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

April 19, 2006

38th Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2006-Apr-19 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Wednesday 19 April 2006 Mercredi 19 avril 2006

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

HIGHWAY 417

HYDRO RATES

PLANT CLOSURE

HOWARD WHITWELL

PREMIER OF ONTARIO

THE BEACH

SHONA THORBURN

PUBLIC LIBRARIES

EASTER OBSERVANCE

VISITORS

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE

ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

STANDING COMMITTEE

ON ESTIMATES

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

INDEPENDENT POLICE

REVIEW ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR L'EXAMEN

INDÉPENDANT DE LA POLICE

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

POLICE REVIEW SYSTEM /

SYSTÈME D'EXAMEN DE LA POLICE

CANCER PREVENTION /

PRÉVENTION DU CANCER

POLICE REVIEW SYSTEM

CANCER PREVENTION

POLICE REVIEW SYSTEM

CANCER PREVENTION /

PRÉVENTION DU CANCER

VISITORS

ORAL QUESTIONS

CRIMINAL INJURIES

COMPENSATION BOARD

HOSPITAL SERVICES

NUCLEAR ENERGY

GASOLINE PRICES

LIQUOR CONTROL BOARD

OF ONTARIO

HOSPITAL FUNDING

CHILD CARE

HIGHWAY LITTER

PIT BULL LEGISLATION

HOSPITAL FUNDING

NATIVE LAND DISPUTE

WSIB EMPLOYEE PENSION PLAN

WORKPLACE SAFETY FOR STUDENTS

YOUTH SERVICES

PETITIONS

LONG-TERM CARE

EDUCATION FUNDING

TUITION

IDENTITY THEFT

CONVENIENCE STORES

CHILD CARE

LONG-TERM CARE

CHILD CARE

LONG-TERM CARE

HOUSE SITTINGS

ORDERS OF THE DAY

PLANNING AND CONSERVATION

LAND STATUTE LAW

AMENDMENT ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 MODIFIANT DES LOIS

EN CE QUI A TRAIT À L'AMÉNAGEMENT

DU TERRITOIRE ET AUX TERRES PROTÉGÉES

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

HIGHWAY 417

Mr. John Yakabuski (Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke): This is not the first time I have raised this issue, nor is it likely to be the last.

Nevertheless, given the lack of response on the part of the McGuinty government and the Minister of Transportation, I must continue to draw attention to the issue of four-laning Highway 417 through

Arnprior and beyond.

I would like the Minister of Transportation to know that, after recently meeting with his ministry officials to discuss the status of projects in my riding of

Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke, I was not pleased with the fact that while the design work for the extension is ongoing, there is no commitment to its actual approval and construction in their current

five-year plan.

I would like to ask the minister: When will your government realize that the residents of rural Ontario deserve a fair shake from their government? When will you

realize that they have a right to the same economic opportunities afforded to those who live in the GTA?

I have spoken many times on the benefits that would follow the 417 extension. The economic boost that would result for people in my riding would go a long way

towards raising their standard of living. So I say to the Minister of Transportation, you are not shy when it comes to collecting the gas tax from my constituents. Your government continues to take

more and more from them, while it gives back less and less.

I have two things for the minister to ponder: Give us back our share of the gas tax, and build that road.

HYDRO RATES

Mr. Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North): Last week's announcement that Ontario residents will now be asked to pay more for their

electricity was certainly not an easy decision to make. Any time you ask people to pay more for a product that they absolutely rely on, you can expect resistance, particularly from constituents

already struggling to survive on fixed incomes.

Having said that, it's difficult to imagine how we could have continued to carry on adding additional debt that would be left for generations to come to pay off.

However, any additional costs are undeniably a burden for many of our disadvantaged citizens, and it is for that reason that I am grateful that $100 million has been found to help low-income

families deal with those increased costs.

But at a time when we are asking people to begin to pay the true cost of electricity, I find it absolutely frustrating that the federal government is imposing

the goods and services tax on our hydro bills. Attached to a debt retirement charge which is neither a good nor a service, the GST is an unnecessary additional financial burden on hydro ratepayers,

both residential and commercial, that should simply be removed -- an appropriate action that would immediately lower all of our hydro bills.

I am pleased that Energy Minister Cansfield shares this view and is preparing to challenge the federal government over this imposed tax. Elimination of the GST

from our hydro bills is long overdue. Considering the impact of other cost increases in the north, such as the price of gasoline for our vehicles, it is all the more vital that this unfair tax is

removed immediately.

PLANT CLOSURE

Mr. Ted Arnott (Waterloo-Wellington): Along with my colleagues the members for Kitchener-Waterloo, Elizabeth Witmer, and Cambridge, Gerry

Martiniuk, I want to express again in this House our deep concerns for the employees of B.F. Goodrich Tire in Kitchener.

Earlier this year, we were disappointed to learn that B.F. Goodrich Tire would be closing down its Kitchener plant this summer, eliminating the jobs of 1,100

workers. This was devastating news for our communities in Waterloo region, but it is the workers themselves and their families who now face the prospect of unemployment or reduced income when the

plant closes its doors and locks its gates for the last time on July 22. These 1,100 workers aren't just statistics; they are the lifeblood of our community -- our volunteers, our neighbours, our

friends -- and they need our vocal expressions of empathy and support as they enter this summer of economic uncertainty.

We have received countless letters from B.F. Goodrich employees, and I talked to the wife of one of them today. These letters ask for the help of the provincial

government to stem the tide of manufacturing job losses -- 140,000 since July 2004.

I call upon the government today to act upon my jobs resolution, which has been before the House for 11 months now, and immediately develop an action plan to

protect manufacturing jobs in Ontario.

HOWARD WHITWELL

Ms. Jennifer F. Mossop (Stoney Creek): When Howard Whitwell was born in Stoney Creek on January 15, 1919, it was a far different place than it

is today. Then it was a community where a horse and wagon were as common as a car, and milk was delivered to your doorstep each morning. It was a community that he loved.

Beginning as a driver at the family-run Stoney Creek Fuel and Supply Co., he developed an understanding of his neighbours, both new and old, and found the

purpose in his life through service -- service to his country, his neighbours and his town.

He served Canada in the Royal Canadian Air Force during the Second World War, and it was there that he met his wife of over 60 years. Far from the place of his

birth, he fell in love with a girl from Stoney Creek.

He served his neighbours as a businessman providing ice and fuel daily in the days before electric refrigerators and modern heating, and perhaps most importantly

he served as mayor and as a member of council for Stoney Creek.

In the twilight of his life, he returned to the community that he loved so that he could spend time with his family, friends and his beloved wife. During that

time, he marvelled at the growth in the city and he would beam with pride knowing that, despite great changes, Stoney Creek had retained that which made it so special to him: a close sense of

community, an indomitable optimism and a consistent readiness to help those in need.

Today I am very proud to say that his family is here in the members' gallery: his daughter Marilyn and his grandsons Allan and David. They have brought to me his

gavel and a photograph of him wearing the chain of office to return to his beloved home of Stoney Creek, which I will do with honour.

PREMIER OF ONTARIO

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): The people of North Bay must be wondering why they're being forgotten by the McGuinty Liberals. Last

week, the Premier made it to North Bay. The only problem is, he thought he was in Sudbury. The headline of the North Bay Nugget after his visit reads: "Premier Unprepared for Visit: McGuinty Vague

with Answers, Calls City by Wrong Name During Stop."

A review of recent news articles in North Bay demonstrates the frustration that city officials and councillors are feeling.

On April 11, the North Bay Nugget reads: "City Services May Have to Be Cut, CFO Says: North Bay Losing Because of Changes to Provincial Fund."

On April 13: "Sometimes `Answers' Are Not Answers at All

"No one was expecting Premier Dalton McGuinty to share the meaning of life with reporters during his visit to North Bay last week.

"But some direct answers to some direct questions would have been nice."

And in today's North Bay Nugget, the headline is "Funding Shortfall Has City Ranting

"City councillors continued to flog the provincial funding issue Tuesday, venting for the umpteenth time their frustration with shortfalls under the Ontario

municipal partnership fund....

"`We've got two options ... either the province comes to help or we're going to be facing massive cuts in services,' Chirico said, noting the city has been

trying to draw provincial attention to the issue for the past two years."

How has the province responded? Today's paper states that "little ground has been gained despite raising the issue with Nipissing MPP Monique Smith and other

provincial officials."

THE BEACH

Mr. Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): The age-old question of eastern Toronto has finally been settled: Is it the Beach or the Beaches? Well,

I'll tell you: It's been answered because 2,200 residents have cast their ballots and 58% of those have chosen "the Beach." People have asked me; people have telephoned and said, "How will that

affect you? You are the member from Beaches-East York." The name is not going to change, nor are the names of the Beaches Business and Professionals Association, nor the Beaches BIA, nor the

Beaches Jazz Festival, nor the plethora of other names of businesses in the Beach or Beaches, as you see fit. The people, of course, will continue to call their home, their residence and their

neighbourhood what they will.

The vote, though, did decide one very important issue: The street signage along Queen Street will say "The Beach." In that regard, the Beach will be just like

other communities in Toronto such as Greektown, Little Italy, Kensington and Chinatown, which all have their distinctive signs. That distinctive sign will now, of course, say "The Beach," but this

will not change in any sense our community, with its wonderful restaurants, with its beautiful stores, with the best shopping street of any large city in Ontario, according to TVOntario. It will

not change the jazz festival, the wonderful neighbours or the ambience along that area, which will forever be the four beaches of Toronto.

SHONA THORBURN

Ms. Judy Marsales (Hamilton West): I proudly rise in the House today to congratulate a young lady who has made the city of Hamilton proud. Shona

Thorburn, a Westdale high school graduate, was drafted seventh overall in the Women's National Basketball Association by the Minnesota Lynx. Shona is the first Ontario female basketball player ever

drafted.

Ms. Thorburn started playing basketball at Dalewood public school, and the coach recognized her exceptional ability. Her love of the sport had her also playing

with Hamilton's Transway basketball program. It's been a long journey for Shona. She played at Westdale high school -- which, interestingly enough, is now celebrating its 75th anniversary -- and

Shona won three straight championships while at Westdale. Ms. Thorburn's hard work paid off, as she was rewarded with a basketball scholarship.

She began her tenure with the youth team's national program in 1998. She was a team member who participated in the World Youth Games in Moscow, went on to be

co-captain of the 2000 junior team, and then joined the Canadian national team. In 2003, she participated and placed fourth in the Pan Am Games.

Hard work, dedication and support from family, friends, teammates and coaches have made this remarkable girl's dream come true. She would not have been

successful if she didn't practise and play hard to the best of her ability. I want to congratulate Shona Thorburn for a job well done and thank her for putting Hamilton basketball on the world

stage. Congratulations, Shona.

PUBLIC LIBRARIES

Mr. Jim Brownell (Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh): As a former teacher and avid reader, libraries are special places for me. In a properly

stocked library, the world is literally at one's fingertips. As a youth growing up in a family of 12 kids, there wasn't a lot of money for books, so the local library was my way of accessing

literature. It was also an invaluable resource for school projects, personal education and social interaction, as there were many activities that went on in the confines of the library.

Apparently, the last government didn't share that feeling. Whatever their motivation, the Conservatives didn't see the need to support Ontario libraries,

literacy or other activities libraries presented to Ontarians of all ages. As a result, our libraries were allowed to decay, as were our roads, hospitals and schools, not to mention the provincial

budget book.

Among the many past wrongs the McGuinty government is righting is the proper financing of our libraries. In particular, the recent strategic investment announced

will go a long way in supporting family literacy and lifelong learning at small, rural, remote, First Nations and francophone public libraries, traits which are all present in my riding, as they

are in many ridings across the province.

For my riding specifically, the Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry County Library board is receiving $199,500. This will go a long way to fixing the damage done in

the past and improving literacy rates. By supporting Ontario library services, this government is providing for the people of the province. What could we ask for? We have delivered.

EASTER OBSERVANCE

Mr. Mario Sergio (York West): I have a statement. First of all, I have to find it because I just got here.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I would like to do my statement and wear this wonderful jacket, which commemorates an event that took place this past week. I

would like to have unanimous consent.

Mr. Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): To that point, Mr. Speaker: To my colleague in the government backbenches, you don't need permission from

this Legislature to wear the clothing of your choice.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Mr. Sergio has asked for unanimous consent. Agreed? Agreed.

Hon. James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism, minister responsible for seniors, Government House Leader): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: My

question to you is, every time someone wishes to have something that would be a little different in terms of what you would consider a demonstration, will that require the permission of the House

to do so or will you simply rule? For instance, if I were to walk in with one of those jackets on, would I need permission or not?

The Speaker: The Chair really doesn't want to be Mr. Blackstone on these kinds of issues. Provided they are suitable to everyday attire here in

Ontario, I think they would be appropriate; however, it is always advisable that a member seek consent of his or her colleagues in this situation.

Mr. Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): On that point of order, Mr. Speaker: I would certainly hope that we don't need a point of order to dress

in the traditional dress of any nationality in this province, including First Nations.

The Speaker: I think I've previously made a ruling.

The member for York West.

Mr. Sergio: I want to thank the House for the understanding they have shown with respect to the occasion.

In light of the holy Easter season, 150 Christian leaders and business people, representing the 8.4 million Christians in the province of Ontario, gathered in

the Legislature last Thursday to prayerfully support and encourage us as government leaders in our service to this province and country. Deputy Grand Chief Kenny Blacksmith was joined by another

First Nations leader, Barry Maracle, to bring blessings from his people. Among the many gifts they came to honour the government with, they brought a beautiful handcrafted clock for the Premier,

shrouded by two auspicious eagles, with their wings outstretched and touching. The clock was a symbol, they explained, that it was time for the First Nations and the government to walk together in

courage, boldness, peace and unity.

I know you are wondering about this delightful leather vest. Yes, you are right. It not only makes me look younger; it represents the First Nations' covering,

prayers and blessings over us. This is something I shall always truly treasure.

Easter is the celebration of the Lord Jesus Christ's resurrection from the dead. It is a message of hope, life and second chances. We take our promise from

Isaiah 55, the theme of last Thursday morning: "Instead of the thornbush will grow the pine tree, and instead of the briers the myrtle will grow. This will be for the Lord's renown," for our

government.

VISITORS

Mr. Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I want to extend a special welcome to Alyssa Surani, who is in the west gallery

-- she is a grade 7 student at Silverstream Public School in Richmond Hill -- and her grandmother, Mrs. Rose Surani. Please join me in welcoming them to Queen's Park.

Ms. Judy Marsales (Hamilton West): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I would like to extend a warm welcome to my mother, Noella Laurence, who is

a tribute to this country's great health care system, visiting us from Winnipeg.

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE

ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): I beg to inform the House that today the Clerk received the report on intended appointments dated April 19,

2006, of the standing committee on government agencies. Pursuant to standing order 106(e)(9), the report is deemed to be adopted by the House.

STANDING COMMITTEE

ON ESTIMATES

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): Pursuant to standing order 59(

a) and 60(a), I beg leave to present a report from the standing committee on

estimates on the estimates selected and not selected by the standing committee for consideration.

The Acting Clerk-at-the-Table (Ms. Tonia Grannum): Ms. Horwath from the standing committee on estimates presents the committee's report as

follows:

Pursuant to standing order 59, your committee has selected the estimates 2006-07 of the following ministries and offices for consideration:

Ministry of Education: nine hours;

Ministry of Community and Social Services: six hours;

Ministry of Finance: eight hours;

Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care: seven hours;

Ministry of Health Promotion: seven hours, 30 minutes;

Ministry of Intergovernmental Affairs: seven hours, 30 minutes;

Ministry of the Environment: seven hours, 30 minutes;

Ministry of Children and Youth Services: seven hours, 30 minutes;

Ministry of Energy: nine hours;

Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing: six hours;

Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities: seven hours, 30 minutes;

Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal: seven hours, 30 minutes.

Pursuant to standing order 60, the estimates 2006-07 of the following ministries and offices not selected for consideration are --

Ms. Horwath: Dispense.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Dispense? Dispense.

Pursuant to standing order 60(b), the report of the committee is deemed to be received and the estimates of the ministries and offices named therein as not

being selected for consideration by the committee are deemed to be concurred in.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

INDEPENDENT POLICE

REVIEW ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR L'EXAMEN

INDÉPENDANT DE LA POLICE

Mr. Bryant moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 103,

An Act to establish an Independent Police Review Director and create a new public complaints process by amending the Police Services Act /

Projet de loi 103, Loi visant à créer le poste de directeur indépendant d'examen de la police et à créer une nouvelle procédure de traitement des plaintes du public en

modifiant la

Loi sur les services policiers.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

Does the minister wish to make a brief statement?

Hon. Michael Bryant (Attorney General): I'll defer my comments to ministerial statements.

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

Hon. James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism, minister responsible for seniors, Government House Leader): I move that, pursuant to standing

order 9(c)(i), the House shall meet from 6:45 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. on Wednesday, April 19, 2006, for the purpose of considering government business.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Mr. Bradley has moved government notice of motion 105. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion

carry?

All in favour will say "aye."

All opposed will say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1355 to 1400.

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

Ayes

Arnott, Ted

Balkissoon, Bas

Bartolucci, Rick

Bentley, Christopher

Berardinetti, Lorenzo

Bradley, James J.

Bryant, Michael

Caplan, David

Chambers, Mary Anne V.

Chudleigh, Ted

Colle, Mike

Cordiano, Joseph

Crozier, Bruce

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duguid, Brad

Elliott, Christine

Gravelle, Michael

Hardeman, Ernie

Hoy, Pat

Jackson, Cameron

Klees, Frank

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Leal, Jeff

Levac, Dave

MacLeod, Lisa

Marsales, Judy

Martiniuk, Gerry

Matthews, Deborah

Mauro, Bill

McMeekin, Ted

Meilleur, Madeleine

Miller, Norm

Milloy, John

Mitchell, Carol

Mossop, Jennifer F.

Munro, Julia

O'Toole, John

Orazietti, David

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Parsons, Ernie

Patten, Richard

Peters, Steve

Phillips, Gerry

Qaadri, Shafiq

Ramal, Khalil

Rinaldi, Lou

Runciman, Robert W.

Ruprecht, Tony

Sandals, Liz

Scott, Laurie

Sergio, Mario

Smith, Monique

Smitherman, George

Sorbara, Gregory S.

Sterling, Norman W.

Tory, John

Watson, Jim

Wilkinson, John

Witmer, Elizabeth

Wong, Tony C.

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Yakabuski, John

Zimmer, David

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

Nays

Bisson, Gilles

Horwath, Andrea

Kormos, Peter

Marchese, Rosario

Prue, Michael

Tabuns, Peter

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 64; the nays are 6.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

POLICE REVIEW SYSTEM /

SYSTÈME D'EXAMEN DE LA POLICE

Hon. Michael Bryant (Attorney General): I rise in the House today to introduce legislation that, if passed, would entrench an independent and

transparent police review system.

A strong police review system that is equitable and effective for both the public and the police is important to the people of Ontario and is a critical

component in a civil society that maintains people's high confidence in police services. According to a 2003 Statistics Canada study, more than 80% of the Canadian public say they have confidence

in our police, and so they should.

If passed, the Independent Police Review Act, 2006, would provide the public with a new and significant option for bringing forward their concerns to an

independent civilian director of police review. At the same time, the legislation will ensure that there is a fair, sensible and clear system that does not weigh down police with frivolous

complaints or otherwise interfere with our police services' ability to keep our streets safe. This is not a return to the cumbersome; it is rather a step forward.

The centrepiece of the proposed legislation is an independent civilian body led by an independent review director, who would be responsible for the intake and

initial screening of police complaints.

The availability of an independent body to which concerns can be brought would be a significant new option for the public. However, under the proposed system,

if a member of the public wants to deal directly with the police service involved, they will still have that choice.

We anticipate that local police services will continue to play a key and vital role in resolving Ontarians' concerns and complaints about policing. Complaints

by third parties would be allowed where certain legislative criteria are met.

This legislation would allow the director to determine, on a case-by-case basis, who would be responsible for investigating a complaint. The director could

investigate the complaint or refer the complaint to the police service involved or another police service for investigation.

If passed, the legislation would subject the parties to a hearing process only where there are reasonable grounds to believe that there is misconduct.

Furthermore, all parties would benefit from the establishment of standards for the people responsible for presiding over such a hearing

Nous avons apporté un soin particulier à la rédaction de ce projet de loi. Notre gouvernement savait depuis le départ qu'il s'agissait

d'une question extrêmement complexe.

Applause.

Hon. Mr. Bryant: Order.

We decided that this was an issue that required careful thought and extensive review. We appointed the Honourable Patrick LeSage, former Chief Justice of the

Superior Court of Ontario and former chief prosecutor of Ontario, to lead a formal and independent review. Justice LeSage was asked to explore a range of perspectives and identify ways to improve

the current way public complaints about the police are handled to ensure that a new system would be fair, effective and transparent.

I would like to take this opportunity to once again express our government's and the public's thanks to His Honour Mr. LeSage, not only for agreeing to take on

this difficult assignment but also for his very thorough review and his balanced and insightful report on the matter.

Applause.

Hon. Mr. Bryant: Hear, hear.

In addition to reviewing over 100 written submissions from the public and holding public meetings across the province, Justice LeSage travelled across the

province to meet personally with hundreds of groups and individuals representing police, community groups and the general public. After months of consultation and review, Justice LeSage submitted

his report, including a number of recommendations. The legislation I am introducing today is based on former Chief Justice LeSage's well-thought-out and excellent recommendations, and implements

his report.

The report recommended the creation of an independent body to administer the police review system that we are introducing today. My colleague across the way,

the member for Niagara Centre, called His Honour Justice LeSage's report "a tremendous effort," and I certainly agree with him. It was a tremendous effort, distilling a number of views and a number

of opinions from a number of people, in addition to considering a number of different models and providing recommendations in a thorough, careful and straightforward way, in language that was

extremely helpful and accessible to the public and implementable by a government.

After reviewing the report, I met with many, many key stakeholder groups: chiefs of police, various police associations and many community groups. We discussed

Justice LeSage's recommendations at length and, after this consultation, drafted the legislation that is being introduced today.

In order for a police review system to work, it has to have the confidence of the public and the confidence and respect of the police. It's a delicate balance.

Since the 1970s, successive governments have attempted to strike that balance. A strong and independent police review system that is fair and effective for both the police and the public is what

Ontarians deserve and what will be achieved if this bill is passed.

CANCER PREVENTION /

PRÉVENTION DU CANCER

Hon. Jim Watson (Minister of Health Promotion): I rise in the House today in the middle of what is known as Daffodil Month to acknowledge this

week as the first-ever Cancer Prevention Week, as designated by the Canadian Cancer Society. Many of us have taken special care to wear a daffodil pin or a yellow ribbon, to purchase daffodils or

participate in a drive to raise money and awareness of the issues related to cancer and cancer prevention this month.

We, as a government, are only weeks away from delivering our promise to protect people from the effects of second-hand smoke in the workplace and in public

places.

Je suis fier de mettre cette loi de l'avant et je serai de retour dans quelques semaines devant cette Assemblée pour lui faire part des progrès que

nous aurons accomplis dans la mise en oeuvre de la loi pour une Ontario sans fumée, le 31 mai.

Tobacco consumption is responsible for over 30% of all cancers, and we are confident that with the combination of Smoke-Free Ontario, measures to prevent youth

from smoking and assistance we are providing to smokers who wish to quit, we will be helping to prevent cancer in this province.

Sadly, one in three Canadians will develop cancer in their lifetime. I doubt there is one of us in this assembly who does not know someone -- a mother, a

father, a son, a daughter, a friend or a neighbour -- who has been affected by cancer. In fact, it's the leading cause of illness and death in Ontario. But, amazingly, about 50% of cancers are

preventable, according to Cancer Care Ontario.

Members of the House will be hearing more over the next weeks on the actions my ministry has taken and will be taking with regard to further cancer and chronic

disease prevention. This community-based approach is the only way that together we will make a difference in preventing cancer. The goal of our ministry is to provide leadership and resources to

help individuals and communities take responsibility for their health, and our healthy active living strategy is going to assist in that regard.

À ce jour, nous avons donc posé de solides fondations sur lesquelles nous assoirons nos prochaines mesures. Depuis que je dirige le ministère de

la Promotion de la santé, nous invitons pour la troisième fois les organismes à nous soumettre des projets dans le cadre du Fonds communautés actives.

These grants are effectively encouraging individuals, families and community groups to become physically active, a key component in preventing a number of

cancers.

We have been consulting heavily with Ontario's fruit and vegetable growers. Having access to fresh produce for meals and snacks is an important component of

healthy living and a key strategy for cancer prevention.

I would be remiss if I didn't take this opportunity to point out that preventing cancer is not a solitary battle. The Canadian Cancer Society and its legion of

volunteers have worked tirelessly as a partner with government initiatives, but also as an independently minded advocate for public policy over the years. They have also worked very hard in

communities across the province to bring awareness on cancer prevention; to raise money for research, both scientific and behavioural; and to provide programs and support for patients who have

cancers.

We all know in our own ridings the many dedicated men and women in our communities who organize a Cancer Society fundraiser or sell daffodils in the mall or

drive cancer patients to their chemotherapy treatments. On behalf of Premier McGuinty and, I believe, all members of the Legislature, we say thank you to our volunteers as we celebrate Cancer

Prevention Week.

If we do not collectively take action and as well promote individual responsibility, we will overtake the capacity of the health care system to respond. Our

government is taking action to aid in the fight to prevent cancer, and it's together that we will make significant strides. I look ahead and see great possibilities for progress on this issue.

Comme la Société canadienne du cancer s'est avérée un partenaire efficace, j'espère pouvoir continuer à compter sur sa

collaboration et sur ses conseils.

Joining us in the gallery are Danielle Paterson and Amanda Kusick from the Canadian Cancer Society. I'd ask members to give them a warm welcome for the work

they do.

I would also like to commend the president of the Canadian Cancer Society, Mr. Peter Goodhand, who does so much good work and sits on my campaign cabinet for a

smoke-free Ontario, along with about a dozen other individuals, giving us advice as we head toward the May 31 implementation date of Smoke-Free Ontario.

I ask members of the House to join me in spreading the message of Cancer Prevention Week and the steps we all take to be healthier individuals: becoming a

non-smoker; eating a healthy diet, including fresh fruit and vegetables every day. Be physically active on a regular basis, follow cancer screening guidelines and take

part in some of the wonderful

cancer society fundraisers. Many of us have the opportunity of having a Relay for Life, which is a celebration of life. I know that people like Lee Near -- I know the Leader of the Opposition knows

Lee Near very well from Rockcliffe village. She has done great work promoting the Relay for Life when it was first brought to Ottawa a few years ago.

Preventing cancer is the primary way to fight this disease, and we all have a role to play. I again thank the Canadian Cancer Society for bringing this new

initiative to the forefront. I thank them very much for the work they do, as we work in partnership to bring Smoke-Free Ontario to the province of Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Responses?

POLICE REVIEW SYSTEM

Mr. Robert W. Runciman (Leeds-Grenville): In terms of the official opposition and the Attorney General's announcement today with respect to

new police complaints processes in the province, we're approaching that with a degree of trepidation, primarily because we believe the current system, which has been in effect for about 10 years,

has worked reasonably well, with some problems that the former government was in the process of addressing, primarily in terms of outreach to a variety of communities across the province. But

essentially, the system that was developed and is in place at the moment was brought into force through extensive consultation with stakeholders, and certainly with the police organizations and

front-line police officers.

I have to say that my concern is having some input with respect to the impact on front-line police officers. What's this going to mean in terms of police

morale? What's this going to mean in terms of red tape? What's this going to mean in terms of taking police officers off the streets on a more regular basis?

I'll give you an example. I've talked about police red tape. I was having lunch with a former police officer today, and we were talking about police red tape

and the search warrant application to search the home of the individual found responsible for the murder of Holly Jones. That application was 800 pages -- an 800-page application. That's the sort

of bureaucratic nightmare that we've created in this province in a whole range of areas for the men and women in blue who try to protect our communities on a regular basis. And I am concerned about

this initiative.

The Attorney General has included the ability for third party complaints. I'm not sure anyone appreciates the impact that could have. That means someone not

engaged or involved in an incident, perhaps two blocks away and thinks they saw something, could now file a complaint against a police officer and leave that individual, that officer, who may be a

hard-working, dedicated individual, twisting in the wind while this complaint goes through this bureaucratic morass that the Attorney General is creating.

I haven't had an opportunity to review the legislation, whether he's accepting all the recommendations. I know Justice LeSage talked about regional offices as

well. I'm not sure if that's being incorporated. But again, that's another layer of bureaucracy, which we know the Liberals love: developing bureaucracy at great expense to taxpayers.

I'm not sure that Justice LeSage made -- there's reference here to a number of meetings. I have one -- perhaps an oversight. I'm not sure about the meeting

with the editorial board of the Toronto Star, but undoubtedly that occurred, because I think a lot of these changes have been driven by the position taken under the former government with respect

to police complaints in Toronto and perceived problems in the city of Toronto. Again, I think it reflects the Toronto-centric mentality of this government, where we have changes being brought

forward that have an impact right across the province on police services and hard-working men and women in our police services. So I think those are considerations that have to be considered.

Again, it's a reflection of basic Liberal philosophy: They don't trust policemen and policewomen in this province. That's a basic Liberal philosophy, and we're

going to hold them to account on this, and we will get the truth with respect to the impact on men and women who represent us so well in police communities across Ontario.

CANCER PREVENTION

Mr. Norman W. Sterling (Lanark-Carleton): Our party would like to add its comments to the minister's with regard to the prevention of cancer.

It is with some sadness, however: The one third of our population who do contract this terrible disease cannot get surgery in time. In fact, cancer surgery times have increased anywhere from 10% to

80% across Ontario under this government's rule.

Notwithstanding that, we add our voices with regard to support for controlling smoking in the workplace. I had the pleasure of introducing the first bill to do

that in 1985. The Liberal government from 1985 to 1989 were dragged kicking and screaming and finally brought forward a bill in 1989 after I had introduced seven private member's bills to do that.

It's great to have these recent converts to this policy of our party.

I would like to congratulate the Canadian Cancer Society on all their work, and the volunteers who help them so much.

POLICE REVIEW SYSTEM

Mr. Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): New Democrats welcome the opportunity to debate and review the civilian complaints review process.

In a free and democratic society, in a society where the rule of law prevails, police are held to an incredibly high and taxing standard. That is the way it

has to be. I don't envy police officers out there, working on our streets in communities across this province, who have incredibly challenging tasks to perform, who have to deal with some of the

most dangerous people in our society and who are at the same time put to the test on a daily basis with respect to the standards that are set for them.

We in the New Democratic Party hold Judge LeSage in the greatest of regard and, yes, without hesitation view his report as the result of tremendous effort.

Why did you sit on it for a year? We should have been embarking on this debate 12 months ago when the report was prepared.

I want this Attorney General to understand very, very clearly that we in the NDP don't believe you can draft legislation -- least of all legislation like this

-- by fiat. There has to be a broad-based public debate.

So I say to you, Attorney General, that if you have been cautious enough about this to have had the report and considered it for the last 11 or 12 months, we

should be cautious enough to ensure that there is a thorough debate and analysis of your legislation in the course of this legislative process and that there are public hearings, that there is a

healthy, vigorous, inclusive debate.

I'm sure you did consult police associations and chiefs of police and any number of community groups that deal with concerns out there on the street. I'm not

sure that all of them necessarily agree with the legislation you have drafted. We are not afraid of the debate. We are not afraid of the discussion. We are not afraid of hearing what will be

diverse points of view and oftentimes conflicting interests being encountered in that committee room, both here at Queen's Park and in the committee rooms that I insist have to occur across the

province.

If you really have concern about the standards of policing and ensuring rigorous propriety on the part of police, let's ensure that they are adequately

staffed, that they're adequately resourced, that they're adequately trained. Travel up to places like Peawanuk or Attawapiskat or Marten Falls in the riding of Timmins-James Bay with the member,

like I have, and look at police forces with dedicated, hard-working women and men in the native police services who are working with broken tools, who are working with no resources, never mind

minimal resources, who are working with little more than basic training because their communities can't afford to send them down to places like Aylmer and Ottawa with the RCMP, where that kind of

training takes place.

Yes, police have to be held to high standards. But, by God, if we're going to hold them to high standards, let's make sure that we give them the support, the

tools and the resources that they need to perform their jobs safely and effectively and in accordance with rigorous standards.

CANCER PREVENTION /

PRÉVENTION DU CANCER

Mr. Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): I applaud him. That was very good.

I want to say the following. On se joint au gouvernement sur son annonce aujourd'hui qui dit qu'ils veulent tout faire pour être capables de prévenir

le cancer dans notre province. Je pense qu'il n'y a pas un député dans cette Assemblée qui va dire le contraire.

Mais je rappelle au ministre que c'est le même Parti libéral qui est aujourd'hui le gouvernement, et qui était dans l'opposition dans le

passé, qui avait fait des promesses qui étaient pas mal claires en opposition pour être capable d'assister sur cette question : par exemple, toute la question du cancer du

colon. On sait que 17 % du monde présentement qui ont le cancer, qui aurait été vérifié avec des tests spéciaux pour le cancer du colon, auraient pu prévenir

ce cancer et survivre jusqu'à cette date. Mais le gouvernement a promis dans la dernière élection qu'ils étaient pour faire quelque chose, qu'ils étaient pour s'organiser

pour que ces tests soient mandatoires. On se trouve aujourd'hui trois ans et demi dans le mandat de ce gouvernement et on n'a pas gardé cette promesse avec la population ontarienne.

Donc, on rappelle au gouvernement que c'est bien beau de dire de belles affaires --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you.

VISITORS

Mr. Lorenzo Berardinetti (Scarborough Southwest): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I want to introduce the kids from Charles Gordon Senior

Public School who are here in the west gallery with their teacher, Dixon Brown, Forman Garber, and Laurence Dawkins. Can we give them a nice, warm welcome.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you. That's not a point of order, but welcome.

ORAL QUESTIONS

CRIMINAL INJURIES

COMPENSATION BOARD

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the Premier. Could you tell us, Premier, what the current financial status is --

the balance is what I'm looking for -- for the victims' justice fund?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): I'll refer that to the Attorney General.

Hon. Michael Bryant (Attorney General): I want the member to know and I know he'll be pleased to learn that, come October 2007, this

government will have spent twice the amount in our four years that the previous government spent in eight years from the victims' justice fund.

It is very important that people understand that the victims' justice fund is administered under a system that takes into account regional input and requires

us to assess the many valid and important applications that are made. Yes, there needs to be due process to ensure that those who apply for the victims' justice fund get appropriate consideration,

but you need to be able to get that money out to serve victims, and that's what this government is doing.

Mr. Tory: In that self-congratulatory response, there wasn't an answer. I'll suggest the answer is $40 million, which is the amount that's

sitting in that fund that is not being used effectively to represent the interests of victims of crime.

The Toronto Sun last week in an

article referred to how "our Criminal Injuries Compensation Board is hopelessly backlogged, pays a pittance, sometimes takes

years to pay out, and during that long and arduous process, often offends, frustrates and revictimizes crime victims." With the exception of last week's front-page story, in almost all cases

criminals are unable to pay satisfactory restitution to victims. Therefore, the system needs to run effectively and smoothly if the victims are to have any realistic opportunity of having a change

brought about in their lives as a result of the activities of criminals.

Why are you ignoring the needs of victims? Why are you allowing victims to themselves be victimized by a system that is backlogged and broken down and not

working?

Hon. Mr. Bryant: I want to address the issue that the member mentioned with respect to what happened last week in the courts and the decision

of Mr. Justice Watt in the supplementary. But I know the member will be pleased to learn that this government, through the victims' justice fund, has invested $13 million in 200 community-based

agencies through victim services grants to support a wide variety of projects. We have projects supporting victims of sexual abuse. We in fact increased the funding for sexual assault centres by

some 10% last year. It was the first such increase to sexual assault centres that they had seen since 1995. I think that's a year the member is familiar with. We invested money for software to

assist students to learn how to work online and be safe online and to protect themselves from Internet stalkers; $2 million in increased funding to the --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you. Final supplementary.

Mr. Tory: Again, there was really not an answer given. But what has also happened is that the McGuinty government has all but eliminated the

Office for Victims of Crime. The victims unit has basically been shut down, and now we're hearing an answering machine when people call there for help rather than talking to a human being. John

Muise, a member of the Toronto Police Service for more than 26 years, is the one who complained to the Toronto Sun that you and your government changed the status of the Office for Victims of Crime

from full-time to part-time status. How is this system supposed to effectively manage the needs of victims when there is no one there to answer the phone, when the Criminal Injuries Compensation

Board is hopelessly backlogged and overloaded and it takes years to pay out, and even when it does pay out, it pays out a pittance?

My question is this: Will you agree at this point in time to take the provisions that are currently in place and agree to a full review of those provisions,

including timing, service, compensation levels and so on? It's time for a review. These things have been in place for a while. Will you agree to that kind of a review so we can really help the

victims?

Hon. Mr. Bryant: It's true; this government inherited a victims' justice fund system that really was not in existence. I say again to the

member opposite, the money has been committed. The surplus has been committed. It is going to places like the communities of Lanark, Leeds and Grenville counties -- $240,000 annually to the victim

crisis assistance and referral centres.

The member mentions victims' compensation. He will know that last week Priscilla de Villiers said of the result involving compensation directly to Louise Russo

that, "This is a red-letter day for victims." It's something that victim advocates have been asking for for a long time.

The member opposite and his party seem to take an approach to victim services that is the lowest-common-denominator approach, which is to say that if all

victims cannot obtain the result that Ms. Russo did, then none should. We say, that's wrong. He doesn't accept the fact that Mr. Justice Watt provided an independent judgment, but I do.

I would also remind the member of what one Mr. Rosen said last week of his justice critic with respect to his comments --

The Speaker: Thank you. New question.

HOSPITAL SERVICES

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): My question again is to the Premier. Ontarians want a health care system where they're receiving the

right care at the right time. Can you explain to me why cancer surgery wait times at the Ottawa Hospital are up 26% since last July, after you promised the people of Ottawa that wait times would be

shorter under your watch?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): To the Minister of Health.

Hon. George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I've noted a recent fascination on the part of the honourable member with some

numbers, but I wanted today to use the opportunity to put a few more on the record. As an example, with respect to cancer surgery wait times on a per-LHIN basis, in Central LHIN, they've gone down

by 8.3%; in Central East by 3.7%; in Mississauga-Halton by 19.2%, and I have more. In the Champlain LHIN, angiography waits are down by 6%; angioplasty down by 40%; bypass surgery down by 5.6%; hip

replacements by 19.4%.

All across Ontario, there are more than 700,000 hits on our website from Ontarians who for the first time are celebrating the fact that they can gain important

information. This is a renewal of health care that's essential. We inherited from that government the capacity not even to measure the number of cancer surgeries that were being provided.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Supplementary.

Ms. Lisa MacLeod (Nepean-Carleton): These numbers don't lie. The data are straight from your own wait times website. Despite Ontarians paying

more, they're always getting less.

Let's talk about two hospitals that serve my constituency, the Premier's and the parliamentary secretary's from Ottawa West-Nepean. Cancer surgery wait times

at the Montfort Hospital are up 51% since last July. And let's look at the Queensway Carleton Hospital, where cancer surgery wait times are up 25%.

Hon. Sandra Pupatello (Minister of Education, minister responsible for women's issues): I want to personally welcome you to the House.

Ms. MacLeod: Thank you.

Minister, you're continuing to make Ontarians get more -- pay more and get less when it comes to cancer surgery waits. Why does your government continue to

break its promises for wait times in the city of Ottawa?

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: It really is a privilege to welcome a member whose first question sounded so much like mine, and emanating from a very

familiar part of the Legislature. I do welcome the honourable member.

I want to say that I thought it was interesting that as she read off her question, she still couldn't lift the words off the page without saying and

recognizing that Ontarians are getting more, that, across the breadth of health care investments, from the $2.4 billion that you promised to cut, Ontarians are getting more. So we've got community

health centres coming to life all over Ontario, newborn screening capacity that didn't exist, free vaccinations -- a $1.3-billion investment.

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: To the very direct question that the honourable member attempts to heckle through the answer, with respect to Champlain,

an area of the province that was left behind for MRIs, the Champlain district now reports the third-lowest wait for MRIs in Ontario, a 35% increase, because your party --

The Speaker: Thank you. Final supplementary. The Leader of the Opposition.

Mr. Tory: Of course, no answer --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Stop the clock. Order. I can wait. Final supplementary.

Mr. Tory: So we have no answer on the Montfort Hospital's 51% cancer surgery wait times; no answer on Queensway Carleton, up 25% since last

July --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Stop the clock. The member from Prince Edward-Hastings isn't in his seat.

We really do need to have some respect for people asking questions in this place. We really do need to have quiet when other people are speaking. The Leader of

the Opposition.

Mr. Tory: The minister raised the Champlain LHIN, and of course, the champion cherry picker again gave us some numbers that suited his case.

But let's talk about the 27% increase to cancer surgery wait times within the Champlain LHIN, covering the communities of Ottawa, Pembroke, Hawkesbury, Cornwall and Winchester. People want a system

that gives the right care at the right time, and they've had enough of paying more of the McGuinty health tax and getting less in terms of this kind of increase in wait times. What do you have to

say about that number from the Champlain LHIN, a 27% increase in cancer surgery wait time on your watch? What about it?

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: Here's the reality for the honourable member. Firstly, you should stand in your place, and every time you say "Montfort

Hospital," you should look across the way here and congratulate a government, unlike the one you're part of -- in name, at least -- where you had a plan to close the whole darn thing. We've doubled

the size. When you look across the way, you should talk about MRIs, because your party has a sorry history of ignoring Ottawa. Under our watch, we've reduced by 35% the wait times for MRIs in the

Champlain LHIN.

On the issue of cancer surgeries, there's a slight increase of 3.4%, contrasted by angiography down by 6%, angioplasty down by 40%, bypass surgery down by

5.6%, cataract surgery by 8.8%, hip replacement by 19.4%, knee replacement by 25%, CT scan by 17.4%.

The evidence is there for people all across the breadth of Ontario. Our dedication to reductions in wait times is having results. Over 700,000 people have

logged on to the website --

The Speaker: Thank you. New question.

NUCLEAR ENERGY

Mr. Peter Tabuns (Toronto-Danforth): My question is for Premier McGuinty. New Democrats oppose new nuclear power plants because nuclear plants

have proven to be expensive, unreliable, dirty and dangerous. This morning, you said nuclear power is the best option for Ontario's energy future. If you really believe that, why are you delaying

announcing new nuclear plants for Ontario until after April 26, the 20th anniversary of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): I'm pleased to take the question and to make it clear to the member

opposite that I did not in fact say what he reported I said. I'll be pleased to provide him with a copy of the transcript. What I did say was that it's really important for all of us to be

sober-minded when considering our energy options. There's no neat and tidy solution. Everything has some kind of downside associated with it.

We are exploiting our hydroelectric potential to the max. There is some remaining run-of-the-river stuff that we are getting at now. I think the member

opposite knows that when it comes to natural gas, prices there tend to be volatile, and it remains a significant contributor to global warming. Wind turbines: We are investing heavily in those, but

again, those are an expensive form of electricity and they're not reliable, because sometimes obviously the wind does not blow. When it comes to solar, those tend to be expensive as well. So we

think it's important that we keep new nuclear as an available option for us to consider, which we are doing.

Mr. Tabuns: You are delaying your nuclear announcement until after Chernobyl's 20th anniversary because that accident raises serious questions

about nuclear power safety.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): I need to be able to hear the question from the member for Toronto-Danforth. I'm sure all members would

like to hear the question. The member for Toronto-Danforth.

Mr. Tabuns: When people remember Chernobyl, they remember the worst nuclear plant accident in history: 200,000 people were forced to flee a

toxic plume of radioactive fallout; large swathes of land were badly contaminated, rendered dangerous and desolate; a death toll that could reach 93,000 people.

If you believe new nuclear power is accident-proof, can you give this province an ironclad guarantee that an accident like Chernobyl will never happen in

Ontario?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I think to make a comparison between Ontario's Candu technology and the technology deployed in Russia some 25 years ago,

where an unfortunate incident occurred to the people living in the community of Chernobyl, is irresponsible. We have a different kind of technology here, and the member opposite knows that.

But we're not just sitting on our hands as we weigh these important issues before us. Let me tell you about some of the exciting news that we have by way of

creating new wind farms in Ontario. We've announced three new wind farms in the last month alone. At Erie Shores, there's a new wind farm with 66 turbines producing 99 megawatts of power for 25,000

homes. The first phase of a new wind farm outside Goderich is now up. That's 22 turbines producing enough power for 12,000 homes. And the first phase of a new wind farm is now up outside Shelburne,

Ontario: 45 turbines producing 67.5 megawatts. That's enough to power 18,000 homes.

We are not fixated or obsessed on the nuclear option. We think it's important to be sober in considering our alternatives, but we're moving ahead in important

areas like renewables, like wind power in Ontario.

Mr. Tabuns: Chernobyl taught the world that nuclear accidents happen, and when they do, they have tragic consequences for the environment and

for human health. You want to run away from that legacy. But when it come to Ontario and building new nuclear power plants here, surely the Premier wants to be up front about the potential risks to

people and communities here.

Does the government have any emergency plans, briefing notes or studies that assess the impact of a potential nuclear accident in Ontario and, if so, will the

Premier table them in the Legislature today?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: Again, I think it is truly unfortunate that the honourable member would compare the Chernobyl technology with Canada's

Candu technology; I think that is unfortunate. We've had technology in place here for some 30 years. There has been nothing even approaching what unfortunately happened in Chernobyl. There are some

downsides connected with nuclear, there's no doubt about it, and that's the waste. The upside is that it does not contribute to global warming and there are no toxic emissions. But there is waste

associated with it. The upside to that, of course, is that we have found a way to contain it on-site, but, as I've been very honest with the people of Ontario, you've got to contain that for at

least 1,000 years. That's a real challenge; we understand that.

Again, the point I make to all members but particularly to the people of Ontario, is that there are no easy solutions to our energy challenges. But we will

continue to grapple with this. We will explore all the alternatives. We will act responsibly. We will ensure that we have an adequate supply of clean, affordable electricity in the province --

The Speaker: Thank you. New question.

GASOLINE PRICES

Mr. Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): I've got a question to the Premier of Ontario. Last fall, due to high gas prices, I held a

province-wide Pump Shock tour. I met a lot of people. They were pretty angry about the price of gas and how they were being ripped off last fall, as the price of gas went up to as high as $1.40 a

litre.

Things were bad back then, but they're getting a lot worse now. Maybe you can't tell from the back of your limo, but these days, people are being forced to pay

up to $1.10 or more for a litre of gas.

Premier, I have a simple question for you: When are you going to stand up for drivers and do something about the rising gas prices?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): Let me say that nobody likes to have to pay more for gas at the pump. I

know we've reached a new high when it comes to crude oil on the international markets. But I can tell you that there are some things that our province and our government is doing to assist our

motorists.

First of all, we are bringing on-stream our new ethanol program, which mandates the use of 5% ethanol by 2007 and 10% by 2010. The members opposite may laugh

at this, but not only is that of some environmental value to us, but it acts as a real hedge against international oil prices, over which we have no control. Just recently in our budget, we have

now doubled the sales tax rebate for hybrid cars to $2,000 as a way to encourage people to conserve on gasoline.

Those are some specific initiatives that we have in place at the present time in order to further assist our motorists.

Mr. Bisson: Premier, that's not helping anybody who has to drive up to a pump today. If you drive to a pump somewhere in Ontario today, you're

going to pay anywhere from $1 to $1.15 per litre.

You said a lot of things in opposition; you were clear. In fact, we agreed with you. You chastised the Conservative government and said that they had to do

something. You proposed a number of initiatives. You said that you wanted a gas price watchdog in order to make sure that people don't get gouged; you wanted 24-hour advance notice on any price

rise that happens in the province of Ontario; and then you said you believed that we should have had a 90-day price freeze in order to give you the time, as a government, to deal with this issue.

They said no at the time, you went ballistic, and now you've got the chauffeur-driven limo.

When are you going to do something and maintain the promises you gave while you were in opposition?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: There is more good news for Ontario motorists as well. I am pleased to report that we're moving in the opposite direction

taken by the NDP government. They raised the gas tax by 30%. But I'm pleased to report that on our watch, when it comes to auto insurance, rates have gone down by 13.4%. Those were nine consecutive

rate decrease filings.

When it comes to motorists and the costs connected with operating their vehicles, it's more than just gasoline. Not only did the NDP raise the gas tax by 30%,

but auto insurance rates went up by 27% on their watch and, of course, they broke their promise on public auto insurance.

Mr. Bisson: Premier, that ain't cutting it with nobody. At the end of the day, people drive to the pumps and are getting hosed. It doesn't

matter if you're in Thunder Bay, Sarnia, Cornwall, Toronto or Hearst; you're paying more for gas now and you're going to be paying more by this summer. You made some promises you didn't keep, but

let's try keeping a promise that you made since you were in government.

On October 17, your committee members agreed with my motion that basically would allow a review of gas prices in this province. Will you allow that committee

to do its work and give that committee the authorization to meet so that we can look into gas prices and make suggestions that this Legislature can act on and your government can do to help the

people of Ontario?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I will make the assumption that there is actually a genuine spirit of desire to address this in an intelligent way. Some

people say that's a great leap; I don't think it is. Let me just say this: We've got an ethanol program under way. We have doubled the sales tax rebate for hybrid cars. We are bringing auto

insurance rates down in Ontario, for the first time in a long time. We're investing an extraordinary amount of public dollars in public transit, which we think is helpful in this regard as

well.

There is something that the member opposite can do: He can join us -- I ask Mr. Tory to do the same -- to convince Prime Minister Harper, who is gaining a

windfall. Every time the price of gasoline goes up in Ontario, the federal government stands to gain. In fact, for every one cent it goes up, the federal government makes another $6 million. We

don't make more money in Ontario on the basis of the tax that we level, but the federal government does. I would ask the members opposite, my good colleagues, to join us in imploring Prime Minister

Harper to do something --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you. New question.

LIQUOR CONTROL BOARD

OF ONTARIO

Mr. Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln): A question for the minister responsible for the LCBO: We've obtained a recent memo to LCBO employees, who are

encouraged to "improve their French Rabbit sales to win great prizes" such as French Rabbit tote bags, barbecue sets and French Rabbit radios. I remind the minister that this is an imported wine

that is a competitor to our domestic industry. Minister, what concern have you expressed to the LCBO about their blatant promotion and bribes to LCBO employees to sell imported wine at the expense

of the domestic industry?

Hon. David Caplan (Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal, Deputy Government House Leader): First of all, I want to thank the member for

the question, and I would indicate to you that, of course, our ministry has oversight of the LCBO. We don't direct their practices as far as what they promote and what they don't. But I can tell

you that the LCBO is one of the premier marketers, in fact the premier marketer in the world, of Ontario-made wine, VQA wine. In fact, without the support of the LCBO, the industry would have

significant difficulty in being able to make those kinds of offerings to the public of Ontario.

I want to let you know that I'm quite pleased with the role that the LCBO has taken on the three mandates that they have: One, to provide to the treasury of

Ontario with the revenues that go to invest in our health, our education and our economic prosperity; also, their social responsibility mandate, to make sure that there is responsible use of

alcohol; but thirdly, the support to --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you. Supplementary.

Mr. Hudak: I thank the minister for his response. He says that the LCBO is a premier marketer of Ontario wine, as it should be. That's like

congratulating a professional hockey player for skating down the ice successfully. It's a matter of course -- of course they should be.

The question I have is, when you see promotions that are effectively bribing LCBO employees to substitute towards selling imported product -- tote bags,

radios, barbecues, etc. This looks like it's probably between a half-million-dollar to a $1-million campaign from the LCBO to promote a foreign product exclusively, at the expense of the Ontario

industry. Unless you are aware that the French government is similarly promoting Ontario wines over in France, I will ask you to get with the LCBO right away -- I know they hold you in high esteem

-- and correct this problem immediately.

Hon. Mr. Caplan: I certainly want to indicate to the member -- to all members -- that the LCBO takes very seriously its three-fold

responsibility: To increase the revenues to Ontario so we can invest in health, education and economic prosperity; two, the important social responsibility and the responsible use-of-alcohol

mandate; but the promotion of the Ontario industry is a very important element of the LCBO marketing practices. In fact, Ontario wines have been featured in LCBO promotions, LCBO magazines and

other retailing opportunities. I'm quite proud of the work that the LCBO is doing.

It is true that the LCBO markets alcohol -- spirits, beer and wine -- from around the world, and those are part of the practices as well. All of that revenue

derived from all of those sales goes back and is invested into this province -- into health care, into better education and into --

The Speaker: Thank you.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Mr. Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): A question to the Minister of Health. The Peterborough Regional Health Centre is facing a projected

$4.5-million deficit this year. It's one of the 12 hospitals across the province that can't meet your demands to put the bottom line before their patients' health. The local paper, the Peterborough

Examiner, says this proves "what everyone knows but the ministry has yet to admit: the hospital is underfunded."

Minister, are you going to force Peterborough's hospital to balance its budget at the expense of hospital care?

Hon. George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): The honourable member asks a question, but again doesn't reflect on any

experience that he had in government. The first two years of your party's government and the first two years of that party's government saw very significant net reductions in hospital funding. Our

record stands in sharp contrast to that. Every hospital in Ontario has received more money each and every year, and we've already given them projections for the next couple of years around

that.

In the case of Peterborough, obviously we have on-site there a very significant new hospital being constructed. The matter at hand, and one that I'm working on

very carefully with the ministry, with the local hospital and with the local MPP to resolve is, what is the appropriate bed count in the existing hospital as they plan to evolve into the new

building, which is coming to life quite quickly? I can tell the honourable member that we've worked very hard to improve the circumstances for health care in Peterborough, with a family health team

for the whole community and with a new hospital. We will seek to resolve this issue in a fashion that allows us to have the Peterborough community among our high-performing communities in Ontario

as it relates to health care.

Mr. Kormos: Minister, we're talking about health care here and now under your watch, and when your government has just announced a $3-billion

windfall in unanticipated revenues. Peterborough's hospital has too few beds, too few doctors and the heaviest emergency room demand in the province. Your ministry's very own studies say the

hospital needs to be expanded, not cut back. But you have forced that hospital to rely on hallway medicine after slashing its budget by $10 million over the last two years.

When are you going to fund Peterborough's hospital and give the folks in that community the health care service they deserve?

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: Firstly, one of the challenges we have in dealing with the honourable member is that he doesn't like to admit to the fact

that when he was in office the record of his party was that they cut, in one year, $268 million from hospitals.

In the case of Peterborough, I think it's very important to note that we've invested more than $12 million in additional operating funds. But like I said to

the honourable member, who was responsible for the closure of 11,701 beds in Ontario, we recognize the needs in Peterborough. We're working very closely with the hospital community and with the

local member, who's very aggressive in advocating on behalf of his community. I can assure the honourable member that these decisions will be taken with a view towards turning Peterborough into one

of the high-performing health care communities, recognizing that when we came to office they were in a very poor situation with a very, very old and decrepit hospital and --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you.

CHILD CARE

Mr. David Orazietti (Sault Ste. Marie): My question is for the Minister of Children and Youth Services. Parents in my riding of Sault Ste.

Marie have told me they need high-quality child care in order to balance the demands of work and family. In many families, both parents work, and they need affordable child care options that

provide them with a safe place to send their young children as well as a place where their children will have learning and development opportunities. That is why I was so pleased to see that our

government had signed a five-year, $1.9-billion early learning and child care agreement with the federal government on behalf of Ontario families. But now I'm very disappointed to see that the

Harper government has refused to honour this important agreement.

Minister, what can members of this Legislature do to stand up for Ontario families, who desperately need to see the benefits of this agreement?

Hon. Mary Anne V. Chambers (Minister of Children and Youth Services): What the member from Sault Ste. Marie has been hearing in his riding is

exactly what we have been hearing from families all across Ontario. I want to thank him for advocating so aggressively on behalf of his families. That agreement would have meant 25,000 new

high-quality, licensed child care spaces in Ontario over the first three years of the agreement. In northern Ontario, that would have meant 2,765 new spaces. A reflection of the demand for those

spaces is what they have committed to expand to by September of this year: new spaces in the order of more than 1,600 in northern Ontario. What we can do here, all of us, is to stand up and

advocate on behalf of Ontario families, regardless of their political stripe --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you. Supplementary?

Mr. Orazietti: Minister, I couldn't agree more. I question why the Conservative and NDP members of this House continue to be silent when we

ask them to join us in calling on the federal government to honour the early learning and child care agreement. Perhaps the Conservatives are just not interested in supporting child care

opportunities for Ontario families, and perhaps the NDP are disappointed that their own federal colleagues sold out Ontario families when they sided with Harper, with no protection for this

agreement.

The Harper government has clearly disadvantaged Ontarians and created a period of uncertainty with their plans to terminate the agreement. Minister, how is our

government proceeding in order to provide the highest degree of certainty to parents and municipalities in Ontario?

Hon. Mrs. Chambers: What I should say is that the federal NDP and the federal Liberals have been standing up for families across Canada. What

we have not seen to date is the Ontario NDP and the Ontario Tories doing the same. So anyone who thinks that $1,200 in taxable money is going to do very much to provide early learning and child

care facilities for these families is actually misguided.

But to give you an idea of how well we are doing so far, more than 14,000, as in more than 50%, of the spaces targeted for the first three years will have been

created in Ontario by September 2006. I'm very proud that our government has committed to sustaining every single one of those new spaces and has also committed to wage improvements for child care

workers and also for increased subsidies for parents so that more families can afford high-quality child care.

HIGHWAY LITTER

Mr. John O'Toole (Durham): My question is to the Minister of Transportation. Minister, it's springtime and cleanup time around Ontario,

whether it's in your home, your backyard or in our municipalities. Everyone is expected to pitch in. In fact, my riding this weekend is hosting a clean-up-your-community event. I think it's

important to recognize that you, Minister -- yesterday there was an

article in the paper expressing concern about the trash buildup on our provincial roads. Minister, could you tell me what plan

you have to keep Ontario clean and green?

Hon. Harinder S. Takhar (Minister of Transportation): I want to thank the member for asking this question. It's important for all of us to

keep our highways clean and safe. We are spending about $3 million every year throughout the province to keep highways clean. But in addition to this, we also have an adopt-a-highway program in

which about 600 volunteers participate every year, and they clean about 2,500 kilometres of highways.

Last year, we also introduced the Operation Springboard program. It's a joint program with the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services, where we

use low-risk offenders to pick up litter on the highways. Having said all that, I want to say that this is an issue in which everyone should take responsibility. We all need to work together to

clean the litter on our highways and keep them clean -- highways as well as the intersections.

Mr. O'Toole: Clearly, Minister, you're responding to the

article in the media yesterday. I'd like to bring to your attention what MPP Wayne

Arthurs's good friend Dave Ryan, the mayor of Pickering, said in the article: "They're the dirtiest parts of our city," referring to your highway ramps. "It's a blight on our community."

In fact, if you look back in history, you'll find that Ontario once bore the slogan "Keep it Beautiful" on licence plates, and now it's "Yours to Discover."

But what they're actually discovering is the litter lying on the sides of the highway. If you want to find one of the deterrents to tourism, your cleanup of our highways is contributing. We're

delivering our trash to Michigan, and a lot of it is finding its way onto our roadsides in Ontario. Minister, what is your solution for this growing problem of trash on Ontario's highways?

Hon. Mr. Takhar: I want to thank all the mayors for raising this issue. I think we all need to work together to keep our highways clean and

safe. As I said before, it's everybody's responsibility. We need to create an awareness about keeping our highways safe. We'll continue to work with the mayors in the GTA area and throughout the

province so that the highways stay clean. It's not an issue that just came up because of the news in the paper. I think this is an important issue, and we all need to work together because it's

also important from the tourism point of view.

PIT BULL LEGISLATION

Mr. Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): A question to the Attorney General: Earlier today on CHML's Roy Green Show, I spoke with a Hamilton mom,

Lorinda Burke. Her nine-year-old son's dog, Jasper, an alleged pit bull, is about to be destroyed because she could not afford to have it spayed. Now she has obtained the money. She is prepared to

pay for the operation for her family pet to be spayed, but animal control says that Jasper has to be killed anyway. What's the logic to that, when she's prepared to have the dog spayed in

compliance with your legislation but animal control says, no, your law requires that it be put to death?

Hon. Michael Bryant (Attorney General): The member knows that the implementation of the law and the application of the law is done at a local

level. Mayor Di Ianni has said that the rules are the rules and the law is the law and that the law must be complied with. I am confident that they will resolve this at the local level.

We have rules in place. We have laws in place. People are aware of the laws. The law sets forth a process. There is a process. They'll make their application,

make their submissions, and animal control and the local municipality will resolve this issue. The mayor has said that this is the way it ought to work, and that's the way it will work.

Mr. Kormos: Well, Attorney General, unfortunately, your law is so defective and so deficient in terms of advice to municipalities and support

for them in the

interpretation of the law that the law is applied helter-skelter, checkerboarded across the province.

The dog never bit anybody, never displayed any signs of aggressiveness -- no signs whatsoever of posing a danger -- yet it was an unspayed alleged pit bull;

two years old, I'll tell you. Attorney General, you haven't exactly shown a great deal of proficiency at picking them out yourself, have you?

A pit bull, a dog that has caused no harm; a nine-year-old boy's pet, a family pet. The woman couldn't afford to have the dog spayed; now she can. Why won't

you and your ministry permit this woman to comply with the law, have the dog spayed and return this pet to its owner, a nine-year-old kid?

Hon. Mr. Bryant: Again, the member knows that this is a matter that is going to be dealt with by the municipality locally. The legislation, on

which we undertook extensive debate in this Legislature, is really the most comprehensive dangerous dog legislation of its kind on the continent. The very concern that the member raises, the

patchwork concern that he raises -- in fact, that's why we brought in province-wide legislation. Instead of having one municipality have one set of rules and another municipality have another set

of rules, we brought in province-wide legislation.

The member will know that in the Niagara region Lylie Brook Bowman says she's still haunted by a pit bull attack last spring that left her with permanent nerve

damage in her hand and seriously injured her dog. She said, "I was really traumatized. I can't begin to tell you how scared I am to walk my dog down the street."

It's because of people like this from the Niagara region that we brought forward the legislation. It is legislation about public safety. It is clear

legislation. It is in the hands of local municipalities, and they will implement it. I'm confident they'll implement it appropriately.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Mr. Tony C. Wong (Markham): My question is for the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal. The Toronto Rehabilitation Institute is one of

the largest teaching hospitals in rehabilitation services in Canada. It also provides leading care in cardiac, geriatric, musculoskeletal, stroke, acquired brain injury -- ABI -- and spinal cord

rehabilitation, as well as complex continuing care across its multiple sites.

As you know, there is a substantial need for investment in the Toronto Rehabilitation Institute's University Avenue site to reduce patient wait times and

enhance access to services for people throughout the province. I was pleased to see that you approved it as an alternative financing and procurement -- AFP -- project last Thursday. Can you tell me

what this announcement means for rehabilitative care in Ontario?

Hon. David Caplan (Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal, Deputy Government House Leader): I do want to thank the member from Markham for

the question, because last week it was indeed a pleasure to be at the Toronto Rehabilitation Institute to announce and commit to a major redevelopment of the hospital's University site, with

construction slated to begin in 2007-08. This project will modernize facilities for 176 rehabilitation beds and increase ambulatory care capabilities, and new state-of-the-art technology will be

housed right here on University Avenue. As well, there will be major enhancements to the hospital's educational and leading-edge research roles.

Approving this project is not only an example of the value that we place on building new research facilities, with a world-class rehabilitation laboratory

called Intelligent Design for Adaptation, Participation and Technology; it's also a shining example of our effort to reduce patient waiting times and enhance access to services --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you. Supplementary.

Mr. Wong: Thank you, Minister. It is wonderful that construction is expected to begin in 2007-08 and that this provincial commitment will

allow the institute to finally close its out-of-date Hillcrest hospital site and move these programs to the University Avenue site. Can you also explain why this project has been approved as an AFP

project and what the benefits are of this innovative approach?

Hon. Mr. Caplan: This project was approved because investing in health care is one of the primary priorities of the McGuinty government. The

many hospitals in this province are long overdue in need of capital investment. The average age of a hospital in the province of Ontario is 45 years old. In fact, this hospital happened to be the

place where I was born, so we know just how old this is. We are very much aware of, and we're working very hard to address, the concerns of all of the communities right across Ontario, doing it one

hospital at a time. We're proud of the approach that we've taken.

The expansion of this facility will give the people of Ontario more opportunities to enhance the quality of their life. And the member is right: Using AFP, or

alternative financing and procurement, methods enables us to complete these initiatives and do them faster. This facility will remain publicly owned, publicly controlled, and it will mean that

construction work is financed and carried out by the private sector. The private sector will assume any project risks. It means that more projects --

The Speaker: Thank you. New question.

NATIVE LAND DISPUTE

Mr. Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): My question is to the Premier. It's now been 51 days of turmoil and uncertainty for people living

in Six Nations and Haldimand county because of the Caledonia native land dispute. Your minister of aboriginal affairs seems to be all over the place on this one. First he said it was a federal

concern, and then last week in this House he said: "The province has been taking a lead role in this." This is from your minister.

Premier, wouldn't you agree that your minister's confusion and indecision about Caledonia further exemplifies the vacuum of leadership in the McGuinty

government?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): No, I don't agree. I think the minister is doing exactly what he needs to

do. I understand that there is, in some quarters, some impatience and some frustration, but we are dealing with this in a peaceful manner. There has been no incident; there has been no injury, or

worse. The member opposite seems to take issue with this particular approach. Well, we have a different perspective on this. The minister is doing exactly what he's supposed to do. He's working

with our federal cousins; he is working with the community; he's working with the First Nations community involved. We are determined to resolve this, but we will do this in a way that results in

no incident and in no compromise to public safety.

Mr. Barrett: Premier, we all agree that we are searching for a peaceful resolution, but I get the impression that your government is being

held hostage. This is a sign of weakness and vulnerability. Your minister responsible for aboriginal affairs told the House --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Order.

Mr. Barrett: Premier, I'll quote from your minister of aboriginal affairs in the House last week: " ... the Ontario government has been on top

of the situation." But today's Brantford Expositor begs to differ. The headline reads, "Bid to Settle Six Nations Occupation Non-Starter."

Premier, what did your minister bid? What did he offer? In an

article titled "Crossed Wires Muddle Effort to End Land Standoff," the Hamilton Spectator claims

that you may hand over land in Brant county, land in South Cayuga and land in Townsend. Have you asked the people in Burtch, in Brant county, have you asked the people in South Cayuga or in

Townsend if they have any thoughts on this? We're talking about well over --

The Speaker: The question has been asked. Premier?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I want to make sure that the leader of the Conservative Party is well aware of the question put and the comments just made

by one of his backbenchers, because people are going to want to know where he stands on this issue. The member opposite has just accused us of demonstrating weakness because we are taking the

necessary time to resolve this issue in a peaceful manner. Well, that's the approach, and we're not going to apologize for that. If the Conservative Party has a different position, if they would

rush in, then the leader of the Conservative Party should say so. I'm sure the media will be interested in determining exactly what his position is on this issue.

I say it again: We will proceed in a responsible fashion. We will be mindful of the public safety issues and we'll be mindful of the fact that no harm ever

comes from sitting down and talking and working together with a determination to resolve it peacefully.

WSIB EMPLOYEE PENSION PLAN

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): My question is for the Minister of Labour. Minister, the WSIB employee pension plan is funded by both

employer and employee contributions, but the employees can't realize any of the gains they negotiate to their pension plan because the WSIB wears two conflicting hats. As the negotiator at the

table with the employees, they agree to pension plan benefit improvements. However, when they put on their hats as the trustees of the plan, they then say the plan cannot sustain those

improvements.

So my question to you, Minister, is this: Will you agree to examine the inherent conflict of interest that exists because the WSIB is both the employer and the

plan administrator of the employee pension plan?

Hon. Steve Peters (Minister of Labour): I want to thank the honourable member for the question. As I'm sure she is aware, the WSIB is an

arm's-length agency of the province, but they do play a very important role in the health, safety and welfare of citizens in Ontario. It's an organization that is accountable. It's an organization

that, as I said, plays an important role in providing coverage for individuals who are injured on the job.

They've also made great strides to improve their own finances, their own stability. They have undertaken a comprehensive audit to look at what steps they could

be taking to improve the way they do business. As well, that audit was initiated by the previous minister, and I have asked for a follow-up audit from the WSIB to look further at some of those

issues.

I'll continue in my response to the honourable member's question.

Ms. Horwath: Minister, having the WSIB as the employer and the sole pension plan administrator is a clear conflict of interest, and it hurts

the WSIB employees because they can never actually see any of the improvements in their pension plan after they've been negotiated. You claim to have an arm's-length relationship with the WSIB, but

at the same time no amendments to their pension plan can be implemented without your approval. WSIB employees tell me that you are well aware of this problem, but you refuse to treat them fairly

with their pension plan.

Will you, as minister, do the right thing by WSIB workers and move to a joint trusteeship for pension plan governance?

Hon. Mr. Peters: Again, I thank the member for the question. Obviously, she seems to forget -- and I made the comment in my opening statement

-- that the WSIB is an arm's-length agency and an agency that plays a very important role. But as well, I think the honourable member should understand that there are issues that need to be dealt

with through collective bargaining and at the table. She should understand that it would be extremely inappropriate for a Minister of Labour to interfere in a collective bargaining process in the

province of Ontario, that the minister has a role to play, and that if there are issues that arise during collective bargaining -- we're very proud of the mediators and arbitrators we have

available to us in Ontario. I would just say to the honourable member that this is certainly an issue that has been raised. It's an issue that we have forwarded to the WSIB and asked the president

and the CEO for their consideration. I look forward to making an announcement in the very near future --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you. New question.

WORKPLACE SAFETY FOR STUDENTS

Mr. Peter Fonseca (Mississauga East): My question is for the Minister of Labour. Undoubtedly, everyone has noticed by now that we are into

spring. It's a time of year when the days are longer and the weather is warmer. It's also a time of year when post-secondary students anxiously write their final exams and engage in yet another

rite of spring: finding a summer job.

Like all young workers, our students are eager to prove themselves, to excel, be productive, learn new skills and demonstrate proven ones. Of course, like all

of us, they want to earn a living. Unfortunately, for some young workers, what should be routine summer work with friends and fun can turn instantly into tragedy. Statistics tell us that workplace

injuries to young and new workers are six times more likely to occur during the first month of employment than at any other time.

Minister, our children are our most precious resource. We want to protect them. Please tell us what your ministry is doing to protect our young workers as many

embark on another season of summer employment.

Hon. Steve Peters (Minister of Labour): I want to thank the honourable member for Mississauga East for his question. I can assure you that the

health and safety of all employees in the province of Ontario is the number one priority for this government. I think we have demonstrated it very clearly by moving forward with hiring 200

additional inspectors in Ontario. As well, we're moving forward with occupational health and safety within our agricultural community, which previously had been exempt.

But I want to say to the honourable member that it should be a priority for every one of us in this House. Young worker health and safety is a major priority

for me, but we all should be conscious of it, because one death or one injury to a young person in this province is one too many. As you pointed out in your question, a young person is six times

more likely to be killed or injured on the job within those first 30 days. I think it's incumbent on us that we recognize that knowledge is power -- in this case, it can be potentially life-saving.

We need to ensure that, collectively, we get that message out to employers, to parents and to students --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you. Supplementary?

Mr. Fonseca: Minister, it's good to hear that this government acts on its commitment to worker health and safety. It's not enough to

prioritize workplace safety without taking action to invest in and promote workplace safety. Your answer assures us that this government has done both. Thankfully, statistics support that this

effort is showing that Ontario is the national leader in preventing traumatic injuries to young workers. However, accidents still occur.

Taking a summer job or starting one's first full-time job should be a learning experience and not a test of survival. Minister, it's important to know what I

can do individually to help prevent young worker injuries this summer, and it's also important to know what we can all do collectively. Please tell us what we can do in our communities so that no

parent will have to hear the unbearable news that their child is not coming home from work that day.

Hon. Mr. Peters: I think the most important question that young people and parents need to ask -- don't be afraid to ask questions when you go

into a new place of employment. As well, I would encourage young people, parents and employers to view our website, Worksmartontario.gov.on.ca, because we have some great tips available there.

There is an individual in this province who has become a real advocate for young worker health and safety. He's an individual who has not done this in any

partisan way, and his name is Rob Ellis. Rob's son was 18 years old when he was killed on the job.

Rob Ellis has gone into all of our ridings across Ontario to spread that message of young worker health and safety. I would encourage any one of you to contact

the ministry office. We can arrange to work with you to have Rob come out and speak to young people in your riding, because that powerful message that he delivers is a message that young people in

this province need to hear.

As well, we need to recognize that next week, April 28 is the day to recognize workers killed or injured on the job. We need to think about all workers killed

or injured --

The Speaker: Thank you. New question.

YOUTH SERVICES

Mr. Norman W. Sterling (Lanark-Carleton): I also want to ask about youth employment opportunities, and this is to the Minister of Children and

Youth Services. In February, you announced youth opportunities strategy funding to reach out to young people to help them access services, find jobs, stay in school and stay off drugs. You limited

that funding to Toronto for the first year and five other urban centres in subsequent years.

Minister, can you explain to me and to Ontario's one million other youthful people who live in smaller communities why you have not provided any new funding

for programs in their communities?

Hon. Mary Anne V. Chambers (Minister of Children and Youth Services): First of all, it's obvious that the honourable member appreciates the

youth opportunities strategy, the $28.5 million that our government announced in February of this year. It is indeed a wonderful program. Starting in Toronto this year, it will provide 750 summer

jobs for youth from at-risk communities and another 100 in a first-of-its-kind-in-Canada program called youth in policing, where young people will have the opportunity to establish very positive

working relationships with the Toronto police services. In fact, that program has already received more than 500 applications. It's very exciting. This year, we'll also employ 39 new youth outreach

workers.

So this is very exciting, and it does emphasize Toronto in its first year because of the particular challenges on the crime front --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you. Supplementary.

Mr. Sterling: The minister emphasizes the problem with the program. She says that it offers all of these wonderful services to Toronto and is

going to offer these services to another five urban areas, but it doesn't offer them to all the young people across Ontario, which, in fairness, it should.

Madam Minister, some of the problems that you outlined in Toronto are worse in rural and small-town Ontario. The teen suicide rate in rural Ontario is double

the rate it is in the urban areas. In small communities, it's harder to get a job. It's harder to find entertainment for young people. It's harder to gain access to services. Yet you have abandoned

these young people.

Why are you discriminating against these young people who live in small-town Ontario? Why are you discriminating against them?

Hon. Mrs. Chambers: I know you like these particular programs, but they're not the only programs that our government has announced. I want you

to know that, as we expand these programs --

Interjections.

Hon. Mrs. Chambers: If you would like to hear the answer, you're going to have to be quiet.

Let me tell you about what my honourable colleague the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities has just announced: more than $50 million in programs

for young people all across Ontario.

I do hope that the honourable member will stop playing politics with this and make sure that his constituents know about the wonderful programs -- summer

employment programs -- that the Minister of Training, Colleges --

Interjections.

Hon. Mrs. Chambers: Focus on the positive, for a change.

PETITIONS

LONG-TERM CARE

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): I have a petition from Pines long-term-care facility in Bracebridge, and it says:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas long-term-care funding levels are too low to enable homes to provide the care and services our aging seniors and parents who are residents of

long-term-care homes need, with the respect and dignity that they deserve; and

"Whereas, even with recent funding increases and a dedicated staff who do more than their best, there is still not enough time available to provide the care

residents need. For example, 10 minutes, and sometimes less, is simply not enough time to assist a resident to get up, dressed, to the bathroom and then to the dining room for breakfast; and

"Whereas those unacceptable care and service levels are now at risk of declining;

"We, the undersigned, who are members of family councils, residents' councils and/or supporters of long-term care in Ontario, petition the Legislative Assembly

of Ontario to increase operating funding to long-term-care homes by $306.6 million, which will allow the hiring of more staff to provide an additional 20 minutes of care per resident per day over

the next two years (2006 and 2007)."

I support this petition.

Mrs. Carol Mitchell (Huron-Bruce): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas long-term-care funding levels are too low to enable homes to provide the care and services our aging seniors and parents who are residents of

long-term-care homes need, with the respect and dignity that they deserve; and

"Whereas, even with recent funding increases and a dedicated staff who do more than their best, there is still not enough time available to provide the care

residents need. For example, 10 minutes, and sometimes less, is simply not enough time to assist a resident to get up, dressed, to the bathroom and then to the dining room for breakfast; and

"Whereas those unacceptable care and service levels are now at risk of declining;

"We, the undersigned, who are members of family councils, residents' councils and/or supporters of long-term care in Ontario, petition the Legislative Assembly

of Ontario to increase operating funding to long-term-care homes by $306.6 million, which will allow the hiring of more staff to provide an additional 20 minutes of care per resident per day over

the next two years...."

I affix my signature to this.

EDUCATION FUNDING

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): The member for Oak Ridges.

Mr. Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): Thank you, Speaker. I was beginning to wonder.

"Petition to Ontario Legislature to End Discrimination

"Whereas the Ontario government already ... funds 93% of faith-based schools in Ontario, but the remaining 7% receive no funding, solely because they are not

Catholic;

"Whereas the United Nations Human Rights Committee ruled in 1999 and again in 2005 that this arrangement is discriminatory and violates basic international

human rights law that Ontario formally agreed to uphold;

"Whereas all three parties represented in the Legislature support Catholic separate school funding, as guaranteed by the Constitution of Canada, so that the

only fair and viable solution to the discrimination is to extend funding to the small religious minorities that are currently excluded;

"Whereas the Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that Ontario has the constitutional power to provide funding to non-Catholic faith-based schools;

"Whereas Ontario is the only western democracy that fully funds faith-based schools of one religion to the total exclusion of all other religions, while all

other provinces except the Atlantic provinces fund faith-based schools and have thriving public school systems;

"Whereas the cultural survival of the affected minority groups is at stake;

"Whereas faith-based schools produce responsible and productive citizens; and

"Whereas the Multi-Faith Coalition for Equal Funding of Religious Schools in December 2004 submitted to the Minister of Education a detailed proposal for the

funding of non-Catholic faith-based schools in a manner that is fair and accountable and protects and enhances the public interest;

"We, the undersigned, call on the Ontario Legislature to pass legislation to provide fair and equal funding in respect of all faith-based schools in Ontario

without religious discrimination and without any reduction in funding for public education, with accountability requirements and standards in place to ensure that the public interest is

safeguarded."

I'm pleased to affix my signature to this petition.

TUITION

Mr. Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): I've got thousands of names on this petition, as you can see.

"Whereas in 2005, Ontario's per-student college funding was the second-lowest in Canada; and

"Whereas, over the past 15 years, the number of college students increased by 53% while real per-student funding declined by 41%; and

"Whereas students' learning conditions have deteriorated in relation to the shortage of full-time faculty; and

"Whereas the Ontario government claims that tuition fees must increase (again) in order `to improve the quality of education'; and

"Whereas persistent government underfunding makes it impossible to realize increases in quality even if tuition fees double or triple; and

"Whereas the government is again trying to stick college students with the bill; and

"Whereas college students have had enough;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to immediately:

"

(1) Invest an additional $100 million per year in core funding for Ontario colleges;

"

(2) Increase the number of full-time faculty in Ontario's colleges by at least 10%; and

"

(3) Extend the current tuition fee freeze until such time as the Ontario government has restored full-time faculty ratios to those that existed in 1990.

"In the event of a faculty strike within Ontario's colleges,

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to immediately:

"

(1) Refund tuition fees; and

"

(2) Fully reimburse college students for all expenses incurred as a result of an expansion or contraction of the semester, including ancillary fees and

expenses such as child care, lost earnings or rent."

I support this petition.

IDENTITY THEFT

Mr. Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): I'm pleased to read this petition, which was sent to me by the Consumer Federation of Canada. It reads as

follows:

"Whereas identity theft is the fastest-growing crime in North America;

"Whereas confidential and private information is being stolen on a regular basis, affecting literally thousands of people;

"Whereas the cost of this crime exceeds billions of dollars;

"Whereas countless hours are wasted to restore one's good credit rating;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, demand that Bill 38, which passed unanimously on November 30, 2005, be brought before committee and that the following issues

be included for consideration and debate:

"

(1) All consumer reports should be provided in a truncated ... form, protecting our vital private information, such as SIN and loan account numbers.

"

(2) Should a consumer reporting agency discover that there has been an unlawful disclosure of consumer information, the agency should immediately inform the

affected consumer.

"

(3) The consumer reporting agency shall only report credit-inquiry records resulting from actual applications for credit or increase of credit, except in a

report given to the consumer.

"

(4) The consumer reporting agency shall investigate disputed information within 30 days and correct, supplement or automatically delete any information found

unconfirmed, incomplete or inaccurate."

Since I agree, I'm delighted to sign this petition.

CONVENIENCE STORES

Mr. Jerry J. Ouellette (Oshawa): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Ontario Korean Businessmen's Association ... represents 3,000 family-owned and -operated small convenience store businesses across Ontario who are

being driven out of business by the McGuinty government; and

"Whereas the McGuinty government has hurt OKBA members by hiking WSIB rates, hiking commercial hydro rates, and dumping the high costs of implementing Bill 164

on these small family-run businesses;

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

"Convenience stores are the last family-run businesses in every neighbourhood throughout Ontario and are in urgent need of both compensation and help from the

government to allow replacement categories for tobacco products."

I affix my name.

CHILD CARE

Mr. Lorenzo Berardinetti (Scarborough Southwest): I have a petition here, and it's addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. I'd like

to read it into the record here:

"Whereas provinces and territories negotiated agreements with the federal government to ensure Canadians would have access to early learning and child care

programs that are high-quality, affordable, universally inclusive and developmental;

"Whereas parents in Ontario have demonstrated a high demand for greater access to high-quality early learning and child care programs;

regulated child care spaces in the first three years;

"Whereas Ontario's early learning and child care agreement represents a $1.9-billion investment over five years in high-quality early learning and child

care;

Ontario's early learning and child care agreement, for the sake of the thousands of Ontario families who would benefit from it."

I agree with this petition. I affix my signature to it and give it to page Mark beside me here today.

LONG-TERM CARE

Mr. Ted Arnott (Waterloo-Wellington): I received the attached petition from Royal Terrace nursing home in Palmerston, Leisureworld in Elmira,

Caressant Care in Fergus and WestMount in Kitchener, and it reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas long-term-care funding levels are too low to enable homes to provide the care and services our aging seniors and parents who are residents of

long-term-care homes need, with the respect and dignity that they deserve; and

"Whereas, even with recent funding increases and a dedicated staff who do more than their best, there is still not enough time available to provide the care

residents need. For example, 10 minutes, and sometimes less, is simply not enough time to assist a resident to get up, dressed, to the bathroom and then to the dining room for breakfast; and

"Whereas those unacceptable care and service levels are now at risk of declining;

"We, the undersigned, who are members of family councils, residents' councils and/or supporters of long-term care in Ontario, petition the Legislative Assembly

of Ontario to increase operating funding to long-term-care homes by $306.6 million, which will allow the hiring of more staff to provide an additional 20 minutes of care per resident per day over

the next two years (2006 and 2007)."

I support this petition as well.

Mr. John Yakabuski (Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke): I would like to thank Carrol Haywood from Groves Park Lodge in Renfrew for presenting this

petition to me.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas long-term-care funding levels are too low to enable homes to provide the care and services our aging seniors and parents who are residents of

long-term-care homes need, with the respect and dignity that they deserve; and

"Whereas, even with recent funding increases and a dedicated staff who do more than their best, there is still not enough time available to provide the care

residents need. For example, 10 minutes, and sometimes less, is simply not enough time to assist a resident to get up, dressed, to the bathroom and then to the dining room for breakfast; and

"Whereas those unacceptable care and service levels are now at risk of declining;

"We, the undersigned, who are members of family councils, residents' councils and/or supporters of long-term care in Ontario, petition the Legislative Assembly

of Ontario to increase operating funding to long-term-care homes by $306.6 million, which will allow the hiring of more staff to provide an additional 20 minutes of care per resident per day over

the next two years (2006 and 2007)."

I support this petition. I sign my name to it and send it down to the table through Cameron.

CHILD CARE

Mr. Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): This is addressed to the assembly of Ontario. It reads as follows:

"Whereas provinces and territories negotiated agreements with the federal government to ensure Canadians would have access to early learning and child care

programs that are high-quality, affordable, universally inclusive and developmental;

"Whereas parents in Ontario have demonstrated a high demand for greater access to high-quality early learning and child care programs;

regulated child care spaces in the first three years;

"Whereas Ontario's early learning and child care agreement represents a $1.9-billion investment over five years in high-quality early learning and child

care;

Ontario's early learning and child care agreement, for the sake of the thousands of Ontario families who would benefit from it."

Since I agree, I'm delighted to sign this petition.

LONG-TERM CARE

Mr. John O'Toole (Durham): I'm pleased to present a petition on behalf of Community Nursing Home in Port Perry, Fosterbrooke Long Term Care

Facility in Newcastle, Strathaven Lifecare Centre in Bowmanville, and Marnwood Lifecare Centre. I'll read the shortened version:

"We, the undersigned, who are members of family councils, residents' councils and/or supporters of long-term care in Ontario, petition the Legislative Assembly

of Ontario to increase operating funding of long-term-care homes by $306.6 million, which will allow the hiring of more staff to provide an additional 20 minutes of care per resident per day over

the next two years (2006 and 2007)."

I'm pleased to sign this and endorse it on behalf of my constituents.

HOUSE SITTINGS

Hon. James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism, minister responsible for seniors, Government House Leader): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I

seek unanimous consent to move a motion respecting the meeting of the House today.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Michael Prue): The government House leader is seeking unanimous consent. Is it agreed? Agreed.

Hon. Mr. Bradley: I move that, notwithstanding the earlier order of the House, when the House adjourns at 6 o'clock today it stand

adjourned until 10 o'clock on Thursday, April 20, 2006.

The Acting Speaker: Mr. Bradley has moved that, notwithstanding the earlier order of the House, when the House adjourns at 6 o'clock today it

stand adjourned until 10 o'clock on Thursday, April 20, 2006. Shall the motion carry? Carried.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

PLANNING AND CONSERVATION

LAND STATUTE LAW

AMENDMENT ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 MODIFIANT DES LOIS

EN CE QUI A TRAIT À L'AMÉNAGEMENT

DU TERRITOIRE ET AUX TERRES PROTÉGÉES

Mr. Gerretsen moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 51,

An Act to amend the Planning Act and the Conservation Land Act and to make related amendments to other Acts / Projet de loi 51, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur l'aménagement du territoire et la

Loi sur les terres protégées et apportant des modifications connexes à d'autres lois.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Michael Prue): The Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Hon. John Gerretsen (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): I'll be sharing my time with my parliamentary assistant, the member from York

West.

It's with great pride and certainly with great privilege that I stand here today to introduce the second reading of the proposed Planning and Conservation

Statute Law Amendment Act, 2005, which I truly believe will substantially change the land use planning system in the province of Ontario.

Our proposed legislation would have a significant impact on the land use planning system in Ontario. If passed by this Legislature, this bill would bring

Ontario's land use planning system and the Ontario Municipal Board into the 21st century.

The proposed legislation will bring about an important change to the culture of land use planning in our province. It will contribute to our efforts to reduce

urban sprawl, preserve valuable green space and protect our natural resources.

Ontario's land use planning system plays a key role in shaping the way our province grows and our communities develop, and reforming Ontario's land use

planning system is a cornerstone of our government's commitment to build strong, healthy and livable communities.

We, as a government, understand that a better planning system will contribute to better development in our province and in the individual communities that are

contained therein. We also recognize that our economic prosperity and quality of life depend on managing growth in a coordinated and strategic fashion.

By continuing to make improvements to the land use planning system, our government is supporting the development of communities that are more compact, have a

good mix of housing and jobs, have more convenient and transit-friendly transportation choices and have easier access to services. By improving the land use planning system, we can also better

protect valuable resources such as water, farmland, wetlands and other natural heritage features.

Good development doesn't just happen by accident. It happens because people have planned and developed these communities and their features carefully and

creatively. Good development happens when decision-makers provide leadership to support sustainable growth. I'm very proud that our government is providing leadership by implementing an aggressive

plan for building strong and sustainable communities in Ontario.

We've already taken a number of steps to implement this plan:

-- our greenbelt plan, which permanently protects 1.8 million acres of environmentally sensitive and prime agricultural land from urban sprawl, as well as

sustainable communities therein;

-- the Places to Grow Act and our proposed growth plan for the greater Golden Horseshoe, which sets out where the three million to four million people who

will be settling in this part of Ontario over the next 25 years will live and work. Our provincial policy statement on land use planning is an extremely important component of that. It speaks to

sustainable development. It speaks to intensification and better land use than is currently the case; and

-- our proposed clean water legislation and our significant investments in public transit, which we made once again in our last budget just a month or so

ago.

Bill 51, the bill that we're debating here today, is another critical part of that plan. The planning reforms that we have proposed in this bill have a number

of key elements that would support better and more strategic development in our communities. The main highlights include: more methods to assist councils in the decisions they make to support

intensification and sustainable and well-designed communities; clearer rules and a more effective planning process for the public, municipalities and everyone involved in planning our communities;

a more efficient and transparent Ontario Municipal Board, which would be focused on land use disputes that have the greatest impact on the broader public interest.

I would like to take a moment