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

March 4, 1997

36th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

L172 - Tue 4 Mar 1997 / Mar 4 Mar 1997

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

NORTHWESTERN ONTARIO

SCHOOL TOUR CAMPAIGN

JAKE TERMORSHUZEN

MUNICIPAL REFERENDUM

SARNIA RIDING

MUNICIPAL REFERENDUM

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

ELAINE BURSZTYN

ESTIMATES

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

ORAL QUESTIONS

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

EDUCATION REFORM

COURT SYSTEM

SCHOOL BOARDS

HEALTH SERVICES RESTRUCTURING COMMISSION

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

PETITIONS

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

DRINKING AND DRIVING

HOSPITAL FINANCING

EDUCATION LEGISLATION

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

DRINKING AND DRIVING

HOSPITAL FINANCING

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

DRINKING AND DRIVING

EDUCATION REFORM

FIRE SAFETY

DRINKING AND DRIVING

HEALTH CARE WORKERS

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

HOSPITAL FINANCING

FIRE SAFETY

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

4588 BATHURST ACT, 1997

750 SPADINA AVENUE ASSOCIATION ACT, 1997

OPPOSITION DAY

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

The House met at 1331.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

NORTHWESTERN ONTARIO

Mr Michael Gravelle (Port Arthur): I want to address my statement directly to the Premier today. This past weekend members of the Thunder Bay District Municipal League overwhelmingly supported a resolution that called on their membership to look into the pros and cons of forming a union with the province of Manitoba.

A radical step, you might say, but one that was prompted by an extreme level of frustration being felt by our municipal leaders in northwestern Ontario. Frustration has been building as this government and the Premier continue their assault on the programs and policies that once made this province the envy of all our provincial counterparts.

The final straw was the massive downloading on our municipalities that will sadly define this special session of the Legislature.

So it was, in an attempt to do something to stop this rampaging government, that Terrace Bay town council took the dramatic step of forwarding this resolution to the membership of the municipal league, a resolution that will now go forward for discussion to the annual meeting of the Northwestern Ontario Municipal Association in May.

Premier, you may wish to continue to arrogantly dismiss this action by our municipal leaders, but frankly, you simply cannot. Our mayors, reeves and councillors are simply doing their job by fighting to protect their citizens from the huge tax increases your dumping will inevitably produce.

Premier, what can you do? First of all, you can apologize to Reeve Ziegler for your rude and dismissive comments and you can directly face up to this issue by attending the NOMA convention in Fort Frances the first weekend in May. If northern Ontario really matters to this government, now is the time to --

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Thank you. Statements. Member for Algoma.

SCHOOL TOUR CAMPAIGN

Mr Bud Wildman (Algoma): I rise to encourage all MPPs to attend the school day with the Ontario Public School Teachers' Federation. On March 21 all MPPs are being invited to attend school for a day, along with the Ontario Public School Teachers' Federation.

The federation is concerned that few MPPs have a real understanding of what is happening in the schools and believes that a school visit would provide the opportunity to witness firsthand the challenges facing public education and to discuss with school staff and parents their concerns about the impact of anticipated future education cutbacks.

The school visit on the 21st is planned as a positive educational opportunity for MPPs and other community leaders, and an opportunity to raise public awareness about the extent to which important educational programs are at risk as a result of the government's changes in education and cutbacks in funding.

I challenge the members of the government side to go beyond the ledger analysis of education provided by the minister in order to see the real face of education in Ontario. Go to school on the 21st and get a bit of education about our education system.

JAKE TERMORSHUZEN

Mr Peter L. Preston (Brant-Haldimand): I rise this afternoon to honour Mr Jake Termorshuzen, Cayuga and District Lions Club citizen of the year. A husband and father of three, I can't think of anyone more deserving to be named citizen of the year.

Jake joined the Ontario Provincial Police in 1967, and in 1970 was assigned to Expo '70 in Japan, one of 14 constables to be chosen to provide security at the Ontario Pavilion. But it's his role of volunteer to the youth of Haldimand that exemplifies Jake's character.

Jake has been a minor hockey league coach, has been active in scouting for nine years, and has been an active member of the Haldimand Youth Soccer Club for 10 years. Jake joined the soccer club as a coach in 1987 and a year later became a member of the club executive. In 1992 he was assigned as overall project coordinator for the proposed 22-acre, eight-field Haldimand Youth Soccer Park in Cayuga. I am pleased to say that through the tireless efforts of Jake, the park is now open, providing a home for 1,200 members of the Haldimand Youth Soccer Club.

Ontario Provincial Police officers in general display a deep regard for the community, and even in this group of dedicated people Jake stands out. I am proud to be called his friend and I am doubly proud to present Jake Termorshuzen to the Legislature today.

Applause.

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Welcome.

MUNICIPAL REFERENDUM

Mr Mario Sergio (Yorkview): My statement is addressed to the Premier. Yesterday the people of Metro Toronto had their say. United with one voice, a very strong voice, their message to you and your government was clear, unequivocal and unmistakably loud. The residents of Metro Toronto have said no to Bill 103. They have said no to the process. They have said no to the unilateral actions of your government. In your own words, "Ontarians must once again feel like citizens with a stake in the public life of their province rather than as spectators who pay the bills but have little say in deciding what government does."

The people of Metro Toronto want to be part of that process. They want to have a say because they have a stake in their city. You cannot ignore the people, you cannot ignore their will, and you cannot ignore their call. They are saying withdraw Bill 103. No means no. Listen to the people and do the right thing.

Ms Marilyn Churley (Riverdale): I'm wearing today a button which says, "We Said No. Now Listen, Mike." The vote results for Metro Toronto I'll read for the record: Toronto 73.5%, North York 79.4%, Scarborough 81.5%, Etobicoke 70%, East York 80.8%, York 71.2%. A total of 76.1% voted no. Make no mistake about it, last night was an incredible victory for democracy in the Metro Toronto area.

Also make no mistake about this: Contrary to what the government is saying, that the vote was so high against the megacity because there's confusion out there and people have it all mixed up with downloading etc, the people out there are not stupid. This government tried to ram this down their throats by saying, "We'll cut red tape and get rid of duplication," and thought people would just buy it. They forgot to think that people are intelligent and, furthermore, that people have a good spirit about their community.

This isn't just about money and cutting red tape, although the government could not prove it would indeed do that; this is a message to the government that people care about their communities and want to keep their communities. We ask the government today to work with us to come to a solution --

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Thank you, member for Riverdale. I would caution the members in the House that it's out of order to wear a button. It's probably even more out of order to refer to the fact that you're wearing a button. I just caution the member for Riverdale.

SARNIA RIDING

Mr Dave Boushy (Sarnia): In my riding people have often referred to the Sarnia area as one of Ontario's best kept secrets. I'm going to blow the whistle today and let everyone know what makes our community so terrific: It's the unique and special people from all walks of life who continue to demonstrate our home-town traditions of dedication to excellence -- people like Allen Ping-Lun Ho, who came from Hong Kong in 1970 and studied accounting and business administration at Lambton College, one of Canada's most innovative learning institutions.

Our Premier, who recently honoured him with the 1996 Premier's Award, can attest to Mr Ho's exceptional career achievements at DataSar and his devotion to community service through the Rotary Club and the Lambton Chinese-Canadian Association.

Then there's our own Mother Teresa, Dr Helene Shingles, who survived Nazi-occupied Germany and now operates, without any government support, Canada's only free dental clinic for seniors with no dental insurance. Dr Shingles has received many honours and most recently was invested in the Order of Canada. She officially retired as a dentist in 1976, but now sees more than 1,000 patients a year, exemplifying Sarnia's spirit of hard work and volunteerism.

Sarnia Sting captain Trevor Letowski showcased the essential life skills of teamwork and commitment as he helped Team Canada win a fifth straight gold medal in Switzerland, a very proud and emotional moment for a hockey town like ours.

Our secret's out: If you want to see dedication, caring and community spirit, the Sarnia riding is the place to go.

MUNICIPAL REFERENDUM

Mr Joseph Cordiano (Lawrence): Last night the citizens of Metro sent a very powerful and clear message to this government: "You'd better listen to what we have to say," they said. The results were clear. They said no to your megacity in a mega no vote.

I tell the members of the government and the Minister of Municipal Affairs, who's sitting there across on the other side, you started off by saying you wouldn't listen to the results of any referenda because they would be largely irrelevant and it didn't matter. Even a few days ago, the referendum as considered by the Premier, as he said it, was put this way: "It will be a slam dunk for the no side and it doesn't really matter." Even as short as a few days ago the Premier said it won't matter.

We're saying to you today, listen very carefully. People feel threatened, and why do they feel threatened? Because you're threatening their way of life in Metro and across this province. People are saying to you, "You'd better listen to us." I tell backbenchers of the government, you'd better listen to everyone out there in your constituencies. What they're saying to you is: "Slow down. You're threatening our way of life. It's a life we've built in our communities, cities and towns right across this province." That's what this message was last night. You'd better listen.

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

Mr Tony Silipo (Dovercourt): Yesterday the people of Metropolitan Toronto sent a very clear message to the Harris government. They said very clearly that they reject the amalgamation notion this government and this minister continue to persist in. This morning our leader, Howie Hampton, and our caucus put out what we believe are constructive suggestions as to how to deal now with the reality we are faced with.

We believe there needs to be change, we believe the broad public understands and accepts the need for change, but we believe that change needs to happen in a way that involves people and involves the citizens, and in a way that deals with the very real issues we should be facing, which are, how do we govern and provide for effective services not just at the local municipal level but indeed at the regional level, and that today the region, as it applies to Toronto, is no longer just Metropolitan Toronto but is the greater Toronto area.

We have suggested and we ask the government to take seriously into account a proposal that would delay the municipal elections in the GTA for a year, that would put in place a citizens' assembly with the task of sorting out the very complicated issues that exist, but also to try to build that consensus we believe exists out there in a very real way that sorts out the governance issues at the regional level from the local level, and that brings back a report to this Legislature that could be turned into legislation to be put into law and implemented in a way that truly reflects the consensus we know can be achieved on this issue.

ELAINE BURSZTYN

Mr Joseph N. Tascona (Simcoe Centre): I'd like to offer my congratulations to Elaine Bursztyn, a teacher in my riding who recently received the Prime Minister's award for excellence in teaching.

Ms Bursztyn teaches intermediate-level science and math at Prince of Wales public school in Barrie. She holds four degrees, including a PhD in immunology. She is the author of more than 20 scientific articles and has also done post-doctoral work in Finland. On top of this expertise, Elaine Bursztyn brings to her classroom an enthusiasm for learning and an excitement about science and math, two core subjects that we know are very important to our children's success.

She readily explains that she expects her students to work very hard. They in return are learning that if you're going to do something, you may as well do it the best you possibly can the first time.

Today Elaine Bursztyn is judging projects at the Prince of Wales school science fair. I expect that many of the students embarked on their research with the same interest and enthusiasm her peers say she brings to the classroom.

Many of us can recall a teacher who made a difference, a teacher who made learning fun while challenging our minds and encouraging our success. For the students of Prince of Wales, Elaine Bursztyn is that teacher.

On behalf of my constituents, I extend our congratulations and appreciation.

ESTIMATES

Hon David Johnson (Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet, Government House Leader): Mr Speaker, I have a message from the Honourable Lieutenant Governor.

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): The Lieutenant Governor transmits estimates of certain sums required for the services of the province for the year ending March 31, 1997, and recommends them to the Legislative Assembly.

Dated Toronto, March 4, 1997.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

Hon Al Leach (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): I am here today with a message for the people of Metropolitan Toronto.

During committee hearings, at town hall meetings, in letters and phone calls to their MPPs, through public opinion surveys and in yesterday's process, the people of Metropolitan Toronto have expressed concerns on a number of different fronts.

We have been listening. Their voices were heard. We're going to reflect on the concerns we've heard and we're going to take the time to respond to make sure we have a plan that works.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Order. Can I get some order in the Legislature, please?

Hon Mr Leach: Thank you, Mr Speaker.

The comments and feedback from the people of Metro Toronto fall into our basic categories: (1) the effect of the Who Does What trades; (2) the impact the "one Toronto" proposal may have on property taxes; (3) the need to protect local communities and their distinct identities;

(4) the need to ensure that the process of reform respects principles of democracy, accountability and representative government.

We've been listening. Taking into account what we've heard, the government will work to respond to every concern.

First, Who Does What: We're working with the Association of Municipalities of Ontario towards our mutual goal of eliminating duplication and waste so that all levels of government can provide better services at lower cost to taxpayers. The joint provincial-municipal implementation teams are already making progress. We will continue to improve the Who Does What package in ways that work better for taxpayers, for local governments and for the province.

Second, local property taxes: Mayor Mel Lastman reflected the views of many when he asked for a guarantee that taxes won't go up because of Bill 103. He has suggested that such a guarantee be enshrined in legislation. While we are confident that our proposals would lead to savings and lower costs, the mayor's suggestion deserves further consideration. We want to hear from the people on whether tax stability should be guaranteed in legislation, and if so, how.

Third, community identity: Mayor Barbara Hall and many others have stressed that any change must preserve our neighbourhoods. We agree. Clearly we need to digest what we've been hearing and, working with everyone concerned, develop improvements to our proposals that will protect and preserve local communities. We will be doing so in the coming weeks.

Fourth, the process, including the role of trustees: The most consistent message from individuals appearing before the committee was that the transition and implementation process must respect local democracy and the role of representative local government. We agree. We want to work with the people of Metro Toronto and with local municipal officials on ways of ensuring a democratic and accountable process, so we will take the time to get it right.

The people have expressed concerns. We have heard their concerns and we are committed to resolving them. Over the next month we will reflect on what we've been hearing and respond with improvements that address each of their concerns. Working together, I am confident that by April we can produce a better balanced package that serves all of us.

The Speaker: Responses? Official opposition, the member for Oakwood.

Mr Mike Colle (Oakwood): I think the minister still doesn't get it. Some 76% of the voters in the six municipalities of Metro yesterday overwhelmingly said no to his megacity amalgamation. They all said no to his scheme, yet he still says he's going to barge ahead, he's still going to bulldoze ahead --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. I would ask the members, including the members for Oriole and Kingston and The Islands: Those signs are out of order. Those signs, yes. That sign too, as a matter of fact. That sign, yes; that sign, that sign. You see, all those signs are out of order, so as long as it takes for you to put them all down -- you'll notice the clock is running for your responses.

We can continue. The member for Oakwood.

Mr Colle: This minister continues to ignore and continues to lack in respect for the voters who came out and rejected his megacity. He's still going to bulldoze ahead by April 1 -- that's probably appropriate -- and ram this bill through despite the fact that people all over Metro have been meeting in church basements and in city halls, rejecting his proposal.

He hasn't been listening. He refuses to acknowledge their democratic right to be heard. They have said clearly, unequivocally, no to the amalgamation of the six cities. This minister, despite a case of contempt being found against him by you, the Speaker, despite the court's ruling that he acted illegally in making the trustees above the law, despite 76% of the people rejecting amalgamation, has the unmitigated gall to say that he's going to do it anyway. He's saying that no matter what people say, no matter how many people voted, he doesn't care. This government doesn't care.

Mike Harris and Al Leach are going to bulldoze ahead and destroy and risk one of the most vital, workable communities in all of Canada, if not North America.

This unmitigated attack on people's right to have a say in their future is being denied by this minister when they went through a process that this minister and his government tried to, first of all, discredit, saying they weren't going to listen to a referendum. Then they tried to disrupt it; even paid staffers were sent down to disrupt the voting at the city of Toronto. Now he's denying what the people have said.

Minister, look at the results. The people overwhelmingly, in the six communities, have said no, no, no to your megacity. They don't want it. They will not listen to your tinkering proposals, your quasi-community councils. They want the real thing. They want real, accountable councils. They will not stand by and allow you to try and ram this thing through even after you've lost a further mandate, because this was not in the CSR.

You, as the vice-chairman of the Trimmer commission, advocated stronger local government. Now we have over 400,000 voters in Metro going out to vote, the vast majority saying no, and you still charge ahead. No wonder people are beginning to question what happened to democracy in this province when despite votes and rulings of the court you continue to say: "I don't care. I'm going to do it anyway. I'm right. All the citizens are wrong. I'm not going to listen."

People are not going to let you get away with it. They are going to continue to meet. They will continue to organize. They will continue to fight you and Mike Harris as you try to dictate your wishes upon them. They are citizens. They are mature adults who have said no to your megacity madness. You have no right and no mandate to continue down this road. You must stop and do the right thing and pull this bill. Withdraw Bill 103 today.

Interjections.

The Speaker: I'd call you to order, but I'd have a tough time calling that a demonstration. Responses? Leader of the third party.

Mr Howard Hampton (Rainy River): It's already evident that the government caucus is not listening. They mistake "No means no" for "Go, Leafs, go." It shows you how carefully they are listening to anything people are saying, and that goes for the minister and what we've just heard today, because the minister --

Interjections.

Mr Hampton: I know the government caucus does not want to hear this. I know that. That's very clear. The minister doesn't want to hear it either, but if the minister was watching last night, he would have noticed that there was a record turnout in many of the municipalities within the boundaries of Metropolitan Toronto, and over 76% of the people turned you down. In fact, more people voted against your proposal than voted for the Progressive Conservative Party in the 1995 election. You should pay attention to that.

You should also pay attention to the fact that they didn't just indicate mild opposition; they didn't just indicate criticism of a few items. They said very clearly no to Bill 103, no to your whole process, and if you were really listening, you would acknowledge that.

You would also acknowledge that the public will was expressed last night. The public will across the municipalities in this Metropolitan area was expressed last night, and you ought to listen to the public will. That's what democracy is all about. That's what democracy involves, listening to people, but it's clear you haven't done that.

It is so sad, the path this government has had to travel to get to this point, and still they don't get it. We've had the minister cited for a prima facie case of contempt of this Legislature. We've had the government trying to use taxpayers' fax machines, breaking federal department of communications regulations regarding the use of fax machines, trying to put out a partisan campaign. We've had them trying to use taxpayers' money to sell their message. We've had them using legislative caucus print shops to print partisan Progressive Conservative Party propaganda about this.

Over and over again this government has shown contempt for the legislative process, contempt for democracy, and what do we have here today? After an overwhelming No vote, after an overwhelming expression of the public will, the minister comes in here and shows that still, once again, he is not listening; that still, once again, he does not get it.

The only thing I can say for this government is that it is somehow appropriate that this minister indicates that he wants to come back here on April 1 and try to ram this through, that he wants to start again on April Fool's Day on an agenda the people have already clearly rejected. In my view that says it all about this government: They don't want to listen to people; they don't practise democracy; they don't recognize that democracy means listening to people. So we're right back where we started from. How unfortunate.

Mr Tony Silipo (Dovercourt): Let me just say that I find it really troubling that after all that's happened, the minister would not even have the decency to refer to yesterday -- yesterday's process is what he called it. He doesn't even have the decency to call it a referendum, because that's what it was, and it was a clear expression of the citizens --

Interjections.

Mr Silipo: The response from the government caucus speaks volumes, Speaker, but I want to try in the short time that's left to reach the Premier, because it seems to me he's the only one who can bring any sense to this.

I want to say to the Premier, if I could get his attention, that we have today put forward a constructive proposal for how to get the government out of this dilemma they've painted themselves into: We believe that the establishment of a citizens' assembly with full discussion, full consultation, together with holding off one year the municipal elections in the GTA, setting up a real process, will get us out of this morass. More important, it will help us find solutions that will help us to govern the city region into the 21st century. That's what we should be doing.

We call upon the Premier to come to his senses --

The Speaker: Thank you.

ORAL QUESTIONS

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): My first question is for the Premier. Last night was one heck of a night for democracy in Ontario and the results are worth reviewing. In Toronto, of those who voted, 73.9% voted no; in Etobicoke, 69.7%; in York, 71.2%; in East York, 81.5%; in North York, 79.4%; and in Scarborough, 78.1%. Metro-wide we're talking about 76.1% of voters voting against the megacity.

Premier, you wanted a unified city and now you've got one. You've got six cities unified against the concept of a megacity, so I've got to ask you: Did you hear the roar out there last night? Did you hear it? Did you hear the strong vocal majority who shouted no, and more importantly, are you now going to listen and withdraw Bill 103?

Hon Michael D. Harris (Premier): Of course we've been listening, not only last night but during the hearing process, and the number of people, the polls that have been over the weekend -- we heard all kinds of people say: "We understand the need for reform. We understand you're the only government that's had the courage to move forward in a number of these areas." But they said: "We're concerned about taxes. We're concerned about other things."

So they've asked us to move, they've asked us to make the difficult decisions that have been postponed, but they've asked us to do so very carefully. They've asked us to take our time, they've asked us to make sure that we get it right, and indeed that's what we plan to do.

Mr McGuinty: They asked you to do one thing alone: They asked you to withdraw Bill 103. It's as simple as that.

Let's take a look at the government's record in these matters because it is far from spotless:

(1) The government tried to ram through Bill 26, the omnibus bill;

(2) we had the Minister of Municipal Affairs being found to be prima facie in contempt of this Legislature; (3) we had a judge rule that the actions involved violated the fundamental principles of responsible government.

Premier, there's only one thing you could do that I could think of that would make this matter worse, only one thing you could do to worsen the record: You could tell me you're not going to withdraw Bill 103. So tell me right now that that is not true, that in fact you've decided to withdraw Bill 103.

Hon Mr Harris: We think we still have some more consultation to do and we'd like to reflect on what we have. I can tell you that --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Premier.

Hon Mr Harris: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I can tell you that already we clearly have listened far more than you or your party or your colleagues have listened. For example, on amalgamation, people are telling us that they're worried about tax increases and service cuts, that they want to keep the unique character of their neighbourhoods, they want to have strong local representation --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. We can't continue under the process, so unless there's going to be some order, I'll have to continue getting up. Premier.

Hon Mr Harris: So I think it's important that we not only reflect on the polls that were released last weekend, which actually had some scientific basis to them, we also ought to reflect on the sentiment yesterday --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Premier.

Hon Mr Harris: As flawed as the process was, I think it's important we do reflect on the number of people who have concerns about a number of areas. I think there are some things that are important that we must understand about that. Many people were concerned about different issues, so just to simplistically postpone, put off as you people did for 10 years -- clearly we heard a message loud and clear: "Do not procrastinate, do not do nothing but listen" --

The Speaker: Thank you. Final supplementary.

Mr McGuinty: The Premier doesn't get it: No means no. It's no more complicated than that. Bill 103 is beyond redemption. It can't be revived. It's dead. The only decent and honourable thing to do now is to withdraw it and bury it. The people voted no. There is nothing left to interpret. It was simple, straightforward and unequivocal. They said they are against turning six cities into one. End of story. They don't want amendments; they want you to withdraw Bill 103.

Premier, you put forward the megacity notion and you've lost. It's time for you to pick some sides here. Either you're going to be with the people or you're going to be against them. Whose side are you on?

Hon Mr Harris: I think you will find through my whole political career, which has had some successes and some not-so-great successes, that listening carefully and being with the people and ultimately at the end of the day making difficult decisions that will bring back the heart and soul and the strength to Toronto is indeed -- people will respond to that.

What we've also found out is that they didn't respond very well to five years of Liberal disaster inaction or five years of NDP-Liberal inaction. Clearly they would like people to listen carefully, they would like a very thoughtful response, they would like the kind of government that will carefully measure what they have to say and then act in their best interests. That is a dramatic change from the 10 years of disastrous government that led to a lost decade and a backwards slide in Toronto.

The Speaker: New question. Leader of the official opposition.

Mr McGuinty: My second question is for the Premier. This from a man who travelled throughout this province and told people that he was in favour of direct democracy and that he would respect the results of referenda. That was then.

Premier, people oppose megacity because they believe it's going to lead to higher property taxes; they oppose it because they believe it's going to lead to bigger and more remote government; and they oppose it because they believe it's going to lead to a loss of sense of community, that which holds them together. They oppose your megacity, and we shouldn't overlook this, because it's contrary to everything you promised during the last election. The bottom line is that people just plain oppose megacity.

Any member of this Legislature who dares to ignore the will of the people, which has been duly expressed by way of referenda held yesterday, is putting their own political career at risk. Premier, your megacity was a mistake. Will you listen to the will of the people and will you withdraw Bill 103?

Hon Mr Harris: I want to acknowledge and agree with the leader of the Liberal Party, who said what it was that people expressed last night: They're concerned about their taxes going up, they're concerned about local government, they're concerned about all those things. We believe we can respond to those things. None of those have anything to do with whether you have one government or seven governments, but they are all, in the minds of the people who voted last night, related to making sure that whatever happens after Who Does What, whatever happens after Bill 103, whatever happens after we go from seven councils and layers of government to one, we can respond to those areas.

I agree with you. You have correctly identified what they were voting on last night. We will correctly and appropriately respond to those concerns.

Mr McGuinty: Is it any wonder that every day more and more people are losing confidence in this government? Is it any wonder? Premier, you have shown time and time again that you simply don't care about what people have got to say. Despite all the fine speeches delivered during the course of the election and prior to that about direct democracy and how you believe in the importance of referenda, you are about to ignore the clear and unequivocal results from last night's referenda.

Premier, anything short of withdrawing your megacity is going to be an affront to the people of Metropolitan Toronto. It is a complete and wanton disregard for their wishes. Some 391,689 people voted against the megacity. That's 76.1% of those who voted. We're at somewhat of a loss here. What is it going to take before you stop and listen to the majority of the people, who voted against the megacity?

Hon Mr Harris: In spite of the fact that obviously 75%, the overwhelming majority, did not vote, and in spite of the fact that those who did vote were there, in spite of all that --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order.

Hon Mr Harris: In spite of the fact that those experts on referenda and on polling would say that, unfortunately, this was a good example of how not to do it if you want people to have credibility in referendums, and in spite of the fact that Dalton McGuinty, the leader of the Liberal Party, on Focus Ontario, February 1, said, "I'm not, generally speaking, a big fan of referenda," in spite of all that, I want to say directly to those who participated in the process, we intend to listen, we intend to reflect on the messages that were sent, we intend to respond and, in the fullness of time, hopefully you can put behind you that process and maybe one day we can have meaningful referenda.

The Speaker: Final supplementary, leader of the official opposition.

Mr McGuinty: There is only one meaningful response to what happened yesterday and that is to withdraw Bill 103. Premier, my questions to you today have been about the basic functioning of a democracy, about the fundamental right of citizens to have a say in how they are governed, to decide who governs them and to have elected representatives who truly represent their concerns.

You may want to plow ahead and to ignore the results of yesterday's referenda, but I'm wondering, what about the back bench? I'm wondering, are you going to allow your back bench to respect the wishes of their constituents? Are your backbenchers going to be allowed to truly represent their constituents by voting against the megacity bill, or are you going to force them to vote against the very wishes of those who put them here in the first place?

Hon Mr Harris: I want to comment on the word "withdrew." What happened was your party for five years and the NDP for five years withdrew from responsible decision-making, you withdrew from changing the assessment system, you withdrew --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Premier.

Hon Mr Harris: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I know how difficult it is to maintain order here and I appreciate what a good job you do.

Interjections.

The Speaker: I don't think he was being provocative there. I think that's fair comment. Premier.

Hon Mr Harris: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. So it is because, during that lost decade, those 10 years when your party and the NDP withdrew from responsible government, withdrew from responsible decision-making, that's what led to commercial concentration tax, led to the deterioration of Toronto, led to jobs and investment leaving Toronto, led to massive increases in not only your own taxes but property taxes as well.

We are determined to do two things: to listen very carefully to what the people have to say, reflect on that, take our time, as we heard last night from a number of people, and make sure we get it right, right for Toronto.

The Speaker: New question. Leader of the third party.

Mr Howard Hampton (Rainy River): My question is also for the Premier. I wonder if you realize that last night 391,689 Metro Toronto people said no to your megacity? In comparison, in the last election you received the support of only 330,000 people in Metro. If that's not a direction from the people to withdraw Bill 103, your megacity bill, I don't know what is. That's an overwhelming turnout and it was an overwhelming voice of no from people.

Today, my GTA caucus colleagues and I put forward a proposal called A Greater Toronto Area for the 21st Century, a proposal that addresses the need for change while respecting people's democratic rights. Premier, it's time to respect the people's wishes and withdraw Bill 103. Will you do the honourable thing? Will you withdraw Bill 103 now?

Hon Mr Harris: I know nobody more honourable or who listens more intently than the minister, and I'm sure he can respond.

Hon Al Leach (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): What we've all heard, in the events that took place yesterday and the hearings that have taken place over the last five weeks, is that people have concerns about the changes being put forward, changes that they all agree are necessary. I think everybody agrees that the status quo is not an option. I know that the NDP have said the status quo is not an option and the Liberals have said the status quo is not an option. Change is required.

I believe that the principles behind Bill 103, when you deal solely with amalgamation, are the best option for this government and for the people of Ontario and for the people of Toronto. What has happened -- I've had so many people mention to me over the last few days, "I don't have a problem with amalgamation but I do have a problem with amalgamation and property tax reform." If we could separate those issues and deal with them -- and we're going to do that. We heard what people were saying and we're going to --

The Speaker: Thank you, Minister. Supplementary?

Mr Hampton: I asked the question of the Premier for a specific reason, because frankly, I believe this minister has been totally discredited on this issue. He has shown time and time again that he is incapable of listening to people, incapable of respecting people's democratic wishes, and he's indicated already by his statements here today that he just doesn't get it, that he's not listening to people.

I'll say this again to the Premier: Our proposal, A Greater Toronto Area for the 21st Century, is intended to work with the enormous citizen interest in municipal government. It's intended to be democratic and open. It's not a status quo proposal. It's a proposal for change based on strong, accessible, responsible local government.

Premier, you should have learned a lesson from last night. It's clear the minister won't learn any lessons, but you should have learned a lesson. Will you form a citizens' assembly, as our proposal suggests, and begin a real consultation with the people who reside in the Metropolitan Toronto and the GTA regions? Will you do that? Will you begin a real process?

Hon Mr Leach: I'm sure the member of the third party would recognize that there has been a very democratic process taking place over the last number of months: the public hearings where over 600 people have had the opportunity to come in and present their views, to point out their concerns, to offer suggestions. That democratic process has allowed for input from the people of Ontario.

On top of that, we heard the results of the process that took place yesterday. We understand that people have concerns about a number of the proposals being put forward. We know that the vast majority of them approve of moving to a single city, approve of property tax reform, approve of changes in education, approve of the disentanglement process. We know that and we're going to address those areas where they have some concern over the next three or four weeks to ensure that we slow down and we do it right. That's what we intend to do.

Mr Hampton: Every time the Premier refuses to answer and every time this minister tries to answer, they simply reinforce what everyone knows: They're not listening. If this minister had been listening he would know that overwhelmingly the people who have come before the committee have not talked about amendments to Bill 103; they have very clearly said no to 103. They don't want it. They don't believe it will work. They believe it will lead not to better conditions within the boundaries of Metropolitan Toronto, but will take people back in terms of the direction this city needs to go in.

Minister, what's so hard to figure out here is that the Premier voted in the referendum. He obviously understood the question. The question was, "Do you want a megacity or do you not want a megacity?" All those people out there understood the question as well. They voted no. We're trying to give you an opportunity here to move forward but to involve people. Will you show some humility, admit you were wrong, admit to the people you were wrong --

The Speaker: Thank you. Minister of Municipal Affairs.

Hon Mr Leach: I think what I recognize here is the frustration of the opposition in dealing with a government that has the will to get the job done. There's a government sitting across there that tried to deal with this issue for five years. They tried to deal with property tax reform and they failed. They tried to deal with disentanglement and they failed. They failed at every one of the policies that we have had the ability to get up, get on the table and get action on.

We intend to carry out our agenda. It's the agenda the people of the province want carried out. They want property tax reform, they want changes in education, they want disentanglement, and we intend to bring all those issues forward and pass the legislation to make them work.

The Speaker: New question. Leader of the third party.

Mr Hampton: To the Premier again, and to the Premier because it's obvious once again that this minister doesn't get it, that this minister is not listening.

Over 76% of the people who took

part in the referendum, and there were record turnouts for the referendum, voted against your proposal. They didn't vote "maybe," they didn't vote "yes, well, possibly, sort of," they didn't for amendments, they voted clearly no, just as you voted in the referendum; just as you voted in the referendum and you understood the question, they understood the question.

I put it to you again: Will you listen to the people who care about democracy, who took

part in a democratic process? Will you withdraw Bill 103? Will you go back to the drawing-board and begin a process which involves people and involves an agenda for change? Will you do that?

Hon Mr Harris: I know the minister would be pleased to respond.

Hon Mr Leach: The people of Metropolitan Toronto, and the people of Ontario for that matter, know that the status quo is not an option, so obviously we have to make changes. The changes we're proposing I think provide for a level of government that does exactly what we said we would do in the Common Sense Revolution: eliminate a layer of government, strengthen local government and create a GTA services board to deal with interregional issues. What the people have been asking for is what we're proposing to carry out.

The members across say the status quo is not an option, and yet in the five years they were there and in the five years the others were there, what did they do? They did nothing, absolutely nothing. Well, they did do something: They put us $100 billion in debt is what they did. But as far as carrying out the agenda the people of Ontario want to see carried out is concerned, this government is doing it.

The Speaker: Supplementary. The member for Dovercourt.

Mr Tony Silipo (Dovercourt): I want to say to the minister, if you were to put aside your arrogance and your continuing insults to the citizens of Metropolitan Toronto just for a few minutes, you would see that what we are suggesting is not a defence of the status quo.

We are clearly saying to you, "Here is a proposal, here is a suggestion that helps you get out of the morass, out of the corner you've painted yourself into." It involves one important aspect, and that is your stopping Bill 103, withdrawing Bill 103, and setting in place a citizens' assembly that consults people and discusses with people over the next number of months on the changes to come about at the greater Toronto level and at the local level. Will you look at that, Minister? Will you do that?

Hon Mr Leach: As I mentioned earlier, the public process we're going through now is giving the people of Metropolitan Toronto an opportunity to have input into the process. The proposal that is being put forward by the NDP is a proposal that always comes forward: "Come forward, do another study and do nothing." That's what they propose to do.

We've had the public hearings. We've had 600 individuals, groups and businesses come to this Legislature and provide input into the process. The boards of trade, the Scarborough chamber of commerce, all the industries, all the people, all the municipalities involved have had an opportunity to say their piece, to voice their concerns, to offer suggestions and alternatives. We've listened to those. We will be proposing changes to this bill, changes that will address the concerns that have been addressed by the citizens of Metropolitan Toronto, and I'm sure that when all that is on the table, everyone will be quite happy with what the situation is.

Mr Silipo: This is not a proposal to study this indefinitely. What we are suggesting is a time line. Maybe the minister hasn't read it, and if he hasn't, that's fine. I would just ask him to take a look at it and consider it because we are trying to be helpful.

We are suggesting a process that involves delaying the municipal elections in the GTA for a year to ensure that change does happen, because we believe change needs to happen, but that change needs to look first and foremost, as Golden told you and as Crombie told you, at the need to coordinate services like transportation, economic development and other issues at the greater Toronto level first, and then within that and only within that look at what amalgamations and what delivery of services can be improved and strengthened at the local level.

That's what we're proposing, and the time line we have set out would ensure that happens with a delay of one year in the municipal elections, and legislation that you would be able to bring here with the support of a broad citizens' movement. That's what we're proposing. Will you take a look at that?

Hon Mr Leach: The member from the third party mentioned the Crombie recommendations and the Golden recommendations that said deal with the GTA. We are dealing with the GTA. We are setting up a process to ensure regional services are delivered across the entire GTA area. We know and recognize that you must have a strong central core and you must have a strong greater Toronto area if this community is going to work in global markets.

To continue to delay, to continue to procrastinate, to continue to have an agenda that says, "Do nothing," is not an agenda this government can live with. We know that we campaigned for a long time on change, and on the change that was necessary, on eliminating waste and duplication, on eliminating levels of government, on eliminating the number of politicians in this area. That's what this program is all about, and that's the program the people of Ontario want.

The Speaker: New question. The member for Oakwood.

Mr Mike Colle (Oakwood): I have a question to the Premier. Premier, you've been ducking this issue from when it was first introduced. You ducked the debate in Scarborough when the other two leaders were there. You refused to allow the committee to go to the city halls when you were proposing elimination. Now you've got 76% of the voters, citizens in Metro, saying no.

How can you still sit there and not listen to them? How can you still sit there and deny all the people who have come before the committee and said, "Withdraw Bill 103"? How can you continue to display such arrogance and disregard for ordinary people who are saying, "Don't do this to my city"?

The Speaker: Premier.

Hon Mr Harris: Thanks, Mr Speaker. I know the minister will be pleased to answer.

Hon Mr Leach: The member talked about the hearing process, and there are first amendments that said we should move from city to city. I don't think that anybody had any difficulty getting down to the hearings that took place here over the last five weeks and that are continuing, for that matter. Everyone was accommodated. All of the spectators who wanted to attend were accommodated.

I think the democratic process of having hearings, letting people have an opportunity to speak, having the opportunity for everybody in Metropolitan Toronto to be able to see that process on television so they could form their opinions, was by far a wide democratic process that gave everybody in the greater Toronto area an opportunity to keep abreast of what was happening, to call in suggestions, to speak to their MPPs and make suggestions. That process will continue over the next few weeks because we're going to do this and we're going to do it right.

Mr Colle: This is most disappointing. The Premier keeps ducking the people of Metropolitan Toronto. I ask the Premier why he is refusing to debate this issue. Will you stay for the emergency debate about the withdrawal of Bill 103, Mr Premier? Will you go face to face with people who are saying no to your megacity? Because it's your proposal, Mr Premier. The buck stops at your door.

How do you have the right to deny people a right to be heard on what's going to happen to their cities? Why are you ducking the people of Metropolitan Toronto? Why are you hiding? Why are chickening out? Are you afraid to face the people of Toronto? Why won't you come out and debate it? Defend your megacity, Mr Premier.

Hon Mr Leach: I wonder what the member for Oakwood's position today is on amalgamation. As I've mentioned in the House before, this is a member who campaigned on amalgamation, campaigned on getting rid of his city of York, which he now stands around and says it's impossible to do. There is absolutely no consistency there whatsoever.

What we wanted to do, as we have continued to say, is to give the people of Metropolitan Toronto an opportunity to speak. They've had that opportunity. Six hundred came to the hearings and said, "We have concerns." Many of them said, "Carry on with your agenda." The last time I was at the hearings, seven out of 10 delegates were in favour of amalgamation. I think that to say this government hasn't carried out the democratic process is absolutely wrong. The democratic process is giving them the opportunity to say their piece. We allowed that.

EDUCATION REFORM

Mr Bud Wildman (Algoma): I have a question for the Premier. Some of the members of the government party such as the honourable member for Scarborough East have said that last night's referendum vote was not just a vote against the megacity but rather a vote against the government's whole agenda.

A major part of the agenda is Bill 104, the Fewer School Boards Act. We've been hearing from many parents in the committee hearings who are concerned about what is happening to their children's education here in Metro and across Ontario. People like Annie Kidder, Jacqueline Latter and Gay Young have expressed concern about the loss of local representation and accountability and concerns about cuts in education that will affect their children. Parents are asking to be consulted by your government on your plan for education. They point out that you haven't even followed the Sweeney report and that you cancelled consultations on that report not long after you became the government.

My question is simple and straightforward: Will you withdraw Bill 104 and initiate province-wide consensus-building processes to develop the best plan for education in Ontario?

Hon Michael D. Harris (Premier): I appreciate the opportunity to respond about education, because the dillying and dallying and the studies and the Sweeney report that your government commissioned, and the royal commission that you commissioned and then really didn't act on very much, are some of the reasons why we are getting an increase in class size in some of the schools, which is totally unacceptable to us. We will not accept any increase in class size. Clearly those increases that took place under your government, and even the first year of our government under the failed structure that's not working very well, are not acceptable to us.

Second, we heard through the royal commission and we heard through all those processes that you had, the Sweeney report, concerns about quality of education, concerns about getting resources into the classroom and --

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Answer, please.

Hon Mr Harris: -- concerns that the current structure was in fact not doing that. So we are responding to the concerns that were expressed to your government. You did not act, and we are acting.

Mr Wildman: The Premier's government responded to the concerns by cutting $400 million out of education in this province.

Central to the government's restructuring package is the removal of education funding from the residential property tax. One of the excuses you've given for your downloading of social and health care services to the property tax has been the removal of education costs from the property tax. Since you've had some difficulties obviously as a result of the referendum and the transfer of soft services like health care and long-term care to the property tax, it has been suggested that one of your approaches may be to take those services and those costs back to the province and to transfer the cost of school maintenance, custodial services, transportation and so on to the municipal property tax --

The Speaker: Thank you very much, member for Algoma. Premier, response.

Hon Mr Harris: No. Our plan is to do this: Stop the erosion of education in the classroom; stop the erosion of standards; stop getting test results back that say we're seven out of 10, 10 out of 10 in math and science here in Canada. So we are bringing forward proposals.

I want to say very clearly to all members of the House and to every parent and to every businessperson concerned about the quality of graduates, and I want to say directly to every student that everything we are doing is 100% for better-quality education in the classroom.

I also want you to know this: Absolutely nothing that we are doing will affect class size or quality of education in the classroom. It is exactly those erosions over the last period of time, particularly under your administration, that we are trying to correct, and in that we have the overwhelming support of parents and of students and of businesses that are concerned about standards in this province.

COURT SYSTEM

Mr Garry J. Guzzo (Ottawa-Rideau): My question is for the Attorney General. I read in the press this morning of problems in the provincial court (family court division), and as your department statistics will reveal, sir, this is not just the hardest-working court in this province but in the entire Dominion.

Sir, the clients of that division are people who have paid taxes in prior years and who will pay taxes in the future, as opposed to maybe clients of the immigration court who have never paid a nickel in tax in this country, and indeed in our own criminal courts some have never paid a nickel in taxes.

I'm asking you today, sir, with regard to that problem, what you are able to do to aid the people and the clients of that court.

Hon Charles Harnick (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs): I had occasion this morning to speak to Chief Judge Linden, who described the

article that was written as highly exaggerative of the situation. However, we do know that because there have been problems with legal aid, which is now on a sound fiscal basis, we are now taking a look, through Professor McCamus, at reviewing legal aid and reviewing the way we deliver legal aid. I'm looking forward to receiving his report.

In the meantime, I can assure you that legal aid, which is run by the law society, is receiving exactly the amount of money that the law society agreed to accept when it made an agreement with the former government. I have every confidence that they will be able to run the legal aid system pending the outcome of Professor McCamus's review of better ways in which we might be able to deliver legal aid to those who need it.

Mr Guzzo: My supplementary deals with the expansion of the Unified Family Court. In particular I note from my own riding that the federal government has money for Bombardier and Pratt and Whitney in Montreal and for a canoe museum in the riding of Shawinigan. Indeed, the member for Shawinigan has free advice but no money with regard to hospitals in the Ottawa-Carleton area. I'm wondering if you have had any luck to pry money away from the Attorney General for the federal government with regard to expanding the unified court?

Hon Mr Harnick: I appreciate the question from the member for Ottawa-Rideau because it is a very important question. We now have the Unified Family Court in Hamilton, London, Barrie, Napanee and Kingston. It's a court that works very well. It's a court that has consolidated all of the family and matrimonial cases in one place.

I have been urging the federal minister to expand that court, particularly into Metropolitan Toronto and the GTA, and to consider expansion into northern Ontario. Certainly the experience of this court is that it works. It responds to the needs of people. It's administratively the right thing to do, and I've been urging the federal minister to expand the Unified Family Court. I hope he does, because I think it will be of great benefit to those who need the services of the family court in Ontario. I do hope the Minister of Justice federally, Mr Rock, will pay heed to our request.

M. Gilles E. Morin (Carleton-Est) : Monsieur le Président, ma question s'adresse strictement au ministre délégué aux Affaires francophones.

Hier, au cours d'une entrevue avec un reporter de la télévision de Radio-Canada, le ministre Villeneuve a déclaré qu'il appuyait le mouvement SOS Montfort. Monsieur le Ministre, 500,000 Franco-Ontariens vous regardent en ce moment. La nation vous écoute. Puisque vous appuyez SOS Montfort, allez-vous maintenant vous opposer publiquement à la fermeture de l'hôpital Montfort ?

L'hon Noble Villeneuve (ministre de l'Agriculture, de l'Alimentation et des Affaires rurales ; ministre délégué aux Affaires francophones) : Il me fait plaisir de répondre à mon collègue de la région de l'Outaouais ontarien. Comme vous le savez, la commission de restructuration a fait ses recommandations. Je félicite Gisèle Lalonde et le regroupement SOS Montfort. Je les encourage fortement à faire une présentation forte pour indiquer exactement leurs nuances, leurs inquiétudes, et puis faire leurs recommandations pour une solution.

Alors, je les appuie fortement. Comme vous savez, les recommandations de la commission sont absolument les leurs et n'ont absolument rien à faire avec le gouvernement ontarien. Alors, je les encourage. Ils ont encore une vingtaine de jours, et je suis persuadé que la commission va les écouter. Les recommandations découlent strictement de la commission.

M. Morin : Entendre une réponse aussi ignorante m'insulte. Il se souviendra que le ministre Runciman n'a pas hésité un instant pour exprimer son mécontentement à la suite de la fermeture d'un hôpital dans sa circonscription. Quand allez-vous intervenir, Monsieur le Ministre, afin que les Franco-Ontariens ne subissent pas l'humiliation d'assister à la fermeture définitive de l'hôpital Montfort sans que le ministre des Affaires francophones lève le petit doigt ? Quand allez-vous manifester votre désaccord ?

L'hon M. Villeneuve: Je remercie encore mon collègue. Je suis convaincu -- on n'est pas obligé de répéter mais, par contre, ça vaut la peine d'être répété -- que dans la région de l'Outaouais ontarien, nous avons environ 800 lits d'hôpital qui sont vides maintenant, l'équivalent de trois hôpitaux de moyenne grandeur.

Je vous dis que strictement, la commission a été établie il y a un an et demi, complètement rien à faire avec la politique. Vous me demandez de politiser avec ce dont vous étiez bel et bien d'accord il y a un an et demi. Nous ne politiserons pas la commission continue à oeuvrer, et n'oublions pas que le gouvernement fédéral aura tranché au-delà de 2 $ milliards, ce qui est environ 40 % des transferts pour les soins de santé en Ontario.

Mr Morin: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I'm sure the table is advised that I will participate in the late show on Thursday evening.

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Please file the appropriate papers. New question.

L'hôpital Montfort est le seul hôpital francophone d'enseignement médical en Ontario. C'est pour cela que ça représente une question d'unité nationale. En fermant l'hôpital Montfort, vous menacez la capacité de formation des médecins et infirmières francophones en Ontario, menaçant ainsi l'accès aux soins de santé pour toute la population francophone. Je vous demande donc aujourd'hui de renverser cette décision et de protéger l'hôpital Montfort.

Hon Michael D. Harris (Premier): I want to say that I appreciate the member's support for my colleague and for our government in providing French-language services across the province and ensuring that we are able to do so in the future. I have made no decision, so there's nothing for me to reverse.

But I think it's important we do express our concerns to the restructuring commission to ensure that anything post-restructuring will provide at least equal or better access to services for francophones in Ontario. That certainly will be our commitment. That is what the minister is expressing. That is what I am expressing. I'd be pleased to pass on your support for that to the commissioner as well, unless you want to do it yourself.

The Speaker: Supplementary. The member for Cochrane South.

M. Gilles Bisson (Cochrane-Sud) : Monsieur le Premier Ministre, ce n'est pas acceptable. Vous avez besoin de comprendre que l'hôpital Montfort est le flambeau, c'est l'espoir, c'est là où nous, les francophones, nous retrouvons. Mais plus important, l'hôpital Montfort est responsable pour être capable de trouver un milieu pour faire l'entraînement nécessaire de nos médecins et tous ceux qui sont professionnels dans le domaine de la santé.

Hon Mr Harris: I think you've heard me express and you've heard the minister express, and I've expressed to the Prime Minister and to Ms Copps -- who congratulated us on the extensive French-language commitment in education, by the way, to francophones here in Ontario -- and to others that we are committed to ensuring that not one whit of service to the francophone community in education and in training of doctors and others that have been provided will be acceptable to us after the final decision has been made. I appreciate your support of my colleague and our government, and I'll pass those concerns on to the commissioner as well.

SCHOOL BOARDS

Mr Dan Newman (Scarborough Centre): My question today is for the Minister of Education and Training. Last Friday I met with parents from Anson Park public school and John A. Leslie public school to discuss, among other things, Bill 104, the Fewer School Boards Act. Parents and students are concerned about what a single, united Toronto district board of education will mean to the many excellent and innovative programs that currently exist at the Scarborough Board of Education, specifically, for example, Scarborough's zero tolerance policy against violence and weapons program.

Can the minister explain to me and the parents from Anson Park public school and John A. Leslie public school who will be responsible for deciding which programs will be kept by a new, united board if and when Bill 104 passes?

Hon John Snobelen (Minister of Education and Training): I want to thank the member for Scarborough Centre for the question. I know this is a concern for people around the province because we do have a lot of very different programs, some very excellent programs, offered by various boards. When the school boards are amalgamated, if we have passage of Bill 104 in its current state, it's our intention and it's the intention of the bill to make sure that the new, elected school board would have the right to take on those policies that they'd like to.

My sense of this, having talked to people who serve as trustees and to parents and educators in the province, is that this is really an opportunity to take the best policies and the best practices from a variety of different boards and put them together in a way that works best for the young people in that area, and that's what I trust will happen.

Mr Newman: Now that the minister has clarified that for the House, could he please tell my constituents in Scarborough Centre, including those parents, what steps they might be able to take to ensure that those excellent programs within the Scarborough Board of Education like zero tolerance are retained by the new, united board?

Hon Mr Snobelen: Of course there will be trustee representation on any new board that's created. I can assure the member, again from my conversations with people who are involved in both the administration and the practice of education in the province, that there is a great concern about school violence, to make sure that our schools are safe. I know all the members from Scarborough share that concern, so I believe there is absolutely no reason to be concerned about that program being dropped by a new board. In fact I think that program will be enhanced and spread into other areas where there is a real concern about the safety of children.

Again, I congratulate the Scarborough board on the zero tolerance program. I believe it will be a model for other boards as we work to have a system of education governance with less waste, less duplication and certainly fewer politicians.

HEALTH SERVICES RESTRUCTURING COMMISSION

Mr Gerard Kennedy (York South): My question is to our Minister of Health, asking him to improve on the response coming from the government side today about responsibility-taking. I'm this time referring to the Health Services Restructuring Commission. We know that the problems of hospitals are directly linked to the cuts that you signed, that have come off your desk. But we know as well that they're now also suffering from this Health Services Restructuring Commission you set up as a political instrument dressed up as some kind of health solution.

You have now lost the confidence of all the major health service providers. This week the Ontario Medical Association, Dr Gerry Rowland, said you're moving too fast and you should block this commission. Earlier this month the Ontario Hospital Association said your plan of restructuring was seriously flawed and must be fundamentally changed. The Ontario Nurses' Association said that patients are not being protected, that you're focusing on bricks and mortar instead.

Minister, will you please stand in your place today and take some responsibility for your commission that is closing hospitals in this province, and will you stop this commission until you have it set up on some kind of a more responsible basis?

Hon Jim Wilson (Minister of Health): Since we're doing who said what today, let me read the London Free Press of this morning, which says:

"What indication has the Harris government given that it plans to renege on these firm and unequivocal election commitments?" -- referring to the health commitments. "This year the province plans to spend $17.7 billion on health, up from $17.4 billion three years ago. That's quite an achievement, especially as the federal Liberals have slashed transfer payments to the province for health and social services by $2.1 billion.

"What Ontario's Liberals and New Democrats could not do was muster the political courage to close entire hospitals," after they closed over 10,000 beds in the province. "As a result, the hospital sector is grossly inefficient. Currently, only about 38% of the physical space of the sprawling London and St Thomas psychiatric hospitals is in use; the rest stands empty."

It goes on to commend the government and the commission for ensuring that every dollar goes to patient services and away from administration and redundant bricks and mortar.

We have a solid plan, a plan that will put health care in Ontario on a very firm footing --

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Thank you, Minister. Supplementary.

Mr Kennedy: Minister, the fact is and the fact has been revealed daily, you have no plan. You have no basis under which to bring things together. But what you do have is responsibility for the restructuring commission.

Yesterday your aide was quoted in the paper as saying you couldn't stop this commission. The act that created it, Bill 26, which took away powers of hospital boards, says that you can. You can "amend or revoke a direction made under this section" where you consider it to be in the public interest.

All across this province are patients waiting for you to get hold of the public interest, to tell them that the guidelines that have been used by this restructuring commission are your responsibility, that those faulty benchmarks that are closing hospitals across this province, that are now causing you to have this commission meet with your Conservative caucus, that are politicizing this process, that you'll stand responsible for them.

Minister, will you stand up today and take responsibility for your commission and tell us when you'll use your power to work in the public interest, for Montfort, for the other hospitals in this province that need you to be the Minister of Health, and not give those powers away to some unelected group that isn't accountable?

Hon Mr Wilson: The honourable member has a lot of nerve. It's his party that cut $2.1 billion from health care in Ontario. We've done everything we can as a government to increase the health care budget. It's up significantly. We spend 6% more per person in Ontario than any other jurisdiction, any other province or territory in Canada. We're right up there with the rest of the world, and that's in spite of the uncooperative atmosphere we've had from the federal government with respect to the cash transfers to our province. The beds are closed. You closed the beds.

We've got to get fewer buildings, more services, modern hospitals, new technology and the best services available for the patients of Ontario, because that's what they need and deserve.

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

Mr Howard Hampton (Rainy River): A question to the Premier. It's already very troubling today. We've been listening to your Minister of Municipal Affairs, and it's clear that he has not listened to the hundreds of people who have come before the committee, the hundreds of people who said they don't want amendments to Bill 103, they want Bill 103 withdrawn. It's clear he hasn't listened to all those people who have been going to meetings, meeting after meeting after meeting, in opposition to your megacity concept. It's quite clear he does not understand the message people tried to send him last night.

Your government has been cited for contempt. Your government has had to face an Ontario court judge who said you're not behaving like a responsible government or a responsive government. People want to see from your government a willingness to listen. People want to see a recognition from your government that you've got it wrong. Premier, will you withdraw Bill 103, go back to the drawing board and respect the wishes of the people who live across Metropolitan Toronto?

Hon Michael D. Harris (Premier): What we've had to face is an $11.2-billion deficit we inherited from one of the worst governments in the history of Canada, let alone just the province of Ontario. That's what we've had to face. After having faced that and consulting in a whole host of areas and bringing forward decisions that you put off, postponed, that led to this deficit, now, all of a sudden, you say you have an idea. Six years later you say you have an idea.

Let me say this: Maybe the lightbulb has gone off; maybe now you recognize the disasters. Let me also congratulate you. At least you've thought of something, which is more than the Liberals have done. They continue to be the old-style politicians, negative this. "I'm against referendums," McGuinty says, "I'm against change, I'm against all those things." So let me at least acknowledge that perhaps the lightbulb is going off and you recognize there need to be solutions.

Let me also say this: Nobody has listened more carefully and is prepared to respond --

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Thank you very much. Motions? No motions. Petitions?

PETITIONS

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

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

"Stop Megacity Madness: Citizens Have Democratic Right to be Heard.

"To the Legislature of Ontario:

"Whereas `bigger government is not better' and the Mike Harris government has no right to dictate a megacity upon the citizens of Metropolitan Toronto;

"Whereas the megacity is being imposed on 2.3 million citizens in Metro Toronto without giving people a voice in the future of their cities and neighbourhoods;

"Whereas a megacity could lead to mega property tax increases, mega user fees and mega cuts in services;

"Whereas the Tories never proposed abolishing local government in favour of bigger government during the election campaign;

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

"To give the 2.3 million people in Metro Toronto a say in the future of their cities and stop the imposition of a megacity."

I affix my signature, as I'm in full agreement with this endorsed-by-a-referendum petition before this House today.

DRINKING AND DRIVING

Mr John R. Baird (Nepean): I have another petition on the issue of drunk driving in support of the Margaret Marland bill.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas drinking and driving is the largest criminal cause of death and injury in Canada;

"Whereas every 45 minutes in Ontario a driver is involved in an alcohol-related crash;

"Whereas most alcohol-related accidents are caused by repeat offenders;

"Whereas lengthy licence suspensions for impaired driving have been shown to greatly reduce repeat offences;

"Whereas the victims of impaired drivers often pay with their lives while only 22% of convicted impaired drivers go to jail, and even then on average for only 21 days;

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

"We urge the provincial government to pass legislation that will strengthen measures against impaired drivers in Ontario."

I affix my own signature thereto.

HOSPITAL FINANCING

Mr Frank Miclash (Kenora): I have a petition that reads:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas Ontarians are gravely concerned with the historic $1.3-billion cut to base funding of hospitals; and

"Whereas Ontarians feel that health services are suffering; and

"Whereas the government is reducing hospital funding and not reinvesting millions of dollars into the communities that they are being taken away from;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly to call on the Conservative government to stop the cuts to base funding for hospitals across Ontario and to ensure that community services are in place before the removal of hospital services. The Conservative government must fund hospitals with a funding formula that reflects demographic and regional needs. The Conservative government must ensure that health services are available, including emergency and urgent care, to all Ontarians."

I've attached my name to that petition as well.

EDUCATION LEGISLATION

Mr John O'Toole (Durham East): I am pleased to present a petition to the Legislature of Ontario.

"Whereas the government of Ontario has introduced Bill 104, the Fewer School Boards Act, into the Legislative Assembly of Ontario; and

"Whereas Bill 104 seriously undermines the job security of caring professional support staff of the educational system of Durham Region;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to stop the process of outsourcing or the privatization of essential support staff, namely, custodians, maintenance, office, clerical, technical, secretarial and educational assistant staff. They are an essential service to the Durham Board of Education and the Durham Regional Roman Catholic Separate School Board and to the students of the region."

I'm pleased to sign my name to the petition.

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

Mr Alvin Curling (Scarborough North): "Stop Megacity Madness: Citizens Have Democratic Right to be Heard.

"To the Legislature of Ontario:

"Whereas `bigger government is not better' and the Mike Harris government has no right to dictate a megacity upon the citizens of Metro Toronto;

"Whereas the megacity is being imposed on 2.3 million citizens in Metro Toronto without giving people a voice in the future of their cities and neighbourhoods;

"Whereas a megacity could lead to mega property tax increases, mega user fees and mega cuts in services;

"Whereas the Tories never proposed abolishing local government in favour of bigger government during the election campaign;

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

"To give the 2.3 million people in Metro Toronto a say in the future of their cities and stop the imposition of a megacity."

DRINKING AND DRIVING

Mr Doug Galt (Northumberland): I have a petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas drinking and driving is the largest criminal cause of death and injury in Canada; and

"Whereas every 45 minutes in Ontario a driver is involved in an alcohol-related crash; and

"Whereas most alcohol-related accidents are caused by repeat offenders; and

"Whereas lengthy licence suspensions for impaired driving have been shown to greatly reduce repeat offences; and

"Whereas the victims of impaired drivers often pay with their lives while only 22% of convicted impaired drivers go to jail, and even then only for an average of 21 days;

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

"We urge the provincial government to pass legislation that will strengthen measures against impaired drivers in Ontario."

HOSPITAL FINANCING

Mrs Sandra Pupatello (Windsor-Sandwich): I am pleased to present this on behalf of the people from Bruce and happy that the member for Bruce is here to hear this. A petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas Ontarians are gravely concerned with the historic $1.3-billion cut to base funding of hospitals; and

"Whereas Ontarians feel that health services are suffering; and

"Whereas the government is reducing hospital funding and not reinvesting millions of dollars into the communities that they are being taken away from;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly to call on the Conservative government to stop the cuts to base funding for hospitals across Ontario and to ensure that community services are in place before the removal of hospital services. The Conservative government must (

a) vote for the Pupatello resolution; find a funding formula" --

Hon Janet Ecker (Minister of Community and Social Services): Oh, it's now the Pupatello resolution.

Mrs Pupatello: Okay, I did add that -- "that reflects geographic and regional needs. The Conservative government must ensure that health services are available, including emergency and urgent care, to all Ontarians."

This is signed by the people from Bruce county.

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

Mr David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre): I have a Christopherson resolution I'd like to read.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Harris government has begun a process to open the Occupational Health and Safety Act of Ontario; and

"Whereas this act is the single most important piece of legislation for working people since it is designed to protect our lives, safety and health while at work and allow us to return home to our families in the same condition in which we left; and

"Whereas the government has made it clear that they intend to water down the act and weaken the rights of workers under the law, including the right to know, the right to participate and especially the right to refuse unsafe work; and

"Whereas this government has already watered down proper training of certified committee members;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario not to alter the Occupational Health and Safety Act or erode the rights of workers any further and ensure strict enforcement of the legislation."

On behalf of my caucus colleagues, I add my name to theirs.

DRINKING AND DRIVING

Mrs Margaret Marland (Mississauga South): I'm very happy to present this petition which supports my private member's bill against drunk driving.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas drinking and driving is the largest criminal cause of death and injury in Canada;

"Whereas every 45 minutes in Ontario a driver is involved in an alcohol-related crash;

"Whereas most alcohol-related accidents are caused by repeat offenders;

"Whereas lengthy licence suspensions for impaired drivers have been shown to greatly reduce repeat offences;

"Whereas the victims of impaired drivers often pay with their lives while only 22% of convicted impaired drivers go to jail, and even then only for an average of 21 days;

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

"We urge the provincial government to pass legislation that will strengthen measures against impaired drivers in Ontario."

I'm very proud to lend my support to this petition.

EDUCATION REFORM

Mr Dwight Duncan (Windsor-Walkerville): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"We, the undersigned, acknowledge the high quality of secondary education which has been developed in Ontario;

"We acknowledge that quality is maintained only through ongoing evaluation and improvements in the curriculum. We also believe that any improvement must be the result of long-term planning and broad-based consultation.

"Since this planning and consultation is not evident in the current reform proposal, we urge the minister to withdraw his proposal until such time as a draft is developed which is based on sound educational research and planning."

I'm pleased to affix my signature along with the thousands of others of my constituents who have signed this petition.

FIRE SAFETY

Mr David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre): I have a petition supporting the firefighters of Ontario.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Firefighters need speed, experience and teamwork to save lives. I oppose any legislation that could undermine the work of my local firefighters and jeopardize fire safety in my community. Please listen to professional firefighters and amend Bill 84 to eliminate the threat to fire safety."

I proudly add my name to theirs.

DRINKING AND DRIVING

Mr Toby Barrett (Norfolk): "Whereas drinking and driving is the largest criminal cause of death and injury in Canada; and

"Whereas every 45 minutes in Ontario a driver is involved in an alcohol-related crash; and

"Whereas most alcohol-related accidents are caused by repeat offenders; and

"Whereas lengthy licence suspensions for impaired driving have been shown to greatly reduce repeat offences; and

"Whereas the victims of impaired drivers often pay with their lives while only 22% of convicted impaired drivers go to jail, and even then only for an average of 21 days;

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

"We urge the provincial government to pass legislation that will strengthen measures against impaired drivers in Ontario."

I am in agreement with this petition and hereby sign my name to it.

HEALTH CARE WORKERS

Mr John C. Cleary (Cornwall): I have a petition to the Legislature of Ontario.

"Whereas we, the health care consumers and health care providers of Ontario, request that the Ministry of Health take steps to ensure that direct patient care is provided by adequate numbers of regulated health care workers whose skills and knowledge match the role they undertake;

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

The petition has been signed by 100 residents of the Cornwall riding and S-D-G & East Grenville. Another 40 people signed the letter accompanying the petition.

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

Mr David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas it is vital that occupational health and safety services provided to workers be conducted by organizations in which workers have faith; and

"Whereas the Workers' Health and Safety Centre and the occupational health clinics for Ontario workers have provided such services on behalf of workers for many years; and

"Whereas the centre and clinics have made a significant contribution to improvements in workplace health and safety and the reduction of injuries, illnesses and death caused by work;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to oppose any attempt to erode the structure, services or funding of the Workers' Health and Safety Centre and the occupational health clinics for Ontario workers.

"Further, we, the undersigned, demand that education and training of Ontario workers continue in its present form through the Workers' Health and Safety Centre and that professional and technical expertise and advice continue to be provided through the occupational health clinics for Ontario workers."

I proudly add my name to theirs.

HOSPITAL FINANCING

Mr W. Leo Jordan (Lanark-Renfrew): I have a petition about health care in Ontario and it reads as follows:

"Whereas Ontarians are gravely concerned with the historic $1.3-billion cuts to base funding of hospitals; and

"Whereas Ontarians feel that health services are suffering; and

"Whereas the government is reducing hospital funding and not reinvesting millions of dollars into the communities that they are being taken away from;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly to call on the Progressive Conservative government to stop the cuts to base funding for hospitals across Ontario and to ensure that community services are in place before the removal of hospital services. The Conservative government must ensure that health services are available, including emergency and urgent care, to all Ontarians."

I submit this petition on behalf of my constituents with the understanding that the Mike Harris government is restructuring to improve the system by maximizing the amount of dollars that go towards direct care.

FIRE SAFETY

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): This is a petition in response to Bill 84.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the firefighters of Sudbury and Ontario are very concerned about Bill 84; and

"Whereas we feel Bill 84 is unfair; and

"Whereas we feel Bill 84 is discriminatory; and

"Whereas we feel Bill 84 endangers the wellbeing of the people of Ontario; and

"Whereas we feel Bill 84 requires extensive changes; and

"Whereas we feel Bill 84 needs broad provincial public hearings before implementation; and

"Whereas speed, experience and teamwork save lives; and

"Whereas we don't want to get burned by Bill 84;

"We therefore petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to listen when we say firefighters need speed, experience and teamwork to save lives. I oppose any legislation that could undermine the work of my local firefighters and jeopardize fire safety in my community. Please listen to professional firefighters and amend Bill 84 to eliminate the threat to fire safety."

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

4588 BATHURST ACT, 1997

Ms Bassett moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill Pr74,

An Act respecting 4588 Bathurst.

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

750 SPADINA AVENUE ASSOCIATION ACT, 1997

Ms Bassett moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill Pr75,

An Act respecting 750 Spadina Avenue Association.

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

OPPOSITION DAY

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

Mr Mike Colle (Oakwood): I move opposition day motion number 3:

Whereas the Harris government is wiping out the existing municipalities of Toronto, the city of York, East York, North York, Scarborough and Etobicoke and replacing them with one enormous megacity of 2.3 million people;

Whereas Mike Harris and his party platform made no mention of amalgamating the six municipalities composing Metropolitan Toronto prior to the 1995 provincial election and were not elected on that basis;

Whereas the Harris government has no mandate from the people to amalgamate Metropolitan Toronto into a megacity;

Whereas, as recently as 1994, Mike Harris said: "There is no cost for a municipality to retain its name and identity. Why destroy our roots and pride? I disagree with restructuring because it believes that bigger is better. Services always cost more in larger communities";

Whereas the Harris government is forcing the people of Metropolitan Toronto into a megacity to hide the $531 million in increased taxes for Metro residents that will be caused by the Harris government's dumping of provincial costs on to the municipalities of Ontario;

Whereas the ill-conceived plan to create this megacity is based on a three-week KPMG study carried out behind closed doors and without consultation;

Whereas the KPMG study contradicts the recommendations of every other study carried out on greater Toronto area restructuring over the last 40 years;

Whereas even the author of the KPMG study admitted that "there has been no amalgamation of which I am aware in the current fiscal environment that would demonstrate the certainty of savings";

Whereas the Harris government has stated that it plans to drive the legislation creating the megacity through the Legislature by April, without leaving adequate time for study or consultation;

Whereas the Harris government's plans to force the people of Metropolitan Toronto into a megacity will cause property taxes to soar, will lead to more cuts in services and will make government even more remote from the people that it is supposed to serve;

Whereas studies have shown that once a city grows to over one million people, economies of scale in municipal operations disappear and per capita costs for basic services go up;

Whereas Mike Harris and Al Leach have failed to provide the people of Ontario with any numbers to support their contention that amalgamation will lead to cost savings;

Whereas the Harris government's own study anticipates transition costs of $150 million to $220 million following amalgamation;

Whereas unprecedented grass-roots opposition to the megacity plan has sprung up all over Metropolitan Toronto;

Whereas thousands of Metro residents have spontaneously and vocally expressed their opposition to the megacity plan;

Whereas the public hearings on Bill 103 conducted by the Harris government have failed to reveal any widespread support for this legislation and instead have revealed deep and consistent concern about this plan among citizens of all political stripes and affiliations;

Whereas the Harris government has refused to conduct its own referendum on the issue of amalgamation;

Whereas the Mike Harris government has stated that it plans to proceed with its plan to force the citizens of Metro Toronto into a megacity regardless of their wishes;

Whereas the Harris government is consistently ignoring the voice of the people of Metropolitan Toronto by continuing to plow ahead with its megacity plan and is acting undemocratically by forcing this massive change down the throats of the citizens of Metropolitan Toronto without proper consultation or a mandate from the people;

Therefore this House calls upon the provincial government to reverse its decision to amalgamate Metropolitan Toronto into a megacity, to withdraw Bill 103 and to proceed to consult with the people and the governments of Metropolitan Toronto, to develop a plan to restructure the greater Toronto area for better coordination of services and strengthened local government and to make this a better place for all citizens to live.

That's the motion. Thank you.

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Opposition day number 3 moved by Mr Colle:

Whereas the Harris government is wiping out the existing municipalities of Toronto, the city of York, East York --

Mr Frank Miclash (Kenora): Dispense.

The Speaker: No, I think I'll go through it.

-- North York, Scarborough and Etobicoke and replacing them with one enormous megacity of 2.3 million people;

Whereas Mike Harris and his party platform made no mention of amalgamating the six municipalities composing Metropolitan Toronto prior to the 1995 provincial election and were not elected on that basis;

Whereas the Harris government has no mandate from the people to amalgamate Metropolitan Toronto into a megacity;

Whereas, as recently as 1994, Mike Harris said: "There is no cost for a municipality to retain its name and identity. Why destroy our roots and pride? I disagree with restructuring because it believes that bigger is better. Services always cost more in larger communities";

Whereas the Harris government is forcing the people of Metropolitan Toronto into a megacity to hide the $531 million in increased taxes for Metro residents that will be caused by the Harris government's dumping of provincial costs on to the municipalities of Ontario;

Whereas the ill-conceived plan to create this megacity is based on a three-week KPMG study carried out behind closed doors and without consultation;

Whereas the KPMG study contradicts the recommendations of every other study carried out on greater Toronto area restructuring over the last 40 years;

Whereas even the author of the KPMG study admitted that "there has been no amalgamation of which I am aware in the current fiscal environment that would demonstrate the certainty of savings";

Whereas the Harris government has stated that it plans to drive the legislation creating the megacity through the Legislature by April, without leaving adequate time for study or consultation;

Whereas the Harris government's plans to force the people of Metropolitan Toronto into a megacity will cause property taxes to soar, will lead to more cuts in services and will make government even more remote from the people that it is supposed to serve;

Whereas studies have shown that once a city grows to over one million people, economies of scale in municipal operations disappear and per capita costs for basic services go up;

Whereas Mike Harris and Al Leach have failed to provide the people of Ontario with any numbers to support their contention that amalgamation will lead to cost savings;

Whereas the Harris government's own study anticipates transition costs of $150 million to $220 million following amalgamation;

Whereas unprecedented grass-roots opposition to the megacity plan has sprung up all over Metropolitan Toronto;

Whereas thousands of Metro residents have spontaneously and vocally expressed their opposition to the megacity plan;

Whereas the public hearings on Bill 103 conducted by the Harris government have failed to reveal any widespread support for this legislation and instead have revealed deep and consistent concern about this plan among citizens of all political stripes and affiliations;

Whereas the Harris government has refused to conduct its own referendum on the issue of amalgamation;

Whereas the Mike Harris government has stated that it plans to proceed with its plan to force the citizens of Metro Toronto into a megacity regardless of their wishes;

Whereas the Harris government is consistently ignoring the voice of the people of Metropolitan Toronto by continuing to plow ahead with its megacity plan and is acting undemocratically by forcing this massive change down the throats of the citizens of Metropolitan Toronto without proper consultation or a mandate from the people;

Therefore this House calls upon the provincial government to reverse its decision to amalgamate Metropolitan Toronto into a megacity, to withdraw Bill 103 and to proceed to consult with the people and the governments of Metropolitan Toronto, to develop a plan to restructure the greater Toronto area for better coordination of services and strengthened local government and to make this a better place for all citizens to live.

Mr Miclash: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: Might I ask for unanimous consent to have my leader go first, please?

The Speaker: The member for Kenora is seeking unanimous consent to allow the leader of the official opposition to lead off debate. Agreed? Leader of the official opposition.

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): I'm looking forward to this opportunity to participate in what I believe to be a very important debate for this House.

Yesterday the people of Metropolitan Toronto spoke loudly and very clearly. They sent Mike Harris and the Ontario government an unmistakable message. They said, "We do not want your megacity." They said, "We do not want you imposing change on us." Finally, they said, "If you continue to try and destroy the communities that we've worked so hard to build, we will fight you every single step of the way."

This isn't the first time the government has been given this message. It's the same message that has been delivered every day at the public hearings by citizen after citizen, group after group, and expert after expert. It's the same message that was delivered by thousands of people marching down Yonge Street, and it's the same message that is delivered every night of the week in every corner of Metro Toronto by groups numbering from 50 to 1,500. I say again, the message has been delivered loudly, clearly and unmistakably.

The question now is: Will this government listen? There are just a few days before the end of public hearings on Bill 103, the City of Toronto Act, a bill which might more appropriately be called Megacity, Whether You Like It or Not.

The government argues that this issue is complex, too complex, it says, for the people to decide. But it really all boils down to two simple issues:

(1) Is the megacity the right vision for one of the greatest urban centres in the world? and

(2) Does this government really believe in democracy? Does it believe in the right of people to decide on the type of community they want to live in?

Let me first speak about the megacity. I want to say up front that I do not believe a megacity is the right vision for Metro Toronto. I believe in strong local governments. I believe in local government because that is the level of government that is closest to the people and that is the level of government to which people can get closest.

When I talk to people in the borough of East York or the city of York, they tell me that one of the great things they love about their communities is that when they have a problem they can call the mayor's office and someone will get back to them the very same day. That won't happen in a megacity of 2.3 million people. When I talk to people from North York they tell me that one of the things that makes their community special is that their garbage gets picked up twice a week and that they have the best snow clearing in all of Metropolitan Toronto. That too will disappear in a megacity.

I'll say again that I'm a very strong advocate of local government, but that doesn't mean I support the status quo. Far from it. By all means let's change towards an integrated transit system, but not just in Metro Toronto; we need it across the greater Toronto area. Let's change towards integrated land use planning, but not just in Metro -- across the GTA. Let's change towards an integrated economic strategy that will attract more investment and jobs, but not just in Metro -- right across the GTA. Let's recognize that all of this has to be anchored to something in order to work, and that something is strong local government.

There's nothing particularly new or unique about this vision of strong local governments and better coordination across the GTA. That's the vision that was put forward by the Anne Golden commission -- in my view, the right vision for Metropolitan Toronto.

It's also a vision that coincidentally used to be shared by Mike Harris, now Premier. Mike Harris used to be the great defender of local government. In fact, I remember when Mike Harris was campaigning in the town of Fergus and someone asked him about amalgamation, and he said: "Why destroy our roots and pride? I disagree with restructuring, because it believes that bigger is better. Services always cost more in larger communities."

He was right. Mike Harris was right, but that was then and this is now. Leader of the Opposition Mike Harris was a great defender of local government; Premier Mike Harris sings a completely different tune.

I also remember when Mike Harris went to Scarborough and told them that their fiscal efficiency was a model that should be followed by other levels of government. I hope you heard that correctly, Mr Speaker. He said "followed by other levels of government," not "swallowed by other levels of government." He was right again; in fact, he was absolutely right. But that was then and this is now. Opposition Leader Mike Harris understood the efficiencies then of local government; Premier Mike Harris sings another tune altogether.

Mike Harris used to sing another tune too, the tune of the Taxfighter, but the best experts on city planning tell us a megacity will increase our taxes. This courtesy of the Taxfighter. If you ask me, the Taxfighter is taking a dive. But that's not just my opinion. Let me read into the record what Paul Pagnuelo, the president of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, has to say. He says: "A single Metro Toronto government will be more costly, leading to higher taxes. It will result in lower service quality and make the Metro area less competitive and will stifle innovation." That from a traditional ally of the Harris government.

I also want to read into the record what Joyce Trimmer had to say. The members opposite will be very familiar with the name of Joyce Trimmer. She was the person Mike Harris appointed before the election as his principal adviser on matters related to the GTA. Here is what Mrs Trimmer had to say about Mike's megacity: "The public simply doesn't know what it's in for. They might think less government is a good idea, but they've been sold a bill of goods if they believe all the propaganda that this will save money."

Now I'd like to say a word about Bill 103 and democracy. Democracy is in some ways a simple concept, although many have fought and many have died for it over the years. Democracy is rarely convenient and tidy. Instead, it's a slow and messy miracle. At its heart, it means that people must have a say in how they are governed. They must have a say on the future of their communities. Democracy clearly imposes a responsibility on people. It's their responsibility to understand the choices before them, and it's their responsibility to choose wisely.

Democracy imposes responsibility on those who govern. Democracy gives the people a voice, but it also compels those who govern to listen to that voice. Democracy isn't just something that takes place once every four years. Democracy is what is supposed to happen in a free society each and every day. Democracy is what took place yesterday across Metro. People were asked if they wanted to be a part of a megacity, and they said no. They said no loudly. They said no overwhelmingly. They said no on every block in every neighbourhood in every city and borough right across Metropolitan Toronto.

Mike Harris and Al Leach view the referenda results as an inconvenience, and with one wave of their hands they dismiss the results of all the referenda across Metro. They say that the question asked was not the kind of scientific question that Environics or Angus Reid would ask. What then of the pollsters themselves? Where have they weighed in when it came to this issue?

Environics released the results of an extensive poll just last week, and the poll showed that there was overwhelming opposition to the megacity right across the GTA. The megacity was rejected by every single demographic group: men, women, rich and poor, old and young. Angus Reid just released a poll showing nearly 60% of people siding with the No side. There was one further poll released this past weekend by pollster Allan Gregg. His poll showed that nearly two thirds of people in Metro want the provincial government to respect the results of the referenda.

Even people who voted yes believe the government should listen to the results of the referenda. But Mike Harris and Al Leach apparently still intend to bow their necks and bull ahead.

I and my caucus are still interested in what the people have to say. A few weeks ago we began a process that this government would never have thought to undertake. We started going out and asking people across this province how the dumping of $1 billion in new costs will affect their lives and the quality of their communities. Tomorrow I'll be sharing with you the results of this consultation, but I want to quote today from one of our presenters, Dr Charles Pascal.

Dr Pascal is now executive director of the Atkinson foundation, but I believe his name is well-known and well-respected by all members of this Legislature as the former Deputy Minister of Community and Social Services and the former Deputy Minister of Education and Training.

Dr Pascal came to our hearings because he is deeply disturbed by what this government is doing to the quality of life in our communities. Here's how he wrapped up his presentation: "Good policy administered badly is harmful enough, but bad policy administered quickly can be devastating." That is exactly what this government is doing with its megacity and mega-dumping. It's ramming through bad policy quickly.

I want to tell you, though, that in spite of all of this I have hope. I still have hope because the megacity is not yet a done deal. So I urge everyone here from all three parties to support the resolution that is now before us, and if the government does not have the common sense to immediately withdraw Bill 103, I urge them to vote against this bill when it reappears before this Legislature in April for final reading. I do this because I do not see the future of one of the great metropolitan areas of the world, a community that took generations to build but could be destroyed by one act of folly by one government, I do not see the future of Metro Toronto as a partisan issue.

A few weeks ago, when I joined the thousands of people marching down Yonge Street, the thing that struck me most was how diverse a group it was. There were Liberals against the megacity, New Democrats against the megacity and, yes, even Conservatives against the megacity. I know there are members opposite who are opposed to the megacity and I'm urging them, I'm calling upon them to follow their consciences. I appeal to them directly. You've seen how your constituents voted in the referenda in your communities. You've seen the No signs on the houses and lawns in your neighbourhoods.

You've been to neighbourhood meetings and you've heard the anger and emotion that this bill has sparked. I urge all the members opposite, but especially those from Metro Toronto, to vote with your constituents and against this bad policy, against the megacity bill.

There's a fine line between leadership and being out of touch and I suggest to the members opposite that to ignore the clear and unequivocal results of the referenda would not be to show leadership; it would be to ignore the will of those you represent.

Everyone in this Legislature ought to support this resolution. It's a win-win proposition. We, as legislators, can win because we will have listened to the people and we will have made the right choice, and the people of Metro will win because they will be given the opportunity to continue growing and changing in a way that works best for them.

Let's all vote our conscience today. Let's bring home a win for the people of Metro Toronto and let's bring home a win for democracy.

Mr Tony Silipo (Dovercourt): I'm glad to rise today and to lead off debate on this resolution presented by the Liberal Party and to indicate on behalf of the New Democratic Party caucus our support for this resolution.

It's clear that yesterday the voters and the citizens of Metropolitan Toronto sent Mike Harris a very clear message. In the words of one of the three Toronto dailies that has been most adamant in its support for the megacity, which had this morning on its masthead, "It's Mega No to Megacity," it was clearly a resounding rejection of the megacity proposal that Al Leach and Mike Harris have been so persistent in insisting on.

It's clearly a rejection of the other pieces that are so linked to what they are proposing to do: the downloading on to the property tax base of services that don't belong there and the equally destructive approach they are taking to our school boards and our education system with Bill 104.

I've heard certainly on more than one occasion the Premier and other ministers and other members of the government say, "You know, when people were voting yesterday, they weren't just voting on the megacity bill," as if to say that all of a sudden it made the vote more acceptable to them.

I've been following and have been part of the committee process as we've been discussing Bill 103 in particular, and it's true that people have made very clearly the connection between that bill and the downloading and the destructive approach of this government with respect to education. They haven't had to search very far to make that connection because in fact the government has made that connection for us and for the citizens of Metropolitan Toronto and indeed of the province with respect to the downloading and the education changes.

When Mike Harris says, "People were actually voting on other issues," then perhaps he should go a little bit further than that and acknowledge that in voting no, as people did so overwhelmingly yesterday in Metropolitan Toronto, just perhaps they were also voting no on that whole package he put together in front of people. It should leave him, as the Premier of this province, with something to think about; it should leave him and all members in this Legislature with something to reflect upon.

Yesterday, despite all the efforts this government has made, the money that's been spent, the millions of dollars in advertising in trying to get people to sort of feel good and forget about the individual issues that are being dealt with, in trying to pretend that everything is fine, in the persistence of ministers and members of this government to say no to call after call from citizens, from groups, from a variety of individuals, calling the ministers and the members of this government to come to their senses, despite that persistence, despite the fact that the Speaker of this House found a prima facie case of contempt against the Minister of Municipal Affairs, despite the fact that a judge found their actions in appointing the trustees to be illegal, despite all those things, the government was still persisting and today is still persisting that what it is doing with the megacity bill is appropriate, but they cannot in any way ignore the strength of the rejection that was there yesterday, the clarity, the vigour of that rejection, the clear message residents in Metropolitan Toronto sent Mike Harris, and Al Leach in particular, yesterday.

What's important in supporting this resolution and this motion is for all members, particularly government members, to come to grips with that reality, the reality being that you lost, the reality being that the people have spoken against you, the reality being that the people understand now more than ever your agenda and don't like it, don't approve of it and told you so in clear, unequivocal terms.

The question now turns to what should be done about it. What is the appropriate response to such a clear objection, such a clear demonstration of the people's will against the actions of the Mike Harris government?

I see what happened yesterday as being far more significant than just the strong vote of no to the megacity bill, as incredibly important and significant as that is. I see it as being even more important in the sense that the people, in this case the citizens of Metropolitan Toronto, have refound their voice.

There has been a sense throughout the province, certainly including here in Metropolitan Toronto, since this government came to office, in the last 20 months of devastation that they have sown right across the province, that there was perhaps no way to get to them, that there was no way to get them to understand the devastation they were causing, that there was no way to get them to move from the arrogant positions they were continuing to take, that there was no way to get them to understand that their actions both in process and in substance continued to show incredible contempt for the parliamentary process, and more importantly, for the people of this province.

What happened yesterday was that people finally realized they had a way to tell the government of the day, to tell Mike Harris that they don't approve of what he's doing, that they object strongly to what he's doing. That they did, so clearly, so strongly, so forcefully yesterday in the large number of people who voted, generally larger than happens in municipal elections, and then even more incredibly with the large, resounding voice which ranges from 73% to 80%, 81%, 81.5% of people saying no, an unequivocal, very clear objection to what Mike Harris is doing.

This should give the government real concern because one of the things that I think people were saying to them yesterday was, "You cannot continue to govern in a way that positions the people as the enemy." That has been the attitude we have seen time after time from this government, that somehow the people out there were the problem and that it knew best, as a government, what should be done regardless of what the people felt should be done, that they were the ones who knew and know what the answers are to the incredibly real problems that exist.

Once again, yesterday, with the referendum results, the people of Metropolitan Toronto, at least, said: "No, we do understand what's going on. We don't believe our government should see us, the people, as the enemy. We do believe in the notions of peace, order and good government." They sent a very real warning to Mike Harris. The test of whether they've really listened, whether they've really heard what was said yesterday will come in the days that follow.

As I looked and listened to the Premier and the minister deal with questions today, I'm one who still wants to give them a little bit of room. I still find, I have to tell you, the attitude particularly of the Minister of Municipal Affairs offensive as he continues to insult the process and the people.

But even in his statement he read out today there seemed to be some indications of the door sort of being left open just a tiny bit to some changes, not the kind of small cosmetic changes that they inevitably will bring forward in terms of amendments to Bill 103, but I hope the door left even slightly open to what really has to happen, which is a withdrawal of Bill 103, a withdrawal of Bill 104, a halt to the downloading and a real discussion beginning.

We today, taking as we do the results of all that's gone on in the last number of weeks and particularly the results of yesterday, have come forward with what we believe is a useful, constructive proposal. We've called it A Greater Toronto Area for the 21st Century, a proposal for that, and we have put it forward sincerely and truly in a constructive way, as a way to try to say to the government: "There's a dilemma. You've painted yourselves into a corner. We know you have to get out of it.

We know you have to find a way to get out of that morass and we want to try to be helpful, because at the end of the day, the issues that we are dealing with are, quite frankly, more important than the Conservative government and the Conservative Party or the Liberal Party or the New Democratic Party."

What we've suggested is that the first step that has to take place is that those two bills, in particular Bill 103 and Bill 104, be withdrawn. Then we've said very clearly that we are not here to defend the status quo. We are not here to say, "Don't do anything." I think there's a substantive difference in what we've suggested to what some others perhaps have said, because we are not saying, "Don't do anything."

It seems to me that if I've heard correctly what citizens have said out there, they too agree that change needs to happen. While there have been a few that have said, "The status quo is just fine by us," large numbers of people who have come in front of the committee on Bill 103 have said, "Yes, we agree there needs to be change, but not this way."

We have put this proposal based on three very important principles, the first being that change is needed, but that change needs to be done so as to ensure effective local government that is responsive to the people and to our communities.

The second principle we believe in very strongly is that the issue that has to be addressed here is not just boundaries within Metropolitan Toronto and the amalgamation within Metropolitan Toronto, but that the GTA as a region is the