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

June 6, 2005

38th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2005-Jun-06 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Monday 6 June 2005 Lundi 6 juin 2005

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

FABRY'S DISEASE

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION

ARCHIVES OF ONTARIO

SENIOR CITIZENS

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

SCLERODERMA

PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS

FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL

FISCAL POLICIES

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON REGULATIONS AND PRIVATE BILLS

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

HIGHWAY TRAFFIC AMENDMENT ACT

(LICENCE SUSPENSIONS), 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 MODIFIANT

LE CODE DE LA ROUTE

(SUSPENSIONS DE PERMIS)

CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES

STATUTE LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 MODIFIANT DES LOIS

EN CE QUI CONCERNE LES SERVICES

À L'ENFANCE ET À LA FAMILLE

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

ADOPTION

ANNIVERSARY OF D-DAY

ORAL QUESTIONS

ADOPTION DISCLOSURE

HYDRO ONE LABOUR DISPUTE

HEALTH CARE

POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS

ADOPTION

GREENBELT COUNCIL

WEST NILE VIRUS

GOVERNMENT SPENDING

PAROLE SYSTEM

HIGHWAY 406

WORKPLACE SAFETY

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

PETITIONS

LEGAL DRINKING AGE

HIGHWAY 406

CREDIT VALLEY HOSPITAL

SCHOOL FACILITIES

FALLSVIEW CASINO

CHIROPRACTIC SERVICES

SENIORS' TRANSIT PASS

JUSTICE SYSTEM

CREDIT VALLEY HOSPITAL

TUITION

GO TRANSIT TUNNEL

REGIONAL CENTRES FOR THE

DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

ORDERS OF THE DAY

PLACES TO GROW ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 SUR

LES ZONES DE CROISSANCE

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

FABRY'S DISEASE

Mr. Ted Arnott (Waterloo-Wellington): I rise in the House this afternoon to express my absolute disappointment with the Minister of Health

because of his unwillingness to exercise his authority as minister to assist the victims of Fabry's disease by approving coverage for enzyme replacement therapy.

This issue was first brought to my attention in April 2002 by my constituents John and Donna Strauss of Mannheim in Wilmot township. My staff and I began to make

inquiries with the Ministry of Health, and I wrote numerous letters to the Minister of Health calling upon him to do the right thing and approve Fabrazyme as a treatment for these patients, who

would otherwise have to pay up to $300,000 a year for this medicine, an absolutely prohibitive amount of money which would soon bankrupt each and every one of these families.

The case for the coverage of Fabrazyme has been made in this House repeatedly and persistently by the MPP with the most credibility on health care issues. Of

course, I'm speaking of the member for Kitchener-Waterloo. I am aware that the member for Oak Ridges and the member for Nickel Belt have also expressed their public support for Fabry's disease

patients in this House. Still, the minister, in response, has demonstrated callous indifference to the pleas of the Fabry's patients as recently as last Thursday during question period -- this in

spite of the verbal and written assurances that he gave to Donna Strauss that he would take action to solve this problem.

How can the minister sleep at night knowing he made this commitment to these desperate people and now comes into this House making bureaucratic excuses for his

inaction? How can he ignore the fact that as many as 40 countries cover this life-saving medication, that it has been approved by Health Canada, and that the provinces of British Columbia and

Alberta have done the right thing for Fabry's patients? When will he earn his keep as Minister of Health, keep his promise to Fabry's patients, and take action on this issue before more lives are

lost?

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION

Mr. Mario G. Racco (Thornhill): On Monday, May 30, I had the pleasure of joining my colleagues the Honourable Minister Takhar and Tony Wong,

along with several York region politicians, to unveil the new Viva rapid transit vehicle.

Viva will link the region's urban centres of Markham, Vaughan, Richmond Hill, Aurora and Newmarket along four major corridors, including Highway 7 and Yonge

Street. In addition, Viva will link York region with the city of Toronto and its subway system, to GO Transit and to the transit system in the region of Peel and eventually into Durham region. Viva

rapid transit service will officially begin in September and will be opened in four stages between September and December.

These rapid transit buses are quiet, roomy and comfortable. The vehicles are fully accessible, with wide doors, low floors and ramps to accommodate wheelchairs

and strollers. They also operate on clean-burning diesel and meet the latest emission standards. This new, modern vehicle is the first of its kind in the GTA, and I can assure everyone that when

Viva begins operating this September it will provide a fantastic ride and a unique transit experience.

Viva will ensure that the current ridership remains, while attracting new public transit users. It is estimated that these initial improvements will lead to a

30% increase in transit ridership, or an additional 4.5 million riders, moving 7,000 cars a day off the major arterial roads. The Viva rapid transit system is designed with passengers in mind,

offering a service that is frequent, flexible and comfortable. Rapid transit vehicles will arrive every five to 10 minutes during peak periods. This is only the beginning.

ARCHIVES OF ONTARIO

Mr. John Yakabuski (Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke): It has become blatantly obvious that this government is not interested in protecting the rich

historical collections housed within the building that stores Ontario's archives. For months we have heard stories of the ongoing mould infestation that is threatening the integrity of Ontario's

most valuable collection of our heritage. Now the safety of staff and countless others who use the archive facilities are also at risk because the building is structurally unsafe. Last week we

heard the alarming news that entire floors in the building may collapse. What can we expect to hear next week, or the week after, when tragedy strikes because this government has failed to respond?

We know that the government plans to move 80% of the collection to a new off-site storage facility north of Toronto, but we have not been told when this will happen or what will become of the most

frequently used collections that the government intends to keep at the main public service facility. How can this even be an option when the safety of those who use the building is compromised?

I have received countless letters and e-mails about this problem, calling on the government to step in and do something to protect our collection. Despite the

warnings we have received, nothing has been done. This lack of action not only speaks to the government's inability to keep their promises, but highlights the fact that they simply don't care about

the health and the safety of the public, or the priceless material housed at the archives that is disintegrating daily due to the deplorable conditions.

It is high time that dithering on this issue be put aside and decisive action be taken. I call upon the minister today to stand in his place and protect our

heritage and public safety now.

SENIOR CITIZENS

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): I want to acknowledge all the seniors of Hamilton this June, which is Seniors' Month. We have a great

community of seniors in my city. Beyond the nice words and activities planned for this month there are some very real issues that are facing Hamilton seniors that this government has not addressed.

The seniors' advisory committee for the city of Hamilton lists a host of concerns needing action. Chair Shirley Glauser and her committee know that many of our seniors face a tough time after they

retire. Everything is more expensive and yet they live on fixed incomes, like pensions that have eroded in value over time. A recent survey shows that inflation hits Canadian seniors harder than

other age groups. In Ontario, the seniors' inflation rate is higher than the national average and takes an even bigger bite out of meagre incomes. A pension cheque doesn't go very far when

everything costs more: hydro, gas, transit fares, property taxes, rent, prescriptions, the McGuinty health tax and other new user fees.

That is why we need the government to index pensions so that they keep pace with the rising cost of living. There should be a focused strategy for improving

seniors' services. Whether it's funding for seniors' centres, public transit, affordable housing or pension reform, the McGuinty government can and should do more.

I commend the groups in Hamilton East that dedicate themselves every day to serving our seniors. To the advisory committee; First Place; the YWCA and its two

active living centres; Hamilton Dementia Care Network, and all the other agencies and people who dedicate themselves to the health, well-being and security of our senior citizens, thank you very

much from the bottom of my heart. Happy Seniors' Month.

Mrs. Donna H. Cansfield (Etobicoke Centre): June is indeed the month that has been set aside in the calendar year to celebrate and recognize the

contributions of seniors in our communities, seniors such as the Honourable Margaret Norrie McCain, who recently received the very prestigious YWCA Woman of Distinction award for her work in the

voluntary sector for abused women, and also for the provision of better child care.

I'm fortunate to have within my own constituency of Etobicoke Centre a senior advisory committee that meets on a regular basis. It consists of members from the

community itself and from community care access, long-term-care facilities, service organizations and legal, just to name a few. The committee identifies relevant issues, such as Alzheimer's,

respite, health, well-being, continuing access to lifelong learning. and community connections such as Jumblies Theatre, which is a remarkable theatre group that's looking to bridge the gap in

diversity in our community, which will result in a play in about three years. These are the types of issues we talk about, and these are the types of things we do in our community. We also discuss

relevant issues relating to proposed legislation, which enables me to come back to the community.

Allow me also to say thank you to some very special people as the session ends: to Janet Marcheauz, Anne Wood and Margaret Williams in my constituency office,

and to Rebecca, Chris, Sarah and Audrey. You're all wonderful.

Charlotte Whitton, the former mayor of Ottawa, once said that being a woman in political life, you have to work twice as hard as others to prove yourself.

Fortunately, when I have such wonderful people around me, it's twice as easy.

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

Mr. John O'Toole (Durham): I rise in the House today to remind the Minister of Energy, as well as all members, that Ontario is entering the peak

months of power consumption. Today's high consumption of electricity proves my point. At 11 a.m., Ontario electricity demand had already hit 21,596 megawatts. The price of power had reached 10.6

cents per kilowatt hour. Today's projected peak in electricity consumption is estimated at 23,466 megawatts.

Ontario is able to meet this demand because of coal-powered plants such as Lambton, which has a capacity of 1,975 megawatts, and Nanticoke, which has a capacity

of 3,920 megawatts, that are available to contribute over 20% of the total capacity to the generation system. Yet, if you believe this government, we must close all coal-powered plants within two

years. If you believe this government, we can completely replace about a quarter of Ontario's generating capacity by 2007 -- unrealistic.

I would invite the members to take a look at the hydro meters today and ask whether this government's electricity policy will meet demands this summer.

In the remaining time, I'd like to recognize the well-behaved young students who are visiting in the chamber today.

SCLERODERMA

Mr. Richard Patten (Ottawa Centre): Several times during this month of June, many committed residents from rural, urban and small-town Ontario

will volunteer to heighten the profile of scleroderma and to raise funds for continued support of research into the causes and cures of this demonic disease.

June is Scleroderma Month across Ontario. It is a progressive disease of the vascular and immune systems and a severe connective tissue disorder. Still-unknown

factors trigger the overproduction of collagen, with resulting thickening, hardening and scarring of the skin and some internal organs, most commonly the digestive, circulatory, pulmonary and

muscular systems. Blood vessels tend to narrow, causing diminished blood flow. Patients become unduly sensitive to the cold and suffer discoloration, thickening and tightening of the skin.

Internally, it's very common that there is a narrowing of the esophagus, creating swallowing problems, and digestive difficulties most assuredly arise. The lungs, heart and kidneys are also

affected by this ailment.

More prevalent than muscular dystrophy or multiple sclerosis, scleroderma affects an estimated two to three people in 10,000. Four out of five affected are women

between the ages of 30 and 50. Its causes are unknown. It is not contagious, and it is not hereditary. It does strike every age, every ethnic background and both sexes. It is estimated that there

are as many as 40,000 cases in Canada. A good friend of ours, Audrey Gouskos, is now recovering from a near-fatal outcome associated with this terrible disease.

The Scleroderma Society of Ontario consists of volunteers and volunteers only. It is moving forward quickly, with the encouragement of the medical fraternity, to

find a cure for this dreaded disease -- we hope sooner than later.

PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS

Mr. Ernie Parsons (Prince Edward-Hastings): As a professional engineer, I would like to take this opportunity to join all members in celebration

of Engineering for Ontarians Day. This is separate from Hug an Engineer Day, which is every other day of the year.

There are close to 70,000 professional engineers in the province, and I would ask that the House recognize the important role engineers play in making our

province strong, safe and a great place to live.

If I could direct members' attention to the gallery, we have with us today representatives from Professional Engineers Ontario, the organization that has been

regulating the practice of professional engineering in the public interest for more than 80 years. Our guests include president Robert A. Goodings, registrar and CEO Kim Allen, past president

George Comrie, president-elect Pat Quinn, deputy registrar Johnny Zuccon, and Ken McMartin, P.Eng., president-elect of the Canadian Council of Professional Engineers. Thank you for being with

us.

Let us also extend a warm welcome to the good contingent of professional engineers and PEO spokespersons who have joined us today. We're pleased to have you

here, and we greatly appreciate the important work you do.

Along with fellow members Phil McNeely and Norm Sterling, I am pleased to be co-sponsoring a reception for PEO in the legislative dining room later this

afternoon. All members are duly invited to attend the event, where the Honourable Michael Bryant will be delivering brief remarks. Attendance will be taken.

Please join us in recognizing this day and the invaluable work professional engineers do for our province.

FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL

FISCAL POLICIES

Ms. Jennifer F. Mossop (Stoney Creek): We all know that a strong Canada needs a strong Ontario, and in order to keep Ontario strong, we need to

invest in our people.

Ontario currently faces a gap when it comes to the money it receives from the federal government and what it sends to the federal government. While Ontario is

honoured to support the rest of this country, we are stretched beyond what we can afford.

I want to commend Premier Dalton McGuinty for tackling an issue that few, if any, Premiers have had any success in quantifying, communicating or altering. As the

great Canadian author Margaret Laurence once said, what matters is "trying to express something that in fact everybody knows, but doesn't say or can't express." Well, Premier McGuinty is saying to

the federal government that we have a fairness issue, and he has found a way to express it.

Here's an example of where Ontario falls short of its fair share: In 2004, 29.5% of unemployed Ontarians qualified for EI benefits and the average benefit per

unemployed person was $5,030. In the rest of Canada, 52% of unemployed persons qualified for EI and the average benefit per unemployed person was $8,338. If unemployed Ontarians were given the same

benefit levels as the rest of Canadians, an additional $1.5 billion would flow into Ontario pockets. Unemployed Ontarians deserve the same support from the federal government provided to unemployed

people in the rest of the country.

I urge the federal government to continue to work with the McGuinty government to close the economic gap and provide Ontarians with the support they need and

deserve.

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON REGULATIONS AND PRIVATE BILLS

Ms. Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): I beg leave to present the first report, 2005, of the standing committee on regulations and private

bills.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Does the member wish to make a brief statement? No.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

HIGHWAY TRAFFIC AMENDMENT ACT

(LICENCE SUSPENSIONS), 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 MODIFIANT

LE CODE DE LA ROUTE

(SUSPENSIONS DE PERMIS)

Mr. Zimmer moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 209,

An Act to amend the Highway Traffic Act with respect to the suspension of drivers' licences / Projet de loi 209, Loi modifiant le Code de la route

en ce qui concerne les suspensions de permis de conduire.

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

Mr. David Zimmer (Willowdale): This is a bill designed to provide for the following consequence: If someone is convicted of a boating offence

involving the use of alcohol, that conviction will trigger a suspension of an Ontario driver's licence if they hold an Ontario driver's licence.

CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES

STATUTE LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 MODIFIANT DES LOIS

EN CE QUI CONCERNE LES SERVICES

À L'ENFANCE ET À LA FAMILLE

Mrs. Bountrogianni moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 210,

An Act to amend the Child and Family Services Act and make complementary amendments to other Acts / Projet de loi 210, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les

services à l'enfance et à la famille et apportant des modifications complémentaires à d'autres lois.

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

The minister has the floor.

Hon. Marie Bountrogianni (Minister of Children and Youth Services, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration): I reserve my comments for

ministerial statements.

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

Hon. Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): I move that, pursuant to standing order 9(c)(i), the House shall meet from

6:45 p.m. till 12 midnight on Monday, June 6, 2005, for the purpose of considering government business.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): The government House leader has moved government notice of motion 388. Is it the pleasure of the House that

this motion carry?

All those in favour, please say "aye."

All those against, say "nay."

I think the ayes have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1352 to 1357.

The Speaker: The government House leader has moved government notice of motion 388. All those in favour, please rise one at a time and be

recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

Arthurs, Wayne

Baird, John R.

Bentley, Christopher

Bountrogianni, Marie

Bradley, James J.

Broten, Laurel C.

Brown, Michael A.

Cansfield, Donna H.

Caplan, David

Chudleigh, Ted

Colle, Mike

Craitor, Kim

Crozier, Bruce

Delaney, Bob

Dhillon, Vic

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duguid, Brad

Duncan, Dwight

Dunlop, Garfield

Flynn, Kevin Daniel

Fonseca, Peter

Hoy, Pat

Hudak, Tim

Jackson, Cameron

Jeffrey, Linda

Kular, Kuldip

Kwinter, Monte

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Leal, Jeff

Levac, Dave

Marsales, Judy

Matthews, Deborah

Meilleur, Madeleine

Miller, Norm

Milloy, John

Mossop, Jennifer F.

Munro, Julia

O'Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Parsons, Ernie

Patten, Richard

Peters, Steve

Peterson, Tim

Phillips, Gerry

Pupatello, Sandra

Racco, Mario G.

Rinaldi, Lou

Runciman, Robert W.

Ruprecht, Tony

Sandals, Liz

Sergio, Mario

Smith, Monique

Smitherman, George

Sorbara, Gregory S.

Tory, John

Van Bommel, Maria

Watson, Jim

Wilkinson, John

Witmer, Elizabeth

Wong, Tony C.

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Yakabuski, John

Zimmer, David

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

Nays

Hampton, Howard

Horwath, Andrea

Kormos, Peter

Prue, Michael

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 64; the nays are 4.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

ADOPTION

Hon. Marie Bountrogianni (Minister of Children and Youth Services, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration): I'm pleased to rise in the House

today to inform members of the historic step we are taking on behalf of the thousands of children and youth in Ontario who are in the permanent care of a children's aid society.

We often hear stories in the news about children who are taken into the care of the children's aid society. These are children who have been abused or

neglected or whose parents could not take care of them. But we don't hear many news stories about what happens to those children after the crisis has subsided. Some of those children thrive, but

often these children get trapped in a system that doesn't work for them.

In Ontario, there are roughly 9,000 children in the permanent care of a children's aid society. They live in foster homes and they live in group homes. On

average, children in foster or group care are moved every two years. Consider that situation. It's not just moving your stuff; it's leaving your friends and your school, it's a new house, a new

foster family, a new group home, new rules, new expectations. That kind of instability affects every part of a child's life: their education, their self-esteem and their ability to form meaningful

long-term relationships.

The current system is too rigid. We need to help more children find a permanent, caring home by making adoption more flexible for individual children and

friendlier for parents. Today, I introduced legislation that, if passed, would modernize the rules around adoption so they work for children and families. These proposed changes would remove the

rigid restriction that a child must completely sever all ties to his or her birth family before being eligible for adoption.

Right now, 70% of children in permanent care can't be adopted because their birth family has a court-ordered right to contact them. When judges make an order

that a child become a ward of the state, they may be hesitant to seal off all contact with the family, except in those cases where it's necessary for the child's safety. So the birth family would

have the opportunity to visit the child, for example, twice a year. That often makes sense, but it should not automatically make the child ineligible to become a permanent member of a new family.

Proposed changes would mean that a child could keep those important ties to their family, community and culture and still be adopted or placed in a permanent home.

We know that adoption will help a number of these children find a secure, stable family, but we also know that it's not the answer for every child. Right now,

if a child can't be adopted, they often have no choice but foster or group care. Instead of trying to make the child fit the rules, we're changing the rules to fit the child.

Proposed changes would give children's aid societies more flexibility to meet the needs of each child. For some children, it would mean being placed with a

member of their extended family, someone they already know and trust. It may be a grandparent; for others, it would be being placed with another adult, possibly a member of their community, even a

long-time foster parent. A young person could have the legal and emotional certainty of a permanent home and family, at least until they turn 18. The proposed changes are part of our government's

plan to help more children and youth in care of children's aid societies thrive in a safe, stable, supportive home.

We're making the system friendlier for prospective parents, removing some of the barriers that often discourage people from adopting in Ontario. Parents who

have tried to adopt a child from a children's aid society will tell you that it's a cumbersome, inconsistent process. So we are standardizing the application process so that it is the same in

Toronto as it is in Timmins. It will even be the same for private adoptions, so prospective parents will not have to go through a different screening process every time they speak with a different

agency.

We're already working with the Adoption Council of Ontario and children's aid societies to develop a province-wide Web site that will help societies match

children who are available for adoption with would-be parents. And for those families that need it, there will be some post-adoption support so that families who adopt a child from a children's aid

society aren't suddenly left on their own.

We're also making three changes to the way children's aid societies do business, changes that will make the societies more stable and sustainable so that they

are there for children who need them for years to come.

First, this year we will begin to provide a new funding framework. That framework puts a greater emphasis on the specific results that we want to see for

children, like adoption. As well, last year we provided added resources to put the societies on a stable footing going forward.

Second, the societies will also have more options available to them when they respond to new cases. It always starts with a rigorous safety assessment, but

after that, the societies will be able to match their level of response to the need of the child.

Third, the legislation proposes more extensive use of mediation instead of courts in child protection matters. Mediation is less adversarial and often better

for the child and family.

Together, these changes will help children's aid societies achieve even more adoptions so that more children can live in the security of a permanent, loving

home. Across Ontario, there are thousands of children who need a permanent family and a great many families who want to bring a child into their lives. We are helping bring them together. By making

adoption more flexible for children and friendlier for parents, I believe the result will be more happy childhoods and more loving, stable, permanent families.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Responses?

Mr. Cameron Jackson (Burlington): It's my opportunity to rise in the House today to respond to the minister's announcement. For the purposes

of the people watching on television, this is the size of the legislation that was tabled today.

What I find most interesting is that this minister and this ministry continue to be embroiled in a high degree of turmoil. We're still not seeing an overall

plan to help us get through this period when the minister seems to be battling on several fronts: not only in our courts, as we witnessed last week, but also with the privacy commissioner and the

federal government, in terms of charter protections for children. Now she's wandering into the Child and Family Services Act with substantive reforms in the dying days of this legislative

session.

My first question to the minister is: Where is the Bruce Rivers report that you promised to make public, so we can put all of these kinds of reforms into an

overall program plan and a business plan, so we can understand exactly where the changes are going to occur, not just for children's aid societies but for families who are dependent on the

government to manage child welfare issues? We have not seen the Bruce Rivers report, yet you've cherry-picked part of that report and dropped this on the floor of the Legislature today. No real

plan; no real program. You seem to be all over the map on this issue.

Even your statement in the House today bears further scrutiny. I'll give you an example. Minister, you talk on page 4 about the resources you put in place. The

resources you put in place last year were to pay for the deficits of a year ago, with no promise to assist children's aid societies today. Currently, children's aid societies are carrying about a

$70-million deficit. Their boards are cash-flowing to keep their employees salaried and in place for child protection in our province. Nowhere in your announcement have you discussed that.

You go on to say that the societies will also have more options available. I haven't read through the document, but if you're talking about the suggestion for

differentiated responses, which has been talked about, that means that when there is a child protection issue, the children's aid societies won't have to do as thorough an investigation. The reason

children's aid societies' budgets went from half a billion to $1.1 billion in under five years in this province is that clearly we needed to give children's aid societies the resources to be as

thorough and comprehensive with each and every one of their cases. Now you're going to take us back -- of course, you don't mention that in your comments. It's buried inside these three and a half

inches of legislative changes, but that's what differentiated responses are.

It's the same with your reference to kinship care. It's wonderful that we can call up a grandparent or uncle or aunt and say, "Would you please take your

sister's son? We'll pay you. After all, we're paying foster care from as low as $25 a day to as high as $100 a day. But you know what? We can save some money if you'll take that child off our

hands, but we'll pay you to be the surrogate parent for your own relation. We'll pay you $40, $50 or $60 a day of taxpayers' money." If that's in fact what you're going to be doing, you should be

saying that and you should be making that clear. But again, we don't know that, because that's not what's in your announcement today and, frankly, you have not tabled the Bruce Rivers report so we

can look at that thoughtful bit of effort to determine exactly what the overall plan will be.

You're currently in the courts with some of these families with adoption issues. You're literally countersuing the families for their requests of the

government to come up with the necessary funding. The incentives that you're looking for to provide CASs are essentially a cost-containment strategy and not a child welfare outcomes issue.

Bill 183 has been well documented in this House. You're currently embroiled in controversies here, and yet you're talking about increasing the number of

adoptions at a time when you're going to be eliminating an adoption registry and when CASs are required to carry huge deficits. You've done nothing to protect those children whom your own ministry

has taken away from a family because they've been sexually assaulted, and now you're going to accelerate their adoption and provide access to the families of these children under these changes.

Minister, you have no plan. I wish you would table the Rivers report as soon as possible so that we can comment properly on these reforms.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Could I have less discussion in Parliament? I hear a lot of discussion. Could you limit it to a much quieter tone or do it

outside, please?

Responses: member from Hamilton East.

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): It's my pleasure to respond to the Minister of Children and Youth Services and to acknowledge that it is

extremely important to give children the opportunity for stable family life, the opportunity for stable and successful adoptions. That's definitely a goal that I think we all share.

It's a tragedy that we're seeing, in all communities across the province, the tragedy of children being forced to grow up in foster homes and group homes.

That's not the environment that anybody would want a child to be growing up in in this day and age. I know the adoption community and grandparents and many people were waiting for this to come

forward, were waiting for this kind of change to happen, and I'm sure that they are, at this point in time, lauding the initiative. It's no doubt important, and I think we would all agree it's

important, that we need to get these children adopted into stable situations as quickly and as seamlessly as possible in this province, but not before the government has an opportunity to sort out

who was given to children's aid societies inappropriately in the first place and under false pretences.

The ministry would know that it currently has a really big problem on its hands because it doesn't track very well the basic information they obtain about

these children. We also know that in many cases children's aid societies have a dismal record with severely challenged children, children with severe disabilities. The ministry has hardly any

information at all about what is happening with these children.

A recent Queen's University study showed that adoption disruption rates were 43.2% for children with disabling conditions compared to 4.8% for children without

such conditions. Four per cent is a good record, but 43% is definitely not a good record. That's something the government seriously needs to work on. The Queen's University study actually came up

with a couple of recommendations, which include enhancing the focus on children with disabling conditions, promoting research in the permanency of outcomes for children with disabling conditions

and improving data collection and ministry reporting on the crown ward population. These are some very tangible measures that need to be put in place to improve the situation for children with

disabling conditions.

The ministry has historically done a terrible job of collecting and retaining this basic information about children in care. We should really be careful about

children who have special needs and make sure that reuniting them with their families takes priority over the adoption by new families within the context of what we're seeing happening in the

province right now.

The Queen's study shows that there are many barriers facing disabled children who need adoption, and the ministry needs to follow their recommendations very

closely. The ministry is able to actually make some of those changes, and we'd like to see that happening right away. In fact, in the context of what's been happening in the province with the

Ombudsman's report, you would think that the minister would have taken this opportunity today with this announcement to announce that she was implementing all four of the recommendations that came

from that very condemning report.

In fact, I was in court just last week, on Friday, with lawyers representing Anne Larcade, who was concerned about the situation with her son Alexandre, and

the many other families who are dealing with the fact that they were forced to give up custody of their children just so those children could get the services they need from this province.

There's no doubt that grandparents will be very happy about what they're seeing today, but there's another issue, and that is the issue of affordability. While

the announcements of the minister are important, what we need to keep our eye on is how well people can take advantage of this situation and actually get those children into the stable situations

they need to have to grow and prosper in life.

The other issue that leaves me with some concern about the huge document I received today is the issue of mediation and child protection. I think that's a very

concerning prospect because we know that in any situation of mediation -- for example, alternative dispute resolutions in family matters -- there is always a power imbalance that needs to be dealt

with. There are significant concerns that we need to address, and I'm not quite sure that the minister has taken that into consideration. Yes, there are backlogs in the family courts that we need

to address. Yes, that's a serious problem we need to get through, but there are ways of dealing with that to make sure that everybody is appropriately represented with the appropriate framework

around it to make sure that the best possible solutions are outcomes -- something like family law clinics, which we have advocated for for quite some time in this province and would like to see

implemented.

Those are my comments; there are many, many more that I'm sure I will have as I review the information I received today.

ANNIVERSARY OF D-DAY

Hon. Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): I believe we have unanimous consent for each party to speak for up to five

minutes in recognition of the anniversary of D-Day.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): The government House leader requests unanimous consent. Agreed? Agreed.

Hon. Gerry Phillips (Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet): It's my privilege today to rise during this Year of the Veteran to mark the

anniversary of D-Day, June 6, 1944, and to honour all those Ontarians who fought with other Canadians and Allies that day and through the war.

As we all know, the invasion of Normandy was the largest combined sea, air and land military operation in history. Tragically, it took the lives of hundreds of

Canadians that day, and 600 were wounded and dozens were taken prisoner. Yet proudly, by day's end, Canadians had advanced further through enemy lines than any other force. It's no wonder that this

conflict remains so profoundly and deeply felt generations later. Amazingly, over one million Canadians and Newfoundlanders volunteered to serve in the Second World War. That was one in 11

Canadians. Tragically, by the end of the war, one out of 10 of those who had gone off to war was either dead or wounded.

D-Day and the Battle of Normandy marked the turning point in the Second World War. The Year of the Veteran marks some of those significant milestones that we

have all been recognizing: the 60th anniversary of the liberation of the Netherlands, victory in Europe and victory in Japan. This year is an opportunity to celebrate, honour, remember and,

importantly, thank our veterans, and importantly to teach our youth about the contributions and the sacrifices our veterans made both here and abroad in war and peace. Our veterans deserve respect

and recognition for their sacrifice and accomplishments to preserve our freedom and safety and for the contributions they continue to make.

Today, Ontario is proud to have over 100,000 Second World War veterans sharing with us the peace and safety that they helped to preserve. While many are well

into their 80s and 90s, many of us know many of them who have a zest for life that is ageless. That was evident in all of our ridings last month when thousands of veterans marched across the

province to mark Victory in Europe Day and to dance at the CNE on May 8. Strong and vital communities are the legacy of those who fought so bravely to preserve the freedoms we enjoy today.

We're committed to ensuring that future generations recognize and remember the contributions of all our veterans, including those with us today and those who

made the ultimate sacrifice. With the support of your government, veterans are bringing history alive for students in school face to face -- many of us have been in schools where veterans have been

in those classrooms -- and on-line through a project called the Memory Project, which is led by our Dominion Institute. We are also supporting the Dominion Institute's Memory Project road show. The

road show records veterans' stories in their own words and voices. It records their artifacts, such as medals, photographs and letters. This will be accessible to generations to come as our Memory

Project Web site begins its eight-city road show.

I'm also pleased to report, as the Premier has in the past, that with your support and the support of all three parties in the Legislature, we are making

significant progress toward our project of constructing a veterans' memorial right here on the grounds of Queen's Park. This memorial will be a fitting and lasting tribute to the heroism, the

dedication and the loyalty of all of our armed forces members past and present, in times of war and in times of peace. As you know, the memorial will be built on the front lawn of Queen's Park,

visible and accessible to everyone who comes to visit. In fact, this is the first time in almost 70 years that approval has been given by the Legislature to erect a structure on its lawns. I'm very

pleased with the co-operation we have received from you, Mr. Speaker, and from all parties in the Legislature.

June, as you know, is recognized as Seniors' Month in the province, an annual tradition that we have recognized for over 20 years. This month allows us to

recognize older Ontarians who continue to make enormous contributions to their families, their communities and country. Each of our proud veterans has made, and continues to make, an important

contribution to Ontario. On behalf of all Ontarians, I salute them and I thank them for their enormous contribution to our province.

Mr. Ted Arnott (Waterloo-Wellington): This morning while I was reading my newspaper at home at the breakfast table, I noticed the date on the

paper as being June 6. I remarked to our boys, who were eating breakfast with me, that today is a very special day, because 61 years ago today, the guns of freedom were discharged on the beaches of

Normandy, launching the final phase of the liberation of Europe from its Nazi enslavement.

We commemorate many of the anniversaries associated with World War I and World War II. On or around November 11, Royal Canadian Legions across this country

hold solemn observances to remind us of the horrors of war, the sacrifices of the generation who gave their all to achieve our victories, and the need for us, the generations who follow, to never,

ever forget.

Just a month ago, many scores of Canadian Expeditionary Force veterans of the campaign in Holland returned to that grateful country for a hero's welcome. Still

proud and charismatic but now carrying the burden of age, many of these veterans were probably visiting the Netherlands for the final time. To say that the Dutch people are thankful for what

Canadians did there in the 1940s would be to understate the degree of heartfelt appreciation that they continue to demonstrate every time they see the Canadian flag.

The events of June 6, 1944, hold special symbolic importance for all of us today. Many of us have a view of that day which has been provided for us by

Hollywood through the films Saving Private Ryan and The Longest Day, or perhaps the recent television film Eisenhower. Without a doubt, these historical depictions give us a somewhat greater

appreciation of what it must have been like for the men who disembarked from those landing craft into that wall of fire.

What we don't often contemplate is the fact that without a successful amphibious landing in France in 1944, there would have been no way of dislodging the Nazi

regime, and there was no guarantee that the landings would succeed. In fact, I believe that General Eisenhower had prepared a speech which would have been broadcast over the radio where he would

have taken full personal responsibility for the failure of the landings if the Allied forces had been turned back into the sea and been unable to establish the vital bridgehead that they needed.

Such is the magnitude of that historic event on Juno Beach on that stormy day. If the landings had been unsuccessful, it is not difficult to speculate that the war would have been prolonged, more

lives would have been lost, and the human misery that war represents would have been intensified for millions.

It has been my privilege to come to know well one of our Canadian veterans who participated in the Normandy campaign, having landed just hours after D-Day.

Donald J. MacDougall of Harriston, who goes by the name of Tuffy, I think going back to his years in the Canadian army, is someone I admire greatly, because to me he exemplifies the courage and

sacrifice of that entire generation.

I return again to this morning at our family's breakfast table. We need to know about what happened 61 years ago today. We need to make sure that our children

know about it. We need to make certain that future generations, even after the passing of our veterans, continue to recognize the superlative valour of every single Canadian who wore a uniform when

their country needed them and the millions whose toil here at home supported them.

I'm pleased that I've had the opportunity to speak briefly in the House in commemoration of the anniversary of D-Day on behalf of our party's critic for

citizenship, the member for Burlington. I thank you.

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): I too am pleased to be able to participate in what is I believe a very significant moment in Canadian

history. I want to follow on my colleague's statement, that too often we tend to take history for granted. We tend to assume that it just happened this way. I think it's good for all of us to

reflect on the fact that D-Day didn't just happen; it wasn't a guaranteed success. As my colleague said, Eisenhower actually carried around in his pocket, until very late in the day of 6 June, a

press release which would have said, "Our landings have been a failure. We are withdrawing from the continent," and then taking responsibility. In fact, Churchill said this was such a gamble that

if it didn't succeed, it would likely be years before the allied armies would have sufficient strength to enter Europe again.

It really was quite a gamble. The weather was a gamble. Whether or not the landings were still going to be a secret was a gamble. So there were all kinds of

uncertainties to it.

What is really amazing is the success that was achieved, and the success that was achieved by and large, in Canada's terms, by soldiers and sailors and flyers

who were all volunteers. These were not professional soldiers; these were all volunteers. Many of them had enlisted in the armed forces because they'd come through the Depression and they were sick

and tired of being unemployed. They wanted a job and they wanted three square meals a day, and that's what they thought of.

Over 15,000 Canadians participated that day. What I think Canadians need to know is that Canada was not a large country then: 11 million people. Yet Canada

virtually participated on an equal basis with the United States and Britain. Canadians landed as paratroopers. In fact, the history of the 1st Canadian Parachute Battalion is probably one of the

most interesting. As everyone knows, paratroops have the most dangerous job, but the 1st Canadian Parachute Battalion probably had the most dangerous job of all. They were landed far out on the

flank, and their job was to blow up a number of bridges before the German army knew that the bridges had been blown up. It was really quite an amazing feat, which probably is one of the best

histories of D-Day.

Another Canadian -- he actually lives in Winnipeg now -- did something equally outstanding. If anyone has ever seen the movie The Longest Day, you'll know

there is a scene where a glider lands quite close to a bridge that had to be captured. It's regarded as the greatest feat ever of military flying. The pilot landed the glider 47 yards from the

bridge so that the paratroops were able to get out and rush the bridge without anyone knowing it. Forty-seven yards away from the bridge on a dark night with no moon and cloud cover. Where does

that pilot live? He lives in Winnipeg.

A year ago, I was able to see him interviewed. They asked him what special skill he had. He said, "Look, I was only 19 years old. I was just trying to do my

job and make sure I lived through the night." Incredible things were done by people who were very young and just trying to do their job.

Nowadays, many of these people are in their 80s and we recognize them on special days, but, again, I want to agree with my colleagues here: I think it's

important that we do something more than that.

This was such a unique turning point in the history of the world.

I just want to read something that a Canadian journalist said at the time. This is by Lionel Shapiro. He was then a columnist for Maclean's magazine. On the

evening of June 6, in the dining room of l'Hôtel Belle Plage, just a few hundred yards from the beach in front of Bernières-sur-Mer, which Canadians had liberated, Shapiro sat down at his

typewriter and reflected on the day's events. "Then, reflecting on the Canadian citizen soldiers, whose `appetite for battle' he had chronicled in Sicily, he wrote finally about their premier

victory in France, `Between the little seaside town of Bernières-sur-Mer and the Caen battle front, Canadian troops have written an immortal history.'"

It really is an immortal history, and that's why I believe we need to do more. These, in many ways, were some of Canada's finest hours, by people who were

citizen soldiers just trying to do their job.

Applause.

ORAL QUESTIONS

ADOPTION DISCLOSURE

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the Premier. Last week we referenced here a number of examples and concerns that

echoed those raised by the privacy commissioner about your adoption disclosure bill; specifically, the privacy of those birth parents or adoptees who do not wish to have their identities revealed.

Your minister did not, at that time, disclose any details about how the tribunal that is proposed, or that exists and would hear some of these applications, would actually work for people in just

this circumstance. In fact, she repeatedly said it would be dealt with by way of the regulations that would be developed. I think it's part of a trend, over many years, where governments of all

stripes seem to decide that issues are far too complex or far too difficult for mere parliamentarians to deal with.

My question to the Premier is, will you include as part of the legislation itself, as opposed to leaving it entirely to regulations developed later in secret,

some specific criteria and procedures that would govern the role of the tribunal in hearing applications from those who are concerned about the violation of their privacy rights?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): The minister would like to speak to this.

Hon. Sandra Pupatello (Minister of Community and Social Services, minister responsible for women's issues): The Leader of the Opposition and I

had an opportunity to discuss over the telephone today the content of an amendment that is being tabled at committee this afternoon. That is in keeping with the conversation we had last week, where

I assured the member opposite that if he had concerns about details involving information for abused children who are now adult adoptees to access information and have the opportunity for that veto

-- rather than his not seeing that by regulation but wishing to see that in the bill, that is the amendment that will be tabled this afternoon. I hope that goes a long way to assure the member

opposite that not only are our intentions good, but we are now coming forward with an amendment that will show him what would have been done by regulation.

Ultimately and in the end, there are two pillars here. Yes, there is a controversy for part of it, but the lion's share of individuals who are affiliated with

this issue on adoption want two things: They want retroactivity and they want that openness, with protection for those extreme circumstances. I believe that, with the work we have done over several

months, that is what we have today.

Mr. Tory: As I've indicated a number of times here and elsewhere, we'll have to see these amendments to see if they fulfill the purpose I was

describing; namely, to give people some greater degree of comfort that we know in the legislation how these tribunals are going to be set up and how they're going to work.

Yesterday's Toronto Sun editorial said, "The Liberals have proposed a bill which, while it has several positive aspects, is fatally flawed because it ignores

the fundamental and non-negotiable privacy rights of both adopted children and their birth parents." The privacy commissioner has said the same thing.

Premier, given some of these comments and concerns, we're asking that you outline the details of exactly how this bill would work before it is passed. The

minister has made some allusion to perhaps doing some of that later today. As an example, under the Victims' Bill of Rights, a person who has been the victim of sexual assault is presumed to be a

victim; no justification is required. Under your legislation as written, however, a victim of sexual abuse would have to appear in person before a tribunal and beg for their privacy. We don't think

this is right.

My question is this: At the very least, will you set out, in your legislation, means by which those who wish their information to be kept private may still

have their submissions put in front of the tribunal without having to relive the entire experience, especially in person?

Hon. Ms. Pupatello: Let me say for the leader opposite that the work that will be done through the course of the summer, if we're successful

with the passage of this bill, would be exactly that. We have never had the intention to have people relive horrible experiences. We also understand that 3% to 5% of those related to adoption may

be in this. For those people, what we are saying is that there will be protection for individuals who come from an abused background. If that CAS file has abuse in it, that file will be stopped.

That adoptee, that adult, will have a choice to release that information. Many of them want it released anyway, but we are giving them that choice. So that will now be in the law, as I said -- in

the amendment.

For the birth parents, there will be circumstances that no one in this House can describe that would constitute, in their view, extreme harm. You and I are not

going to be the ones who are going to be the judge of that. It will, in fact, be by the panel. We will make a process that will work for those individuals.

Mr. Tory: We're still in this mode of, "Pass the bill now and we'll sort out the details later." I think that there are members of this House

and, indeed, members of the public who might like to be involved in a very public way in sorting out the details now, concurrent with the passage of any piece of legislation.

The minister has indicated in the media that the most common case -- of a mother who had given up a child for adoption and did not want to relive the pain and

anguish associated in her case with that decision -- would not be successful in a bid to have her privacy maintained were she to apply to this tribunal to have the information kept private.

Recognizing, as the minister just said, the relatively low percentage of files that will go to a hearing, are you willing to include in the legislation, as part of the provisions we've been

discussing today, an explicit mandate given to the tribunal to hear and decide upon any application to be brought by anyone so that there can and will be a balanced consideration of both the

protection of privacy rights and the benefits which would flow from disclosure of information, without any arbitrary assumption in advance as to which rights should prevail in a given case? Are you

willing to give the tribunal that explicit mandate?

Hon. Ms. Pupatello: Let me just say that it has always been the intention, and the bill, as it is written, allows for individuals to come

before that tribunal, however easy that process will be. I can tell you that it will be an easy process. If anyone has described it as something difficult, that's their description, not ours.

I will also say that in all of the parts that will require regulation, we have laid out a plan for open consultation on the regulation-making; stakeholder

consultation on its development; e-consultation so that people can do it anonymously; and it will include the regulations that will affect the adopted children as well as the birth parents.

In answer specifically to the question that this member asks: Absolutely. We will have a process by which people can get involved in the development of those

regulations, especially for the cases that he describes.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Final supplementary.

Mrs. Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener-Waterloo): New question.

The Speaker: New question.

HYDRO ONE LABOUR DISPUTE

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): I'd love another supplementary, Mr. Speaker. I would say that what I asked for there was a specific

legislative provision that would mandate the committee, but we'll go to a new question, again for the Premier.

For the first time in the history of Hydro One, engineers, scientists and safety supervisors are on strike. Indeed, this is the first strike vote taken by

these energy professionals in over 50 years.

Last week, in responding to a question from our energy critic, your energy minister said that a "robust contingency plan" -- his words, not mine -- was in

place for this strike. What specifically is in your plan to ensure the safety and reliability of our power system and to ensure that the lights remain on in Ontario? Can you share some of those

details with us?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I'm going to allow the Minister of Energy to speak to this in the

supplementaries, but let me just say at the outset that it is indeed unfortunate that it has come to this and that there is a strike. I'm sure the Leader of the Opposition would agree with me that

we should, in the strongest possible terms, be urging both sides to continue to talk to ensure that, at all times, the public interest is upheld. Notwithstanding the fact that we find ourselves in

this situation, I remain optimistic, I remain hopeful, and again I urge both sides to come together, work out their the differences and do so in a way that always upholds the public interest and

public safety.

Mr. Tory: I think we would all share those sentiments, though it had little to do with my question. I'll try again.

It was the Ontario Minister of Energy who boasted of a robust plan in the event of a strike when we asked him about this last Wednesday. All I'm seeking is an

assurance on behalf of the people and the businesses of Ontario that we will continue to have a reliable, safe electricity system while these people have withdrawn their services.

The Ontario Society of Professional Engineers sent a letter to the members of your cabinet two months ago raising concerns over a potential strike. The letter

says, "Professional engineers of Hydro One are responsible for the protection and control of transmission operation and supervision of the safety of work rules. Their role is critical to recovery

from outage situations such as the August 2003 blackout."

My questions is this: You've known about this strike for over two months. I think it is fair now for you to share with us details and specific elements of your

robust contingency plans so that people and businesses know they can rely on a stable supply of electricity and maintain their confidence in that important element of our economy.

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: To the Minister of Energy.

Hon. Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): The plan was devised and developed by Hydro One. It has been subject to

review by the Independent Electricity System Operator, which is an organization that is separate from Hydro One. They have responsibility for overseeing the flow of electricity from generation

through to transmission and distribution. They reported publicly this weekend that they are satisfied that this is a robust contingency plan, one that will serve the interests of the province while

this dispute is ongoing.

As the Premier said, it is our hope that both sides will get back to the bargaining table and be able to resolve the dispute before them. In the interim, the

plan has been overseen by the Independent Electricity System Operator, which is the expert in these matters. They are satisfied that the plan will serve to protect consumer interests in Ontario

during this period of time.

Mr. Tory: While I certainly welcome the minister's volume today, which I would say might be appropriate to be used at a Rosedale tea party, he

didn't answer my question, which was to talk about the plan. He told us there was a plan and he said the plan is a plan we can all rely on, and so forth. We need to have some assurances from this

government, and the people of Ontario need those assurances. It's not unreasonable for us to ask about some of the details of those plans. We have seen the detrimental effects that small power

interruptions can have on daily life in Ontario. Two weeks ago, NOVA Chemicals lost $25 million as a result of a four-second power outage which occurred at a transmission station in Milton. In that

case, it was the Hydro One engineers who had to fix it.

I'm going to ask one more time: Can you tell us what the elements are of this robust plan that you referred to so confidently a few days ago? Can you give the

people and the businesses the assurance they need that they will have a confident, reliable supply of energy during the course of this work stoppage?

Hon. Mr. Duncan: The member opposite will be aware that the operations of the system and its security are overseen by the Independent

Electricity System Operator. The elements include management employees from within Hydro One who will fulfill obligations, so you have that contingency. The contingency deals with making sure of

the safety of the system itself, quite apart from the potential public impact. Those are defined in regulation and enforced by the IESO, and I'll be happy to send those regulations to the Leader of

the Opposition.

It deals with a range of contingencies. For instance, last night, power was lost in Puslinch township. That was a routine outage caused by weather. Power was

lost briefly in my riding last night as a result of a storm. There are routinely outages every day throughout the province. There's a set of rules that are publicly available that govern how we

operate our system. They're overseen by the Independent Electricity System Operator. I have confidence in their ability to ensure that this contingency plan will serve the system well throughout

the duration of this labour situation.

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

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): A question for the Premier: Premier, it is a very hot day indeed. People are turning on their air

conditioners across southern Ontario, and the usage of hydroelectricity is surging. But while that's happening, 1,000 of the skilled engineering professionals whose job it is to ensure a stable

provision of hydroelectricity are off the job. For the first time in 60 years, they are not on the job.

Last week, we made a modest request that you take responsibility and get both sides together to try to find an agreement. Premier, why do you sit on the

sidelines while Ontario's hydroelectricity supply comes under greater risk every day?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: The Minister of Energy.

Hon. Mr. Duncan: Earlier, before I came into the House, I checked: Peak demand is expected to reach 23,000 megawatts of power today, or a

little bit higher. There will be the routine imports of electricity on a day like today. The IESO reports that on Monday and Tuesday of this week, we expect domestic production to be augmented. I

should also point out that three out of 15 nuclear units are out of service at this moment. Our reserve remains at approximately 20%. Two of those three are on planned maintenance. So in terms of

the available supply, it's very robust.

We have in fact availed both sides of all the services offered by the Ministry of Labour: conciliation, mediation. There is a board of directors in place to

oversee the negotiations. Our belief, I stress again, is that union and management should negotiate free and open collective agreements. We continue to believe in that. We believe that the services

of the government have been put to good use to date. Unfortunately, the situation remains unresolved, but we do --

The Speaker: Supplementary?

Mr. Hampton: This is really encouraging. I ask the minister a question about transmission of electricity, and he talks about generation. This

is not fooling anyone. People understand that it's the transmission system that is increasingly under stress, and the people who should be there operating the transmission system aren't there. Your

government wants to try to pretend that you have no responsibility here.

Minister, you say there's no risk. Then can you tell me why Hydro One lawyers are in court saying that they need to clamp down on picket lines at the Barrie

control centre because "the system is at risk"? Let me put it to the Premier, because ultimately the buck stops with him: How many risks are you prepared to take, Premier, with the hydroelectricity

supply of the province?

Hon. Mr. Duncan: I don't want to speak about the matter before the court right now, but I want to stress, first of all, as I said to the

question from the leader of the official opposition, that we believe there is a robust contingency plan in place that involves continuing access to Hydro One facilities. The member did indirectly

reference generation in his first question. Generation is satisfactory, and I'm satisfied that the contingency plan will see to it that transmission remains in place throughout the duration.

These matters are difficult. We have had a number of opportunities, as I indicated earlier, through the Ministry of Labour to have appropriate mediation and

conciliation with the two sides. I have faith in the free collective bargaining system, and I am optimistic that both sides will be able to resolve their differences.

Finally, I'm satisfied that the contingency plan is satisfactory under the circumstances.

Mr. Hampton: What a contrast between Liberals today and Liberals just a couple of years ago. I want to quote one of their spokespersons: "The

Minister of Energy is really the representative of the shareholder, the people of Ontario. We, the people, own Hydro One. We're the sole shareholder and our representative is [the minister]. He is

responsible not only for that which happens to his direct knowledge, but he is responsible for everything that happens in Hydro One, ultimately."

Who said that? The now Attorney General of the McGuinty government. But suddenly, now that they're the government, they want to pretend that somebody else out

there, somewhere off in never-never land, is responsible.

Look, you're fooling no one. You are taking huge risks with the electricity transmission system in Ontario. You're already seeing situations where electricity

supply has been interrupted. When are you going to take your head out of the sand, call the parties together, take some responsibility and help them find an agreement that works for the people of

Ontario?

Hon. Mr. Duncan: I don't know where that member has had his head, but I can tell you the ministry conciliators and mediators have done that on

a number of occasions.

Again, the Attorney General at the time was correct, and we are relying on the board. That is who is in place, the board that this Legislature agreed to. One

of the members is Bob Rae.

I am optimistic, and I believe in free and open collective bargaining. I believe the two sides can resolve this issue. I'm optimistic that at the appropriate

time, they will. In the interim, I'm satisfied that the contingency plan in place will maintain the service that Ontarians have come to expect from one of the most reliable systems in the

world.

The Speaker: New question.

Mr. Hampton: Again to the Premier: What really has the energy professionals baffled here is your position in terms of who should get what. You

handed your chief executive officer at Hydro One, Tom Parkinson, a 35% pay increase, plus you're going to subsidize his mortgage, but you want the people who actually work in the system, who make

the transmission system work, to take an over 11% pay cut. Can you explain this logic on behalf of the McGuinty government: The CEO gets a 35% pay increase, but the engineers who actually do the

work take an 11% pay cut?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: The Minister of Energy.

Hon. Mr. Duncan: I'm not going to even attempt to respond to the inaccuracies contained in the question, but what I do know is what is on the

record from the member. This is what the member had to say about those workers who are members of the bargaining unit who are in the $100,000-plus club. He said, "These people aren't concerned with

providing a service to the people of Ontario. They are concerned about their own salaries." We don't believe that. A number of the members of this bargaining unit have made it into that club -- a

number of them because their salaries get them there and a number of them because they work considerable overtime.

I believe that the free collective bargaining system can resolve this. I'm optimistic that it will. In the interim, I believe there is a contingency plan that

will continue to ensure Ontarians have a reliable supply of electricity as we move forward.

Mr. Hampton: It is appropriate that these workers show concern about their own salaries, particularly when the McGuinty government wants to

hand the CEO a 35% pay increase and tell them, "We're going to cut you by 11%."

It's not just Mr. Parkinson's pay increase that I find interesting. You also pay for his golf club dues at Glen Abbey. This is how they advertise it: "Canada's

no. 8 golf course. Receptive fairways. Devilishly undulating greens. Lavish meals at the spectacular Gallery Bistro and Grill." Cost to Ontario's hydro ratepayers: almost $5,000 a year. While you

cut the wages of these workers, how do you justify paying Tom Parkinson's greens fees?

Hon. Mr. Duncan: Again, unlike the member opposite, who is inconsistent in his views of these workers -- as I said, on March 31 he spoke about

them being concerned about their own salaries -- we have been consistent. The board of directors oversees not only the hiring and salary levels of the CEO but indeed bargaining with the collective

bargaining agents in place. We have confidence in that collective bargaining system. We believe in open and free collective bargaining.

I am optimistic that both sides will come to an agreement. I hope they will continue to work toward that. We have employed all the services available to us

over the last few months to ensure that we try to bring the two parties together. In the interim, while this labour situation is present, I believe there is a robust contingency plan in place that

will give Ontarians assurances that the reliability they've come to expect from Hydro One will continue to be in place.

Mr. Hampton: Once again, I just want to draw the contrast between what these people used to say a couple of years ago and what they're saying

now. I want to quote Dalton McGuinty: "We, the people of Ontario, through you, are the sole shareholders in Hydro One. Why is it that you have been so weak, so incapable of bringing the Hydro One

board to heel?" Here we have the Hydro One board handing the CEO a 35% pay increase to make him another million-dollar man, paying his greens fees at one of Canada's most illustrious golf courses,

subsidizing his house mortgage, flying him around in a helicopter for pleasure, and yet you're cutting the wages of the people who actually keep the lights on.

I say to the Premier, what happened to your promise to exercise some control over what happens at Hydro One, or is that just another forgotten promise?

Hon. Mr. Duncan: In fact, we are exercising proper leadership by entrusting the board of directors of the corporation to manage the affairs of

the corporation in a way that maximizes the benefit of the corporation to the people of Ontario through their government.

In addition to what the member said on March 31 with respect to these employees, we also shouldn't forget that, while he was the government, they laid off

10,000 employees at Hydro. Albeit that these are difficult decisions and difficult discussions, our hope is to preserve jobs and to create jobs, both at Hydro One and indeed at OPG in the future as

we move forward.

I believe the board has put forward the policy of Hydro One with respect to this particular set of negotiations. As the Premier said, I am optimistic and

remain optimistic that the two sides can resolve their differences. In the interim, I believe that the contingency plan in place should give Ontarians some comfort that the reliability of their

hydroelectric system remains in place.

HEALTH CARE

Mrs. Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener-Waterloo): My question is for the Minister of Health. Your health plan is in disarray. Yesterday the Toronto

Sun reported that a senior health ministry official has said that you will be spending $27 million to get rid of district health councils. As you know, it only costs $18 million to operate them.

Most of this money is going to pay severance to staff. This $27 million could have been spent on 13 MRIs, 27 CT scanners, 540 nurses, or treatments for a year for 90 Fabry patients.

While you are spending $27 million to eliminate DHCs, you've also spent $91 million to fire nurses. At the same time, Ontarians have paid $1.6 billion in your

illegal health tax.

Minister, why are you asking Ontarians to use their hard-earned dollars to pay your illegal health tax so you can use it to close DHCs and fire nurses?

Hon. George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): As always from that honourable member, you need five or six minutes to

untangle fact from fiction, but I'll try.

On the issue of district health councils, I'm very pleased to confirm for the honourable member -- not some unnamed source in a newspaper -- that the costs

with respect to the windup of district health councils will come in at a number in the teens, not anywhere close to the number the honourable member has predicted through an unnamed source.

With respect to the honourable member's suggestion that any dollars last year were paid to Ontario hospitals for the layoff of nurses, this is inaccurate.

She's been corrected on that point before. There is not one nurse that I've been made aware of who has been given severance from any of the figures the honourable member speaks about. However, I

would acknowledge that that honourable member, from the party that spent $400 million on severance for nurses, does know a lot about severance.

Mrs. Witmer: Despite the rhetoric coming from the Minister of Health, he should talk to the OHA and they can tell him precisely how much money

they asked for --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Order.

Mrs. Witmer: With all due respect, the Minister of Health should probably ask his staff how much money was spent providing severances to fire

nurses. The nurses have put out their own press release, and he knows that the information is different than what he said.

However, your health plan is in disarray. You've now shut down the DHCs, and at the same time there is no health services planning in the province because your

new LHINs are not up and running as you planned. According to the senior official from the ministry, "All of the ... planning has stopped. Nobody's doing planning in hospitals because they don't

know what direction the LHINs will take.... One of the abject fears that folks in the ministry have is, `Please don't let us have another SARS right now.'" Minister, why are you putting patient

safety at risk, and can you tell us when your LHINs will be approved and operational?

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: I'm happy to address any of the questions the honourable member speaks about, and I'd encourage her to raise them. But

I'm not surprised that that honourable member, operating off the quote of some unnamed person who may be -- who knows -- a former Conservative staffer, would dare to raise the spectre of a lack of

preparation for SARS. All I can say is, if the honourable member seriously thinks that's the case, or if that unnamed person honestly thinks that's the case, they should send a note with all the

detail they have down to Justice Archie Campbell, because he's the one who is working hard on this issue and giving significant advice and direction to the government. Here's what he said on April

11: "The government accepted the recommendations and committed itself to implement them in an ambitious three-year program.... Improvements have so far been significant."

POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS

Ms. Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): My question is for the Premier. Contributions from golf-club-swinging energy company executives

accounted for roughly 35% of all money donated to Energy Minister Dwight Duncan's riding association last year. An energy watchdog is quoted in today's Windsor Star as saying, "Dwight Duncan is

just picking up where the Conservatives left off.... the smell of all this is quite bad."

Premier, before the election you said, "The Harris-Eves government gave money too much influence and citizens too little." Why are things as bad as ever?

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Could you address members by riding rather than by name --

Ms. Churley: I was quoting.

The Speaker: -- regardless of the quote.

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): To the Attorney General.

Hon. Michael Bryant (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs, minister responsible for democratic renewal): We introduced

legislation, which I understand is being debated in the House today. If we can get the New Democratic Party and the Progressive Conservative Party to agree, we can get this passed today. I think

it's important for people to understand that this bill is the most ambitious, open and transparent effort to bring on real-time disclosure that has happened in the history of the Commonwealth and

maybe the world. I say to the member opposite, just say yes. Let's agree to pass this now so that we can get real-time disclosure tomorrow.

Ms. Churley: Today's Windsor Star presents a long list of private power merchants and other corporate interests who bought access to your

minister -- Calpine, AIM PowerGen, Bruce Power -- and they didn't even have space for some others, like former Enron lobbyist Aleck Dadson, Accenture lobbyist Barry Campbell, and the vice-president

of the Detroit-Windsor tunnel, who sent his money in from south of the border. One of those donors is quoted as saying that buying access is simply part of politics. He says, "The reality is, you

get to talk about issues that are bothering you as a company or bothering you as a person. That's democracy."

Premier, is this democracy in Dalton McGuinty's Ontario, and don't you think the minister should give the money back?

Hon. Mr. Bryant: Obviously, the Minister of Energy ensured that the fairness commissioner oversaw all energy RFPs, as one would expect to

happen. I just say to the member opposite that the reason real-time disclosure is important is that it will mean that everybody will understand who is giving to whom in real time.

For example, Eleanor Clitheroe is well known to have given $5,000 to the New Democratic Party -- I don't know if she gave to our party or not. In 1994, when

the NDP were in power, cabinet colleagues emphasized in their good-news announcements, the centrepiece of which was a Windsor visit, a provincial fundraising dinner.

Here's what Sid Ryan said. He said it was ironic that this dinner was being held for business people who were "begging" trade unionists to buy tables to

support the NDP government. "That just highlights the betrayal" of the way in which the NDP talk and yet the amount of money which they raise. The point --

The Speaker: The point is that your time is up.

ADOPTION

Ms. Monique M. Smith (Nipissing): My question is for the Minister of Children and Youth Services. Minister, as Hillary Clinton wrote, "It

takes a village to raise a child." You've been talking for some time now about the need to help Ontario's 9,000 crown wards find a permanent home. We all know how important a stable and loving

permanent family is for the well-being of a child, but too many children and youths do not have this type of home to grow up in. I understand that, because of the legal and structural barriers,

fewer than 10% of all children currently in the care of children's aid can be adopted. That kind of instability affects every child's life.

Minister, you've been talking for some time now about the need to help these children find a permanent home. Can you explain how the changes you have

introduced today will help these children?

Hon. Marie Bountrogianni (Minister of Children and Youth Services, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration): There are approximately 9,000

crown wards in Ontario; 75% of them have access orders. The majority of those access orders are never accessed. We've introduced legislation today which would remove some of the obstacles for

children's aid societies so that it's not so black and white -- either you have a family or you don't -- so that these children who right now are restricted because of access orders can have

permanent families, and so that there's an agreement between the birth mother and the adoptive parents for some sort of contact or access, if agreed upon, so those children can have families. This

is long overdue. Seventy-five per cent of 9,000 is 6,500, approximately. Those children cannot ever be adopted at present. We hope that, with the present legislation, we can give permanent families

for these children. We all know that the best prognosis for a healthy future is a good, stable family.

Ms. Smith: Members of my family, some friends, and many constituents who have tried to adopt from a children's aid society have told me that

it's a cumbersome and inconsistent process. In some cases they must file an application form and a complete home study for each children's aid society that they approach. This is a time-consuming

and onerous process, and these barriers often discourage people from adopting in Ontario. With 9,000 children in the care of children's aid societies, we need to find some way to encourage and

promote adoption in Ontario. Can you tell us what steps you are taking today that will make it easier for these prospective parents to adopt right here in Ontario?

Hon. Mrs. Bountrogianni: We are actually standardizing the application process for adoption so it is identical no matter where you are in

Ontario. It will even be the same for private adoption, so prospective parents will not have to go through the screening every time they speak to a different agency. We're already working through

the Adoption Council of Ontario and the Ontario Association of Children's Aid Societies to develop a province-wide Web site that will help societies to match children who are available for adoption

and would-be parents. For those parents who need it, we're going to provide some post-adoption support so that families who adopt a child from a children's aid society aren't suddenly left on their

own. I believe that by making adoption more flexible for children and friendlier for parents, the result will be more children in permanent, stable and loving homes.

GREENBELT COUNCIL

Mr. Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln): I have a question for the Minister of Agriculture and Food. Minister, Ron Bonnett, president of the OFA, wrote

to Premier McGuinty on March 28 of this year and copied you with respect to the greenbelt advisory council. In his letter he made the point that that council should "reflect proportional

representation from the largest group of land holders in the greenbelt proper. For this reason, we are requesting a majority percentage of farmer representation on this committee." Do you agree

with Mr. Bonnett's point?

Hon. Steve Peters (Minister of Agriculture and Food): Certainly, as we move forward with the greenbelt through the Ministry of Municipal

Affairs and Housing, first and foremost, unlike the Tories who want to pave, we want to save land in this province. That's all they want to do.

I think that when one looks at the representation that is on this Greenbelt Council, it is very reflective of agriculture. We have a farmer who is there from

the Durham region. We have a grape grower who is represented on the Greenbelt Council. We have representation from the University of Guelph, the foremost leaders in agriculture. We've listened, we

wanted to make sure that there was an agricultural voice there, and I think we've very clearly demonstrated that agriculture is being heard.

Mr. Hudak: With respect to the Minister of Agriculture, he has a choice: He can speak on behalf of farmers or he can speak on behalf of the

Dalton McGuinty government. I guess he's made that decision, by the way he describes this greenbelt advisory committee. Certainly, the OFA put out a press release saying that they're frustrated

with the committee makeup. They're not saying the same thing you're saying, Minister; in fact, quite the opposite.

I'll tell you why farmer representation is important. Since the greenbelt act was passed, we have seen a lack of progress -- in fact, backward steps -- for the

agricultural community. There is no support plan for greenbelt farmers that has come forward. Thomas Kuegler, a grape farmer in Niagara-on-the-Lake, has said that the greenbelt act is preventing

him from farming his 22-acre parcel that he wishes to farm. In Pickering and Durham, when it comes to the agricultural preserve, those communities are in full rebellion against the government.

Clearly, a strong agricultural voice is necessary. Will you fight for a majority representation of farmers and support the call for subcommittees for Niagara and the Holland Marsh area, the two

specialty crop areas, in my private member's bill, Bill 200?

Hon. Mr. Peters: It just amazes me, the richness of what comes out of this member's mouth. He talks about preserving agricultural land. What

was one of the first things the Tories did? They cancelled the Niagara tender fruit land protection program. So how can he stand up here today and say that we need to be compensating there for

farmers? There was a program in place, and the Tories cancelled it.

We have Howie Herrema, a full-time farmer from Uxbridge; Clay Switzer, former Deputy Minister of Agriculture and food in this province and dean of the Ontario

Agricultural College; Mrs. Donna Lailey, a grape grower in Niagara-on-the-Lake. I'm sure that everyone has a great deal of confidence in the expertise, the leadership, that Dr. Elgie is going to

show with this initiative. Unlike the Tories, who want to pave, we want to save agricultural land.

WEST NILE VIRUS

Ms. Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): I have a question to the Minister of Health. Minister, here's a letter to you, dated May 27, 2005,

from Dr. Fiona Hunter, a medical entomologist specializing in West Nile virus at Brock University. She says, "The 2005 West Nile virus mosquito program has the potential to be a disaster because of

a serious potential conflict of interest. The private companies hired to test mosquitoes for West Nile viruses are strongly linked to members of mosquito-killing pesticides. Some have been listed

and linked to false positive results reported. Companies that stand to gain financially from selling pesticides shouldn't be doing the testing." I agree.

Minister, why are pesticide companies hired to do the testing for West Nile? Isn't this a conflict of interest?

Hon. George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I appreciate the question from the honourable member. I had a chance to see

the media transcript from the story. This follows a practice that was in place last year. The ministry does not involve itself in organizing for these. This is done by public health units, which we

fund to conduct this testing. Accordingly, they have the opportunity to contract with a variety of different suppliers of this service. In any instance where they might choose to contract with a

supplier that doesn't meet the honourable member's test, I just want the honourable member to be aware that public health units, by the directives it's necessary for them to follow, must take

conflict of interest into consideration. So I think there is adequate protection there for the public. We feel very secure with the choices that public health units are making in Ontario.

Ms. Churley: Your own Web site, HealthyOntario.com, cites Dr. Hunter as being on the front lines in the battle against West Nile virus in

Ontario. But her letter says that she has been ignored by your ministry and by you. She has written to you eight times over the last two months and has had absolutely no response. She says that the

privatization and conflicts of interest began under your watch last year.

Mosquito season is upon us. Some mosquitoes could be carrying the deadly West Nile virus again this year. Dr. Hunter wrote to you two months ago about

privatization and conflicts of interest. You do have some say and control over this. You'd better have some say and control over this. It is a conflict of interest. Why have you ignored her

concerns?

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: I don't think that's an accurate characterization. If the honourable member wishes to make that assertion, I suppose it's

appropriate for her to do so; it's her choice. The reality is, as I said in my earlier answer, this is a policy that's been in place since last year. It's a policy that is designed to have adequate

protection around the idea of conflict of interest. No one has presented information with respect to the challenges associated with the way the program operated last year.

I'm very proud of the role that our public health units are playing in the front-line defences for the public around West Nile virus. We continue to support

that with a very significant contribution of operating resource. As always in battles with respect to public health, we continue to rely upon those front-line health care providers, our public

health units across the province of Ontario, and we invest in them a significant degree of confidence.

GOVERNMENT SPENDING

Ms. Caroline Di Cocco (Sarnia-Lambton): My question is to the Minister of Finance. Our government's recent budget presented a balanced and

responsible plan to return the province to fiscal health while making key investments in health and education. Eliminating the structural deficit is a responsible part of our strategy. In the three

years before we took office, spending was increasing by 21% while tax revenues declined by 0.7%. We've reduced or flatlined spending to below the rate of inflation in 15 ministries.

I know the minister has been meeting with investors that buy and with the agencies that rate our bonds. Can the minister update the House about the status of

our bond ratings?

Hon. Greg Sorbara (Minister of Finance): I appreciate the question. I should tell you that I feel, given the time of year, a little bit like

the student at the end of the school year coming home with a pretty good report card.

In fact, the Dominion Bond Rating Service actually upgraded the trend of our --

Applause.

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): What did they say?

Hon. Mr. Sorbara: In their report, they referred to faster progress in restoring fiscal soundness than had been originally anticipated. They

also pointed to increased confidence that the fiscal recovery plan can be successfully implemented by the province. We were very, very happy indeed.

Ms. Di Cocco: Outside agencies are affirming the prudent management of our government, but other financial institutions have also commented on

our approach. The Bank of Montreal has said, "The economic and fiscal projections appear to be reasonably conservative, raising the possibility that the province will better its targets." The Royal

Bank noted, "To its credit, the Ontario government is taking a careful and prudent approach to a balanced budget." The TD Bank said, "The general thrust of the budget is to be commended."

This is about good management, so I ask the minister, how does our record compare to that of the former government from 1990 to 2003?

Mr. Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): Great question.

Hon. Mr. Sorbara: My friend from Trinity-Spadina says, "Great question," and it is a great question.

I would just point out that we appreciate the comments of objective entities that have no particular axe to grind, but it just points out to us that we have a

whole lot more work to do.

In response to my colleague's question on how we compare to the period 1990 to 2003, I don't think we can comment much on the NDP period in government. They

weren't prepared to form government. It was a surprise to them. They weren't ready, and their sins should now be forgiven.

Let's deal with the Tories for a second, though, from 1995 to 2003. It's clear that the economic policies that dominated that era led to a $48-billion increase

in the public debt, shrinking revenues, and a deterioration of public services that is unprecedented in our history.

PAROLE SYSTEM

Mr. Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): My question today is for the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services. Minister, I

understand that you are putting the final touches on a plan that will have the National Parole Board take over the responsibilities of the Ontario Board of Parole. Why are you jeopardizing public

safety for the sake of saving dollars?

Hon. Monte Kwinter (Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services): We have a responsibility, and it's interesting to note that when

the Leader of the Opposition responded in the budget debate, he was critical that we hadn't looked at every single item in our ministries. We are looking at every single item in our ministries to

see if in fact we can provide better service for the people of Ontario without in any way minimizing safety. That decision has not been made, but we are looking at everything in our ministry,

because we have a very large program delivery ministry. Just so the member will know, the three largest expenditures made by program delivery are the teachers' pension plan and OPSEU's pension

plan, correctional service and the OPP. Those are the three major program delivery parts of the government. I have an obligation, as the minister, to take a look at two of those three, to make sure

that we are getting value for money and doing what is right for the people of Ontario.

Mr. Dunlop: Minister, I've been informed by staff within your ministry that about 50% of the offenders who go before the National Parole Board

for hearings are released,

whereas about 14% to 15% of offenders are released after the hearings at the provincial parole board. Clearly, they have been much more lenient at the federal level.

Minister, we have many examples of National Parole Board mistakes. We could ask the family of Christopher Stephenson, who was brutally murdered by Joseph

Fredericks, and ask the family of parole officer Louise Pargeter, who was brutally murdered by Eli Ulayuk just last fall; or how about Douglas Moore, who is the prime suspect in the deaths of

René Charlebois and Robert Grewal? Minister, we have many other examples of errors and blunders by the National Parole Board. This is a very serious community safety issue.

Minister, how are you going to assure this House and the families of Ontario that your $3-million savings won't end up in tragic blunders by the National

Parole Board?

Hon. Mr. Kwinter: Again, the member is predicting that this is going to happen. That decision has not been made. But I think it's also

important that you can't compare one with the other. The provincial correctional service houses those offenders who have been sentenced to two years less a day. There are no murderers in there;

there are none of these people who are there. These are people who, on average, serve 54 days of their sentence, which means that very, very few of them even appear before parole boards. Most of

them are on probation as opposed to parole. So to compare one with the other isn't reasonable and it isn't responsible.

I can tell you that nothing will be done in this ministry unless it protects the public safety and it makes sense from a taxpayer's point of view.

HIGHWAY 406

Mr. Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): My question is for the Minister of Transportation. Minister, a horrible crash last Thursday on the two-lane

portion of Highway 406 down in Niagara leaves one driver still in very serious condition in a Hamilton hospital. The stats show that the accidents and fatalities on the two-lane portion are twice

what they are on the four-lane portion. Do you agree that the four-laning of the 10.8-kilometre

section of 406 is essential to make it safer, among other things?

Hon. Harinder S. Takhar (Minister of Transportation): I had the chance to meet the chair of the region of Niagara and also other

representatives from that region. We feel that Highway 406 is an important corridor in that region and that we need to move ahead in order to protect the economic viability of that region, and we

feel some improvements are needed on that highway.

Mr. Kormos: Minister, if you met with Chairman Partington, you also know that folks down in Niagara region who agree with the goal of

preserving scarce and valuable agricultural land believe that the four-laning and extension of 406 is critical to move development up on to what we call the clay belt and away from tender fruit

land and prime agricultural land. Do you agree that the extension and four-laning of Highway 406 is an important and effective tool in your greenbelt policy?

Hon. Mr. Takhar: I already indicated that Highway 406 is an important corridor in the region of Niagara. We feel it's important for us to

protect the economic viability of that region, and we need to do something with the 406. We have already done the design work on that region, and we hope to make some announcements in the very near

future.

WORKPLACE SAFETY

Mr. Peter Fonseca (Mississauga East): My question is for the Minister of Labour. Graduations and the summer job season are approaching. Young

workers will be starting their summer jobs, and recent graduates will be entering the workforce.

Statistics show that workers are six times more likely to be injured during their first month on the job than at any other time in their work lives. More than

49,000 young workers were injured, and some even killed, on the job last year.

There can be no doubt that this government has taken significant steps to improve the health and safety of Ontario's workers. We've hired 100 new health and

safety inspectors, and we're going to be hiring 100 more.

Given the special situation of young workers and this government's clear emphasis on workers' health and safety, can you please tell me if there are

initiatives that focus specifically on the health and safety of young workers?

Hon. Christopher Bentley (Minister of Labour): I'd like to thank the member from Mississauga East for the question about young workers' health

and safety. He has been a tireless advocate for safety and a tireless advocate for prevention activities in general in his many roles before the House.

He correctly outlines the challenge: Although a lot of good work has been done, 49,000 young people are still injured in workplace incidents every year. That

is a horrible statistic.

This morning, I had the good fortune to be in the riding of Kitchener Centre with my colleague from Kitchener Centre, Mr. Milloy.

Mr. John R. Baird (Nepean-Carleton): Name him.

Hon. Mr. Bentley: I just did.

We were announcing a new initiative to enforce health and safety rules. In particular, we were announcing an initiative that I'll talk about further in the

supplementary.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Let's get some order on the other side.

Mr. Fonseca: Maybe the opposition doesn't care about young workers, but I do, and I know the hard-working minister does too.

Minister, I'm glad to see the focus on enforcing the health and safety of young workers. As you have indicated, on-the-job training and supervision, with a

focus on health and safety, are crucial. I'm wondering if there's also an opportunity to learn about health and safety even before young people leave the classroom and start their careers,

volunteer work, co-op placements or summer jobs. Can you tell us about the initiatives to educate students about the importance of health and safety before they leave school?

Hon. Mr. Bentley: When I was in Kitchener Centre with Mr. Milloy this morning talking about young workers' health and safety, we talked about

two things: first of all, the extra information available to young workers -- for example, through the Live Safe! Work Smart! program. It was started a few years ago. It's a program in all high

school curricula in the province. Recently, we announced an improvement to that program -- namely, the Live Safe! Work Smart! Special Needs Resource -- which provides additional health and safety

information to workers with special challenges or workers who actually learn in a different way.

At the same time, at the member's insistence, we also addressed an additional means of getting businesses to understand their responsibilities. We have

enhanced enforcement. We've got five tips:

-- Is your workplace ready for the workers?

-- Are the workers ready?

-- Is there an orientation program?

-- Is there a training program?

-- Are there tips for supervisors?

It was a great morning.

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

Mr. John O'Toole (Durham): My question is to the Minister of Energy. As you probably know, we're entering the critical period of summer demand

for energy. You should be aware that today's projected peak is in the order of 23,000-plus megawatts. At 11 o'clock we were already at 21,500 megawatts.

The issue is that this is at over 10 cents per kilowatt hour. Your reckless plan to close the five coal plants and eliminate as much as 25% of generating

capacity will have a terrifying impact on the bottom line. The president of the Sarnia-Lambton Chamber of Commerce, Garry McDonald, has stated that the business community is concerned that

electricity will drastically rise in price if coal is abandoned by 2007. Minister, can you be honest about Sarnia-Lambton, Nanticoke and the coal plants in Ontario? Is it your plan to go ahead with

the closure of those plants without sufficient replacement power on-line?

Hon. Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): Only the Tories would advocate keeping coal-fired plants open on a smog day

in Ontario. My goodness.

But to address his question specifically, he referenced the high peak point price today. He probably doesn't understand how it works. The fact is that prices

are down almost 19% since we took office.

The other point is that, unlike his government, this government is moving to bring on an abundance of new, clean, run-of-the-river hydroelectric opportunities

not only in northern Ontario, but indeed importing electricity from northern Manitoba. In fact, we're bidding on the Lower Churchill opportunity in Newfoundland.

I urge restraint. I urge that people understand the true cost associated with coal-powered generation: more than $4.4 billion to our health care system, to

children's health. Let me be unequivocal and say without hesitation that, unlike the member opposite, this government has laid out a plan for closing down all of the coal-fired generation stations

in this province. We believe it's prudent, we believe it's in the public interest, and we believe it's a cost-saving measure that will save this province tens and hundreds of millions of dollars

over time.

PETITIONS

LEGAL DRINKING AGE

Mrs. Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener-Waterloo): This is a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario from the Wilfrid Laurier University

students' union.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas most Ontario students now begin post-secondary education at 18;

"Whereas the age of majority in Ontario is 18;

"Whereas an increased drinking age leads to more underground drinking;

"Whereas an increased drinking age leads to an increase in illegal drug consumption;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to lower the legal drinking age to 18."

HIGHWAY 406

Mr. Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the province's greenbelt legislation and Places to Grow plan have significantly restricted how Niagara can grow and develop; and

"Whereas the development-ready land in Niagara's southern tier lacks adequate transportation infrastructure to facilitate economic development; and

"Whereas the 406 highway from Beaverdams Road in Thorold to East Main Street in Welland is one of the busiest two-lane highways in Ontario, with 27,000 cars

daily; and

"Whereas the accident and fatality rate double on the two-lane stretch of the 406 highway in comparison to the four-lane segment of the 406 highway; and

"Whereas the expansion of the 406 highway will attract much-needed new investment and job opportunities for Niagara; and

"Whereas the government of Ontario will receive compensation in 2005 from the federal government in the form of a percentage of the gas tax to be applied

towards transportation and infrastructure projects;

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

"That the Premier of Ontario together with the Minister of Transportation fulfill their existing commitment and place the expansion of the 406 highway in the

capital plan for infrastructure projects in Ontario in 2005."

CREDIT VALLEY HOSPITAL

Mr. Jeff Leal (Peterborough): I have a petition to the Ontario Legislative Assembly today regarding the Credit Valley Hospital capital

improvements program. I'm doing this on behalf of a friend, Elva Waldron, who lives at Idlewilde Crescent in Mississauga. I always like to try to help those people out.

"Whereas some 20,000 people each year choose to make their home in Mississauga, and a Halton-Peel District Health Council capacity study stated that the Credit

Valley Hospital should be operating 435 beds by now and 514 beds by 2016; and

"Whereas the Credit Valley Hospital bed count has remained constant at 365 beds since its opening in November 1985, even though some 4,800 babies are delivered

each year at the Credit Valley Hospital in a facility designed to handle 2,700 births annually; and

"Whereas donors in Mississauga and the regional municipalities served by the Credit Valley Hospital have contributed more than $41 million of a $50-million

fundraising objective, the most ambitious of any community hospital in the country, to support the construction of an expanded facility able to meet the needs of our community;

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

"That the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care undertake specific measures to ensure the allocation of capital funds for the construction of A and H block at

Credit Valley Hospital to ensure that the ongoing acute care needs of the patients and families served by the hospital are met in a timely and professional manner, to reduce wait times for patients

in the hospital emergency department, and to better serve patients and the community in Halton and Peel regions by reducing severe overcrowding in the labour and delivery suite."

I will affix my signature to this petition and give it to Devon to deliver to the table.

SCHOOL FACILITIES

Mr. John O'Toole (Durham): It's my pleasure to present a petition on behalf of Dani Robins, Alan Robins and Logan Robins from my constituency,

along with other people.

"Whereas the Ontario Street Public School community in Clarington wishes to alert the Minister of Education to a damaging situation with respect to

overcrowding and underfunding at this French immersion school" in Bowmanville; "and

"Whereas Ontario Street Public School is being penalized because it is located in the fast-growing urban centre of Clarington but is part of a larger ... board

that includes rural communities with declining enrolments and less access to provincial funding; and

"Whereas despite its exceptional track record, Ontario Street Public School's French immersion program is being reduced from a K-8 to a K-6 program, with a cap

on K-6 enrolment and grade 7 and 8 students being temporarily housed off-site for a third consecutive year; and

"Whereas our single greatest need is in adequate housing of a program that has seen superior academic achievement and a unique community culture building on

strong values of success; and

"Whereas the entire Ontario Street school community is committed to working with the Minister of Education and all parties to explore a fair, practical and

effective solution;

"Therefore we, the undersigned parents, students and friends of Ontario Street Public School respectfully petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as

follows:

"To grant special consideration for a review of funding options that will protect and develop the existing K-8 French immersion single-track program at Ontario

Street Public School in Bowmanville.

"To undertake the necessary actions immediately, in the context of the current budget, to resolve the urgent accommodation needs of Ontario Street Public

School in the shortest time possible."

I'm pleased to endorse this petition and give this to Alecia to bring to the table on my behalf.

FALLSVIEW CASINO

Mr. Kim Craitor (Niagara Falls): I'm pleased to submit this petition. It's signed by a large number of people from my riding, including Sheila

Hosking, Carol Maiden and Pat Mangoff. The petition reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Falls Management Group made numerous commitments to the city of Niagara Falls when it was awarded the Fallsview Casino contract by the government

of the day in 1998,

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

"Niagara Falls residents are still waiting for the on-site amenities and the off-site attractors. We believe that the government of Ontario should ensure that

all promises made at the time of the awarding of the contract be fulfilled."

I'm pleased to present this, and I have affixed my signature in support of this petition.

CHIROPRACTIC SERVICES

Mr. Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln): I'm pleased to present a petition signed by many folks in Niagara, including Nelson Gaidola from Grimsby and

Sammy Halls on Fly Road. It reads as follows;

"To: Legislative Assembly of Ontario

"Re: Support for chiropractic services in Ontario health insurance plan:

"Whereas,

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

need;

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

physician offices and emergency departments;

"Elimination of OHIP coverage is expected to save $93 million in expenditures on chiropractic treatment, at a cost to government of over $200 million in other

health care costs; and

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

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

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

In support, I affix my signature.

SENIORS' TRANSIT PASS

Mr. Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): This petition regards free TTC passes for senior citizens and it reads as follows:

"To the Parliament of Ontario and" especially "minister responsible for seniors:

"Whereas most seniors live on fixed incomes which are eroding every year due to inflation costs and other necessary expenses;

"Whereas most seniors have their freedom severely restricted when unable to go about their daily business, which includes public transit;

"Whereas most seniors should be encouraged to live active, healthy lives -- visiting friends, relatives, going shopping etc.;

"Whereas other jurisdictions already provide free local transit passes to seniors, namely, many cities in the USA;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, strongly urge the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing and responsible for seniors to ensure that seniors be granted a

free TTC pass, and/or introduce legislation that will force the local Toronto Transit Commission to issue free TTC passes."

Since I agree with this petition 100%, I will therefore sign it.

JUSTICE SYSTEM

Ms. Laurie Scott (Haliburton-Victoria-Brock): "In-Depth Investigation of the Judicial System

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Honourable Michael Bryant is minister responsible for democratic renewal;

"Whereas the Honourable Michael Bryant, Attorney General of Ontario, is elected to safeguard our justice system on behalf of the people of Ontario;

"Whereas the ministry of our Attorney General may not be aware of the serious and important issues facing individuals involved in areas of the justice system,

even though the Attorney General's ministry is continually monitoring,

"Therefore we, the undersigned, ask the Honourable Michael Bryant, Attorney General, for his in-depth investigation of the Ontario judicial system and make the

public aware of his findings immediately."

Signed by Albert Werry from Inniskillin.

CREDIT VALLEY HOSPITAL

Mr. Bob Delaney (Mississauga West): I have a petition here signed by a number of people in Mississauga, including Ines Wiehr of Battleford

Road in Meadowvale and Rena Turpin of Buttonbush Crescent in Erin Mills. It reads as follows:

"To the Ontario Legislative Assembly:

"Whereas some 20,000 people each year choose to make their home in Mississauga, and a Halton-Peel District Health Council capacity study stated that the Credit

Valley Hospital should be operating 435 beds by now and 514 beds by 2016; and

"Whereas the Credit Valley Hospital bed count has remained constant at 365 beds since its opening in November 1985, even though some 4,800 babies are delivered

each year at the Credit Valley Hospital in a facility designed to handle 2,700 births annually; and

"Whereas donors in Mississauga and the regional municipalities served by the Credit Valley Hospital have contributed more than $41 million of a $50-million

fundraising objective, the most ambitious of any community hospital in the country, to support the construction of an expanded facility able to meet the needs of our community;

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

"That the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care undertake specific measures to ensure the allocation of capital funds for the construction of A and H block at

Credit Valley Hospital to ensure that the ongoing acute care needs of the patients and families served by the hospital are met in a timely and professional manner, to reduce wait times for patients

in the hospital emergency department, and to better serve patients and the community in Halton and Peel regions by reducing severe overcrowding in the labour and delivery suite."

I'm pleased to sign this petition, to support it and to ask Benjamin to carry it for me.

TUITION

Mrs. Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener-Waterloo): A petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario from the Ontario Undergraduate Student

Alliance:

"Whereas tuition fees in Ontario are already the second-highest in the country;

"Whereas all willing and qualified students in Ontario must be guaranteed equitable access to university;

"Whereas the provincial government has a clear responsibility to provide appropriate public funding to universities as an investment in the social and economic

viability of Ontario;

"Whereas the provincial government, not any individual post-secondary institution, has a social responsibility to ensure affordability by controlling

costs;

"Whereas the costs of post-secondary education must be predictable to ensure that students are able to save for and afford to go to university; and

"Whereas the deregulation of tuition fees hurts Ontario students;

regulating all tuition fees in Ontario."

GO TRANSIT TUNNEL

Mr. Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): This petition is addressed to the Parliament of Ontario, the minister of infrastructure services and the

Minister of Transportation, and I know you're interested in finding this petition of use:

"Whereas GO Transit is presently planning to tunnel in an area just south of St. Clair Avenue West and west of Old Weston Road, making it easier for GO trains

to pass a major rail crossing; and

"Whereas TTC is presently planning a TTC right-of-way along all of St. Clair Avenue West, including the bottleneck caused by the dilapidated St. Clair-Old

Weston Road bridge; and

"Whereas this bridge ... will be: (1) too narrow for the planned TTC right-of-way, since it will leave only one lane of traffic; (2) it is not safe for

pedestrians (it's about 50 metres long). It's dark and slopes on both east and west sides creating high banks for 300 metres; and (3) it creates a divide, a no man's land, between Old Weston Road

and Keele Street. (This was acceptable when the area consisted entirely of slaughterhouses, but now the area has 900 new homes);

"Therefore we, the undersigned, demand that GO Transit extend the tunnel beyond St. Clair Avenue West so that trains will pass under St. Clair Avenue West thus

eliminating this eyesore of a bridge with its high banks and blank walls. Instead it will create a dynamic, revitalized community enhanced by a beautiful continuous cityscape with easy traffic

flow."

Again, I'm delighted to sign this petition.

REGIONAL CENTRES FOR THE

DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

Mr. Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): It's a petition to pu