I'm also asking you to note that

it is conditional on matters of which the House should be informed.

I submit to you, and the opposition parties were appropriately provided with a copy of that statement and the compendium, that they are all matters of which

the House has already been informed. I put to you that it is for the Speaker to control abuses of the rules, and that is to say exploitation of the rules, especially when that exploitation of those

rules would preclude, as the House leader for the official opposition has already indicated, a bona fide address of the issue of World AIDS Day.

Surely members in this House, some of whom have been here longer than I have, understand that there has been a tradition of addressing these matters with equal

allotments of time.

There are 20,000 diagnosed people living with AIDS here in the province of Ontario. AIDS is a provincial issue, it's a national issue and it's an international

issue. One out of nine members of the population of South Africa is living with AIDS. It is something this House should be addressing far more seriously than as a mere political football to elevate

the stature of a junior minister.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Perhaps I could take a quick moment to read standing order 35 and consult with the table.

Members will know that standing order 35 is very broad. I don't have a copy of the statement; I don't even know what the minister will be talking about. Let me

say this, though: there has been a tradition where governments on all sides work together on non-partisan issues. When things like this come up, that's why the House sometimes does not work. When

we take situations like this and the opposition take sides on particular issues, we end up with a situation where this place, quite frankly, doesn't work. There is nothing the Speaker can do to

make it work if there isn't some goodwill on all sides. I hope the government will reflect on that. I don't know if there's anything that can be done at this late date, but hopefully in the future

they will reflect on that when they are doing ministerial statements.

With that, we will proceed.

ANNUAL REPORT,

PROVINCIAL AUDITOR

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): I beg to inform the House that today I have laid upon the table the 2001 Annual Report of the Provincial Auditor,

who is seated in the Speaker's gallery this afternoon.

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE

ON GENERAL GOVERNMENT

Mr Steve Gilchrist (Scarborough East): I beg leave to present a report from the standing committee on general government and move its

adoption.

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

Bill 111,

An Act to revise the Municipal Act and to amend or repeal other Acts in relation to municipalities / Projet de loi 111, Loi révisant la

Loi sur

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

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

All those in favour will please say "aye."

All those opposed will please say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1358 to 1403.

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

Ayes

Arnott, Ted

Baird, John R.

Barrett, Toby

Chudleigh, Ted

Clark, Brad

Coburn, Brian

Cunningham, Dianne

Dunlop, Garfield

Ecker, Janet

Elliott, Brenda

Flaherty, Jim

Galt, Doug

Gilchrist, Steve

Gill, Raminder

Guzzo, Garry J.

Hardeman, Ernie

Hudak, Tim

Jackson, Cameron

Johns, Helen

Johnson, Bert

Marland, Margaret

Martiniuk, Gerry

Maves, Bart

Mazzilli, Frank

Miller, Norm

Molinari, Tina R.

Munro, Julia

Mushinski, Marilyn

Newman, Dan

O'Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Sampson, Rob

Spina, Joseph

Sterling, Norman W.

Stewart, R. Gary

Stockwell, Chris

Tascona, Joseph N.

Tsubouchi, David H.

Turnbull, David

Wettlaufer, Wayne

Wilson, Jim

Wood, Bob

Young, David

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

Nays

Agostino, Dominic

Bartolucci, Rick

Bisson, Gilles

Bountrogianni, Marie

Bradley, James J.

Brown, Michael A.

Bryant, Michael

Churley, Marilyn

Cleary, John C.

Colle, Mike

Conway, Sean G.

Cordian