Ontario Hansard — 5 October 2006 (38th Parliament, 2nd Session)
2006-10-05
Ontario — Debates (Hansard)
role="main" class="main-container container js-quickedit-main-content" id="main-content">
October 5, 2006
38th Parliament, 2nd Session
< Previous sitting day
Next sitting day >
Hansard Transcripts
Votes and Proceedings
Orders and Notices
Hansard Transcripts 2006-Oct-05 (PDF)
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO
ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO
Thursday 5 October 2006 Jeudi 5 octobre 2006
PRIVATE MEMBERS'
PUBLIC BUSINESS
CLIMATE CHANGE
AWARENESS DAY ACT, 2006 /
LOI DE 2006 SUR LA JOURNÉE
DE SENSIBILISATION
AUX CHANGEMENTS CLIMATIQUES
WORKPLACE SAFETY
AND INSURANCE AMENDMENT ACT
(BOB SHAW), 2006 /
LOI BOB SHAW DE 2006
MODIFIANT LA
LOI SUR LA SÉCURITÉ
PROFESSIONNELLE ET L'ASSURANCE
CONTRE LES ACCIDENTS DU TRAVAIL
CLIMATE CHANGE
AWARENESS DAY ACT, 2006 /
LOI DE 2006 SUR LA JOURNÉE
DE SENSIBILISATION
AUX CHANGEMENTS CLIMATIQUES
WORKPLACE SAFETY
AND INSURANCE AMENDMENT ACT
(BOB SHAW), 2006 /
LOI BOB SHAW DE 2006
MODIFIANT LA
LOI SUR LA SÉCURITÉ
PROFESSIONNELLE ET L'ASSURANCE
CONTRE LES ACCIDENTS DU TRAVAIL
MEMBERS' STATEMENTS
GREEN LEGACY PROGRAM
AL BIRNEY
DIAGNOSTIC SERVICES
NURSE PRACTITIONERS
PARKINSON'S DISEASE
MINISTER'S COMMENTS
YOUTH SERVICES
WORLD TEACHERS' DAY
HOSPITAL SERVICES
INTRODUCTION OF BILLS
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY AMENDMENT ACT, 2006 /
LOI DE 2006 MODIFIANT LA
LOI SUR L'ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE
STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES
WORLD TEACHERS' DAY /
JOURNÉE MONDIALE DES ENSEIGNANTS
FIRE PREVENTION WEEK
WORLD TEACHERS' DAY
VISITOR
RELEASE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS
ORAL QUESTIONS
HOSPITAL SERVICES
BAIL VIOLATIONS
EDUCATION FUNDING
HOSPITAL SERVICES
LONG-TERM CARE
BOTTLE RECYCLING
CHILD PROTECTION
WINDSOR RACEWAY
EDUCATION
LONG-TERM CARE
APPOINTMENT OF
OPP COMMISSIONER
TECHNOLOGIES DE L'INFORMATION
PETITIONS
PENSION PLANS
FISH HATCHERY
HIGHWAY 26
LONG-TERM CARE
IMMIGRANTS' SKILLS
WATER QUALITY
FAIR ACCESS TO PROFESSIONS
SCHOOL FACILITIES
IMMIGRANTS' SKILLS
FREDERICK BANTING HOMESTEAD
IDENTITY THEFT
SCHOOL TRANSPORTATION
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
ORDERS OF THE DAY
ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT, 2006 /
LOI DE 2006
SUR L'ACCÈS À LA JUSTICE
The House met at 1000.
Prayers.
PRIVATE MEMBERS'
PUBLIC BUSINESS
CLIMATE CHANGE
AWARENESS DAY ACT, 2006 /
LOI DE 2006 SUR LA JOURNÉE
DE SENSIBILISATION
AUX CHANGEMENTS CLIMATIQUES
Mr. McNeely moved second reading of the following bill:
Bill 139,
An Act to make April 21 Climate Change Awareness Day / Projet de loi 139, Loi visant à faire du 21 avril la Journée de sensibilisation aux changements climatiques.
The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Mr. McNeely, pursuant to standing order 96, you have up 10 minutes.
Mr. Phil McNeely (Ottawa-Orléans): "I have seen the enemy and it is us." It is sad when we can point to ourselves as our own worst enemy. We all share this earth -- it's the only one we've
got -- but we are quickly destroying this earth for ourselves, our children and our grandchildren. Climate change is here, and we are in denial. Al Gore called his book and movie An Inconvenient Truth. We do not want to hear the truth. As we go
through our greedy lives consuming, wasting, using and throwing away, we do not want to consider what we are doing to this beautiful environment around us.
The Environmental Commissioner of Ontario, Mr. Gord Miller, and I shared a stage in Orléans last week to talk about the environment. The Friends of Petrie Island had a wonderful slide presentation showing
the flora and fauna of Petrie Island. That's an island only two kilometres away from the community of Orléans, a community of 100,000 people.
We started the evening with photos of our beautiful Petrie Island as a reminder of what we have and what we must protect at all costs. But the truth is, most of us are carbon makers. Climate change is caused by
emissions of greenhouse gases. The gases that make up greenhouse gases are complex, but to discuss them in simple terms, we can refer to them as tonnes of carbon. Dirty carbon can be attributed in large part to human behaviour. In Canada, 22
tonnes are emitted per capita; we are the worst polluters in the world.
The cars we drive, the homes we live in with all their appliances and entertainment devices, energy production and industry all produce carbon. The resulting carbon production is bringing about changes in our
atmosphere that are unnatural and should serve as a warning to us all. Many scientists say we're at a tipping point where irrevocable change in our world can happen rapidly.
The changes we are experiencing already include warmer weather. The temperature has increased by 0.6 degrees around the world. In our north, it has increased by two degrees. The effects of the changing climate
are widespread. Here in Canada, First Nations are seeing more beach erosion due to savage storms that are becoming more frequent and much more intense. Their traditional hunting grounds have changed radically.
More and more often, we are seeing storms that flood our basements, wash out bridges and send hydro lines plummeting to the ground.
Low-lying countries like Bangladesh have been experiencing major catastrophes. Then, of course, there is New Orleans, still repairing itself from the effects of Katrina.
Scientists predict that the Greenland icecap will melt. It is already reducing in size at an alarming rate, and that will cause the oceans to rise up to five metres, forcing hundreds of millions of people to
move inland. Perhaps you've taken a vacation to Miami, Florida. If the ocean level rises as expected, Miami will be a small island some 80 kilometres out to sea. Everything from Fort Myers south will be underwater.
Our problem lies in the fact that we live in a consumer culture. Somehow, over the years, keeping up with the Joneses has become quite the endeavour. Now our cars are too big and use too much gas, our houses are
too big and cost too much to heat and cool, and we consume too much in material goods, and that all adds up to the carbon we produce. We have become blind to our actions, but now our eyes are opening and it's time for action. We should be
downsizing our cars and taking public transit, teleworking, ride sharing, biking, walking. In China and India, people who were biking to work are now getting off their bikes and into cars. How can we prevent them from repeating our mistakes?
We can sit here this morning and point fingers all we like, but that will get us nowhere. Placing the blame on someone else is just another avoidance strategy. We have to realize that this problem is everyone's
problem, regardless of where we live, where we work or what political affiliation we may have. This is the single most important issue of our time. What we need to do now is work together.
Ontario has already closed one coal-fired plant, which reduced CO 2 emissions by 15%. The most important step we can take in Ontario is to close the other four coal-fired plants and achieve almost 50%
of Ontario's share of reductions agreed to under Kyoto. And that we will do.
Ontario will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 30 megatonnes when we close our four coal-fired electric generators. Closing those plants will be the equivalent of taking seven million cars off the road.
So while Ontario plans to close four coal-fired electrical plant generators, the United States has planned to open 72 -- half of them upstream from us in the Ohio Valley etc., China is opening 562 or planning
them -- which translates to five per month, and India is planning to build 200, or two a month. All these coal-fired plants will have a tragic effect on our climate. If these 834 coal-fired plants are similar to ours in their production of
greenhouse gases, it will be equivalent to putting 1.4 billion more cars on the road.
Unfortunately, Alberta oil production generates 23 megatonnes of greenhouse gases, and by 2010, that figure will rise to 70 megatonnes: 9% of Canada's greenhouse gases. This is equivalent to putting 16 million
cars on the road. Should we subsidize oil for export when the production contributes so much to climate change? I wonder.
We live in an interconnected world. Whether we live here or in Beijing, in Crawford, Texas, or in Alberta, we all share the same air.
We all share the same atmosphere, and we all need to protect it. It should be a priority for all of us and for all levels of government. Should we boycott goods from countries that are expanding their dirty
coal? I would say yes.
Has the federal government done enough? The Liberal government signed the Kyoto accord, but their accomplishments were mediocre, with few victories. The new Minister of the Environment, Rona Ambrose, is
appearing in front of the environment committee this morning as we speak. I hope she is not in denial. The new Conservative government of Stephen Harper threw in the towel and cancelled good Liberal programs like the EnerGuide program. They are
now having second thoughts.
There is a need for real change, and the power to effect this change is here within each one of us. That is where this piece of legislation comes into play. The legislation will proclaim every April 21st to be
Climate Change Awareness Day. It is time to take a look at ourselves and our lifestyles and find the ways where we can make the small changes that will make all the difference. The older generations have failed miserably. We have driven our large,
single-occupant vehicles to and from work every day for far too long. We have become victims of the consumer culture that thinks little of conservation. We are the ones who have brought the world to the state it is in now. It is now up to the
younger generation to succeed where we have failed. They must change the consumer culture. They must be the conservationists.
I invited several high schools in Orléans to listen to the debate here this morning. I would like to devote the little time I have left to them, since they are the ones who will determine the future of our
earth. Climate Change Awareness Day is for you, the youth. You are the ones who can make the difference. You can choose to save the world for you and your children. When you are old enough to drive, remember that you can make the decision about
taking public transit instead. When you buy your own home, make sure it is energy-efficient. Buy energy-efficient appliances. Perform an energy audit on your home to discover where you can improve energy efficiency. The more we learn about climate
change and the things we can do to help, the easier it will be to change our lifestyles. Eventually it will become second nature, and we won't even have to think about it. These are the types of actions we can discuss every April 21st on Climate
Change Awareness Day. We can set targets for ourselves, then each Climate Change Awareness Day we can take a look at our lifestyles and see how far we have come.
It may seem like this is not your problem. You may think that this phenomenon is so great that nothing you can possibly do could make a difference. You are wrong. We need to change drastically if you're going to
save this earth for our children to enjoy. As Mr. Glen Murray, chair of the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy, said on the program The Passionate Eye last week, "If we do not act quickly to reduce greenhouse gases, then we
can kiss our grandchildren goodbye."
The Deputy Speaker: Further debate?
Ms. Laurie Scott (Haliburton-Victoria-Brock): I am pleased today to rise and speak on the member from Ottawa-Orléans's Bill 139,
An Act to make April 21 Climate Change Awareness Day. Let me
start off by saying that we certainly support a clean and vibrant environment and that climate change is an issue we have to take seriously in addressing, and I admire the member from Ottawa-Orléans for bringing this forward with the
sincerity he does. There are some things, though, that I would like to get on the record that are relevant to this piece of legislation.
It's fitting that we're speaking about an environment-related bill this week, especially coming from the government side of the House, when on Tuesday the Ontario Environmental Commissioner issued an absolutely
scathing report on the record of the McGuinty Liberal government and its inaction in almost every area of environmental management, including climate change. What does it say when a climate awareness bill has to be introduced as a private member's
bill, when the minister should be introducing a plan -- we asked yesterday if she had any details of any kind of plan -- to deal with climate change? When the Environmental Commissioner went to search various ministry websites and phoned the
Ministry of the Environment, they said, "Well, there is no official plan." In estimates, the minister said, "It is a priority. It's very critical. But we have no plan." That's very typical of the Liberal government here: Duck and dodge all these
questions, all these plans. Do the photo ops. "We're working for a better environment." I think the "granola Premier" was quoted in the paper today -- the granola-eating Premier, the eco-Premier -- but he hasn't done anything. The Environmental
Commissioner has issued several books on their record, and it is government mismanagement, three years of broken promises.
The member for Toronto-Danforth yesterday referred to many of this government's environmental policies as marketing and sales promotion, and he is correct. He has sat with me through many environment committees
and the Clean Water Act. He has nailed it right on the head: it's all good talk but no action.
It's great that it has been introduced. It's unfortunate it's as a private member's bill, but obviously the Minister of the Environment does not have any intention of taking the stand that the federal
Conservatives are and introducing legislation to deal with climate change and working with the auto industry -- working with them. The mixed messages from Premier McGuinty are ridiculous, horrendous. Read the newspapers today and there are quotes
on quotes. It doesn't make sense. He's talking one line and doing something else. I certainly hope the member for Ottawa-Orléans is taking this bill further and that they are actually going to move on it, because he may be instigating change
that the minister herself is not able to.
There's a lot to take into account when we need to consider the different issues and measures for greenhouse gas emissions. It's not simply declaring the one day. Earlier this year -- I think it was in June -- I
introduced Bill 115, dealing with truck speed limiters, which directly addresses reducing emissions from the hundreds and hundreds of trucks that are travelling down our highways. The proposed bill does reduce fuel consumption by 8,000 litres on
the average truck, and reducing fuel consumption directly corresponds to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The trucking industry has estimated that Bill 115, when brought in, would eliminate 140 kilotonnes of greenhouse gases every year. But my
friend from Ottawa-Orléans didn't vote for that bill, and he was not the only one; his own Minister of Health voted against the bill also.
Let's summarize for a moment. On one hand, he's introduced Bill 139, which, in my opinion, is an endearing idea which we will support. On the other hand, he can't feel up to agreeing with environmental experts
and the trucking industry to support a bill to reduce fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions in this province, which is one of the leading causes of greenhouse gas emissions -- far above coal. And you promised to close those coal plants,
but then you cancelled that promise. But a bigger contributor to greenhouse gas emissions in this province is from automobiles, and what have you done for that? Well, not much: You've done a bunch of announcements, announced a bunch of programs.
Nothing actually has been implemented. I certainly hope, as I said, that he can move this train of thought up to the cabinet table so we can actually see a plan to deal with climate change, which we haven't before.
Bill 139 -- making April 21 Climate Change Awareness Day -- is an idea that is good. I know that more of my colleagues want to speak to this bill so I'm going to close my remarks and let them move forward with
their interesting commentary on this bill. Thank you very much.
The Deputy Speaker: Further debate? The member for Trinity-Spadina -- no, excuse me. The member for Toronto-Danforth.
Mr. Peter Tabuns (Toronto-Danforth): I'm going to get a very large nameplate made. Thank you, Mr. Chair; I appreciate that. "Mr. Chair" -- I'm as bad as you, Mr. Speaker.
In the offices of Greenpeace Germany, which are located on the waterfront in Hamburg, in the office of the campaign director is a large black-and-white photograph of Hamburg taken at the end of 1945. I think
it's an aerial shot, because it shows ruins as far as you can see; a city destroyed. That is there to remind the people who work in that office what happens when a government, when a nation, goes completely wrong, ignores the reality of the world
and, borne on a wave of hubris, believes that it can do whatever it wants.
In my time visiting briefly with the folks who work in that office, I had a chance to talk to Harald Zindler. Harald was born in 1945 in Hamburg. He was the founder of Greenpeace Germany. He was the one who
pioneered their work against polluting industries. Harald, interestingly, told me about the response of that generation of Germans born at the end of the war who grew up and, in the early 1960s, in their late teens, came to realize what had
happened to their country, what happened when they were children or before they were children. Across Germany, he told me, this is what they would say to their parents; this is what they'd say to their grandparents: "You knew. You knew what was
happening. Did you act? Did you do something? Did you try to prevent this catastrophe? No. You knew and you didn't act."
In 1993, in Ottawa, the environment committee brought out a report on climate change, and at the time, the chair -- a Liberal, a good guy, Charles Caccia -- said that climate change was second only to nuclear
war as a threat to humanity. Caccia was later sidelined, but he wasn't using hyperbole when he talked about this. Climate change threatens the fabric of our society. It threatens the stability of our society. It is a profound challenge to people
on this planet, to the planet itself.
There's a reality here that we know. The MPP from Ottawa-Orléans clearly, from his remarks, knows what's coming. To the students in the high school, many of your parents know what's coming. We know. I've
gone on tour with the members of this caucus. They read. They're capable people. They know what's happening in society. They know. We know. But for those who may be watching who don't know, climate change is predicted to have substantial impact on
30% reduction in agricultural production in Canada's prairies -- one of the bread baskets of the world. In one of the bread baskets of the world, a 30% reduction in agricultural production.
If you look at the third assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, they talk about the impact of climate change on world rice production. It's about a 10% decrease in world rice
production for each one centigrade degree increase in the world temperature. We're looking at a range of up to five degrees in increase. It could be larger -- six degrees. A 60% reduction in world rice production? Do you know what that means in
terms of hunger? You know. So I find it extraordinary that we are in a Parliament in a country where knowledge has not resulted in action.
I had an opportunity in 2001 to be at the Kyoto negotiations in Bonn, and I have to tell you, the anger at Canada was palpable. Under a Liberal government, Canada was seen as a renegade. Day after day, people
from the environmental movement all over the world would say, "What is Canada doing?" Day after day, it would be beaten, nominated as the fossil of the day because of its role in climate negotiations. In many ways, our speculation was that Canada
was acting as a surrogate to the United States. It was not looking after its interests; it was looking after the interests of others. That was speculation. All I can say is that on the floor, dealing with the issues, Canada's role was
appalling.
So when you come back to what Canada did at home, you need to go to the very recent report made by the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development in Ottawa. This was October 3; Johanne
Gélinas. She had very simple commentary. "In the course of our audit work, we've tried to answer three basic questions: Is Canada on track to meet its emission reduction obligations? Is Canada ready to adapt to the impact of climate change?
Is the government organized and managing well? The answer is no to all three questions."
I have to say I've read the reports from this commissioner over the years. Normally they tend to be understated. I don't think you can get much clearer than that: "No. Not on track; not doing what needs to be
done." But she adds -- and this was interesting because I had an opportunity for about a year to be a climate change adviser in Ottawa to Jack Layton, so I spent a lot of time reading the reports, a lot of time looking at what the outcome was of
the money that was invested to deal with this profound problem. She sums it up pretty well: "Government action has not been well organized or well managed. The government has not defined its leadership role, nor has it identified the
responsibilities of each department.
"It has been unable to come up with the basic tools that it needs to measure its progress. Even though more than $6 billion of funding have been announced since 1997, the government still has no system to track
the spending and the results of its climate change ... investment."
They don't know if that $6 billion had any impact at all. No idea; didn't have a coherent plan. They had a series of really -- what can I say? -- ambition statements. You'd read the documents and it was like
wading through mush. You couldn't find substance.
I have to say that at the federal level, under the leadership of Jean Chrétien and then Paul Martin we saw grand statements; as Mr. McNeely has done today, a recognition, a statement about the scope of the
problem. But action? No. My God, have mercy. Action? No. That brings us now to this level of government here in Ontario.
I had an opportunity in estimates a short while ago to question the Minister of the Environment. I asked her, "Is climate change one of the most significant crises facing humanity today?" Her response was,
"Absolutely." So I'm going to assume that she wasn't misleading me or misrepresenting herself. She was telling the truth. She thought it was one of the biggest questions facing humanity today. So does she act? Does she have a plan? Does she know
where she's going? Does she know when we will have arrived at the point at which we have to arrive? Absolutely not.
Ask her for a plan and you get a song and dance. She knows; oh, yes. She has two children. I have a son. Many of us in this room have children. We have kids who will see the impact over the next few decades, and
many of them will say, "You knew."
She knows she has no plan. She is the Minister of the Environment. If anyone has carriage of this file, it's her, but there is no plan. She can't tell us whether she's getting where we need to get to.
You have to look at other validators on the outside. When you look at David Suzuki's report, what does David Suzuki say about Ontario? "No plan." One of the things he noted was that at least there was a
commitment with a time frame to shut down the coal-fired electricity plants. Well, as you all know in this House, that one is abandoned. We have an expression of sentiment -- "Yeah, we're gonna do something" -- but no plan.
Go to the Environmental Commissioner's report that came down the other day. He has a few things to say: "Adapting to a Changing Climate: Neglecting Our Basic Obligations?" He says we haven't done anything to
adapt. Do we want to make sure that our electrical system is reliable in a situation where high-level wind storms are going to be far more common, where tornadoes will be far more common? Nope. Are our sewage and waste water systems set up to deal
with this? Nope. The Clean Water Act debate, the debate on a clause-by-clause basis: Would the government even entertain an amendment that asks source protection authorities to take climate change into account in their planning? Nope.
The Environmental Commissioner put it very clearly. I was impressed by his wording. All of our planning is based on a climate that no longer exists. That's over, and every day that passes, it's more and more
behind us. The world is changing very rapidly, and our response is negligible. The response of the government entrusted by the people in this province to look after them is negligible and negligent. A sustainable transportation system for Ontario:
You remove one roadblock but others remain. Transportation, key to the resolution of this problem: no action. Sixty per cent waste diversion: not there. Banning of organics from landfill: not there. When you put food waste in a landfill, it
decomposes and produces methane, a radically more powerful greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. Do we have a plan, commitment, funding? Nope.
Knowledge, but no action. How ethical is that? Ask students in high school and anyone else watching. If you threw tacks on a floor and knew someone was going to walk in and didn't take action to clean them up --
you knew they would risk stepping on those tacks -- would that be ethical? If you were in charge of a city department and you knew that collapse of an overpass was possible, would it be incumbent on you to take action to ensure that overpasses
didn't fall down? Everyone in this room would say yes. No one has a question of that. So when you think the major systems we depend on for food and water are at risk, aren't you compelled on an ethical basis to take action? I think there is an
ethical responsibility; I think there's a profound ethical responsibility when you're in this position.
What we do determines -- and I know this may sound like hyperbole to some -- life and death. If you don't take action on a public health issue, if you don't prepare for an epidemic, people die, and that is
because we did or did not take action. We take action on tobacco. People live or die. It matters. What we do in this chamber may seem very, very distant from the day-to-day, but if you've ever visited someone in hospital who has cancer, who's
dying, you know you have a responsibility to take whatever steps you can to prevent the spread of cancer. The anti-tobacco movement over the decades has taken that ethical position. If you know something will harm people, if it's clear that you're
talking about large numbers, you must act. What we have is a situation today where that simple ethic of acting on the basis of knowledge has been abandoned by this government.
I want to tell everyone here I'm voting in favour of this bill. My hope is that every day, every Climate Change Awareness Day, we get to hold the government of the day accountable for its climate change
activities -- or inactivities -- because the only way, unfortunately, to bring about ethical behaviour is to shine a bright light on those who are responsible for taking action when the power is in their hands. The power is in the hands of this
government. Will this government act in an ethical way? Will this government act in a way that will ensure that future generations will have lives that are relatively comfortable, relatively pleasant?
I want to end by saying this: To all those on the government benches, on the opposition benches, on the benches of the third party, we know we must act.
Mr. Jeff Leal (Peterborough): I'm pleased to have the opportunity this morning to get a few words on the record in support of the motion from my colleague the member from
Ottawa-Orléans.
The
preamble of the motion is very important. I'd like to get it in the record. It says:
"Climate change has become a harsh reality of living in Ontario and anywhere on this planet.
"Often characterized by an increase in the average temperature of the Earth's atmosphere and oceans, climate change has in recent decades gone beyond occasional milder winters and scorching-hot summers and has
taken on frightening new dimensions with a marked increase in severe, destructive, and often cataclysmic weather."
In my own community of Peterborough, it's interesting to see how weather has changed dramatically. We're all aware of Hurricane Hazel that blew through Ontario in 1954. If you look at the records of the time and
the people who were involved in the weather prediction service, the people involved in looking at that very carefully, they concluded at that particular time that this was a very rare occurrence that happened. A number of factors came forward that
led to Hurricane Hazel going through our province.
But things have changed dramatically. In my own community of Peterborough, we had a minor flood in 2002, thought to be the famous 100-year storm that only comes every 100 years. Then, on July 15, 2004, in a
three-hour period, 200 millimetres of rain fell: the second 100-year storm in two years.
In 2006 -- I know my colleague from Victoria-Haliburton-Brock has left the chamber -- at least two documented tornadoes blew through the northwestern municipalities of Peterborough county, creating unprecedented
damage.
In fact, with the 2004 flood that went through Peterborough in that three-hour period, it's estimated that more than $40 million of damage was left because of that occurrence.
I've come to appreciate the change in climate through my good friend the former member of Parliament from Peterborough, Dr. Peter Adams, who's a professor emeritus at Trent University. His academic career was in
the research of ice and snow. He spent many years not only in northern Quebec but in the Yukon and Northwest Territories, and now that he's out of politics, he goes to Nunavut to study changes in ice and snow. Through his academic research,
documented extremely well, he came to the conclusion that by looking at changes in the polar ice cap and level of snow, indeed climate change is with us and is something that needs to be addressed fairly aggressively.
One of the areas through which we can address the whole issue of climate change, I believe, is urban design. In fact, looking through the news clippings this morning, there's a leading American urban planning
expert who is praising the provincial government on its Places to Grow strategy, saying that this is the template that should be used throughout North America to encourage orderly urban design, which indirectly relates to better air quality
through better use of existing resources within communities.
As a former municipal councillor, I'd like to note that when they were looking at planning new subdivisions, everybody wanted cul-de-sacs, and one of the worst urban designs from an air emissions point of view
in terms of servicing are cul-de-sacs. When you look at vehicles that go in from the public works perspective to plow and provide other services, they constantly have to go back and forth and increase fairly dramatically the amount of air
pollution that's generated.
It's interesting today that a leading expert in American urban design is praising us for our Places to Grow strategy, a template of how we should look at planning in North America, which is a very positive step
forward in terms of dealing with climate change.
In terms of transit, we've gone a long way in providing two cents of the gas tax to provide sustainable long-term support for municipalities in Ontario to allow them to expand their transit operations, to get
people out of their vehicles and onto public transit; again, another positive step forward in dealing with problems of air quality.
We know in fact that premature deaths are occurring through air quality and the poorness of the air we breathe. I know, when I was in elementary school, you heard of very few cases of kids suffering from
asthma. I know, as I take the opportunity and you take the opportunity, Mr. Speaker, when you're touring elementary schools in the riding of Essex or in my riding of Peterborough, that you take note of the number of young children these days who
all have puffers to deal with the problem of asthma directly related to air quality.
The motion we have here today from the member from Ottawa-Orléans -- having a specific day encourages all of us in this place to pay more attention, to be more proactive and work together to improve the
quality of the air that we all breathe.
Mr. Ted Arnott (Waterloo-Wellington): I'm pleased to have this opportunity this morning to speak briefly to Bill 139,
An Act to make April 21 Climate Change Awareness Day, which has been
brought forward in this House by the member for Ottawa-Orléans. I certainly want to begin by indicating my support in principle for this bill. I think that the member is sincere in terms of bringing forward this idea that we need to do more
to promote amongst the people of Ontario the need for greater action to deal with climate change, and that recognizing April 21 each year as Climate Change Awareness Day will to some degree help to move towards that objective.
We have a number of bills that are brought forward in this Legislature on Thursday mornings that are an effort to symbolically recognize a worthwhile objective or challenge, and certainly this bill falls into
that category. If you look at the bill, there is a fairly lengthy
preamble which talks about many of the environmental challenges that mankind faces and that we in Ontario must recognize and attempt to grapple with. I think most of the
preamble
includes points that most of us would agree with.
I listened to the member for Ottawa-Orléans in his presentation this morning and I would agree with much of what he said. I heard him say, I think, that we are the worst polluters in the world, and I
would have to say that I disagree with that statement. I don't believe that Ontario or Canada qualifies as the worst polluter in the world. I think, from what I've read, there are serious environmental problems in many other countries across the
world that would be far worse than here. I do agree, though, with the member when he talked about the challenge faced by Ontario in terms of the severe weather that we've encountered in recent years. The member for Peterborough talked about the
flood that affected his community in, I think it was, 2005 or 2004. Actually, last year at this time I was raising the need for the provincial government to assist a number of communities in our riding of Waterloo-Wellington because we were
dealing with the aftermath and the cleanup of two very severe tornadoes that hit our area in August of last year. So I'm well aware that the provincial government needs to take action to support communities that are affected by these examples of
severe weather.
Given that this is Thursday morning and it's private members' business, I don't want to be overly partisan in terms of my response, but I'm sure the member for Ottawa-Orléans would have wished that this
report had come out some other week, as opposed to the week that his bill was being presented and discussed in the Legislature. The fact is that the Environmental Commissioner is a non-partisan office. He's an officer of the Legislature. He's
appointed by the Legislature as a whole. When you're in government, perhaps you look forward to this report coming out with a little less excitement than the opposition does, but when this report comes out, I think we all have to take it very
seriously.
I was glad that the Environmental Commissioner prefaced his report this year with a quote by Prime Minister Winston Churchill from November 1936. It said: "The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of
soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close. In its place, we are entering a period of consequences." Of course, I'm sure that Prime Minister Churchill was talking about the threat faced by England from the Nazis, but in this
context we have to take this report seriously, obviously.
My colleague the member for Haliburton-Victoria-Brock mentioned the fact that on page 61 of this report the Environmental Commissioner has pointed out that his office contacted the Ministry of the Environment
recently, and staff told the Environmental Commissioner "that the ministry does not have a formal written plan or strategy dealing with adaptation to climate change." I'm sure the member for Ottawa-Orléans would want the government to do
more, to do better in this area, and the fact that he's brought this bill forward I would hope will encourage the government to take this action so that it can, in some meaningful way, show its response to the challenge of global change, as a
ministry and as a province.
I think it is fair to say that whether you look at it as climate change or global warming, it is a real concern of many people in the province of Ontario. Certainly, it's a huge concern for many people in
Waterloo-Wellington; I'm amongst those people. The preponderance of scientific evidence seems to suggest that human activity in recent years is at least accelerating this change, if not a contributing factor. So obviously it's something that we
all have to be concerned about, any of us who care about the future -- and all of us should, obviously. As a father of three children -- my wife and I are obviously very concerned about the world that our children and our grandchildren will
inherit. All of us should share this concern, and all of us should be part of the solution.
Again, I would suggest to the member for Ottawa-Orléans that's he's done a good thing today by bringing this bill forward, and this bill has my support.
Ms. Jennifer F. Mossop (Stoney Creek): I'm going to take this opportunity to give a shortened version of The Lorax by Dr. Seuss. This should prove to be an enjoyable part of private members'
time, which I always enjoy. I think it's the best time that we spend in this House, where we actually discuss issues in a more candid and supposedly less partisan manner.
At the far end of town where the Grickle-grass grows
and the wind smells slow-and-sour when it blows
and no birds ever sing excepting old crows
is the Street of the Lifted Lorax....
What was the Lorax?
Any why was it there?
And why was it lifted and taken somewhere
from the far end of town
where the Grickle-grass grows?
The old Once-ler still lives here.
Ask him. He knows....
Way back in the days when the grass was still green
and the pond was still wet
and the clouds were still clean,
and the song of the Swomee-Swans rang out in space...
one morning, I came to this glorious place.
And I first saw the trees! The Truffula Trees!
The bright-coloured tufts of the Truffula Trees!
Mile after mile in the fresh morning breeze.
In no time at all, I had built a small shop.
Then I chopped down a Truffula Tree with one chop.
And with great skilful skill and with great speedy speed,
I took the soft tuft. And I knitted a Thneed!
The instant I'd finished, I heard a ga-Zump!
I looked.
I saw something pop out of the stump
of the tree I'd chopped down. It was sort of a man.
Describe him? ... That's hard. I don't know if I can....
The Lorax said,
"Sir! You are crazy with greed.
There is no one on earth
who would buy that fool Thneed!"
But the very next minute I proved he was wrong.
For, just at that minute, a chap came along,
and he thought that the Thneed I had knitted was great.
He happily bought it for three ninety-eight....
And, in no time at all,
in the factory I built,
the whole Once-ler Family
was working full tilt.
We were all knitting Thneeds
just as busy as bees,
to the sound of the chopping
of Truffula Trees....
He snapped, "I'm the Lorax who speaks for the trees
which you seem to be chopping as fast as you please.
But I'm also in charge of the Brown Bar-ba-loots
who played in the shade in their Bar-ba-loot suits
and happily lived, eating Truffula Fruits.
Now ... thanks to your hacking my trees to the ground,
there's not enough Truffula Fruit to go 'round"....
"Once-ler!" he cried with a cruffulous croak.
"Once-ler! You're making such smogulous smoke!
My poor Swomee-Swans ... why, they can't sing a note!
No one can sing who has smog in his throat....
You're glumping the pond where the Humming-Fish hummed!
No more can they hum, for their gills are all gummed.
So I'm sending them off. Oh, their future is dreary.
They'll walk on their fins and get woefully weary
in search of some water that isn't so smeary"....
I yelled at the Lorax, "Now listen here, Dad!
All you do is yap-yap and say, `Bad! Bad! Bad!'
Well, I have my rights, sir, and I'm telling you
I intend to go on doing just what I do!
And, for your information, you Lorax, I'm figgering on biggering
and biggering and biggering and biggering,
turning more Truffula Trees into Thneeds
which everyone, everyone, everyone, everyone needs!"
And at that very moment, we heard a loud whack!
From outside in the fields came a sickening smack
of an axe on a tree. Then we heard the tree fall.
The very last Truffula Tree of them all!...
And all that the Lorax left here in this mess
was a small pile of rocks, with one word...
`unless.' Whatever that meant, well, I just couldn't guess....
"But now," says the Once-ler,
"Now that you're here,
the word of the Lorax seems perfectly clear.
Unless someone like you
cares a whole awful lot,
nothing is going to get better.
It's not."
I have a three-year-old daughter and, like most parents, I can tell you that I adore her with every fibre of my being. She is a delight and I cannot imagine life without her, at least not a life filled with
the magic and the sparkle that she provides. But I resisted having children, honestly, for a number of reasons, but chief among them was that I could not imagine bringing someone into this world that is run by a species that is so hell-bent on
destroying itself, on destroying this planet and everything and everyone on it. Because what else can you call a species that fouls its nest so, the way we do, the way humans foul their collective nest? We produce enough food in the Western world
to feed the entire planet, but we don't; we waste it. We fill our water with our own feces and with toxic chemicals. Then we pull the water from the ground and stick it in bottles, and those plastic bottles then litter our streets and our
landfills, despite efforts to recycle.
When do you suppose we're really, really going to get a grip on the fact that every year in Ontario 2,000 to 5,000 people die of smog-related illness? That's like wiping out an entire town in Ontario every
year with the smog we create. Actually, the air in Ontario isn't too bad, compared to other places, and the water is not too bad, compared to other parts of the world, and we do have the land and the climate and the know-how to provide our own
food supply, more so than in other parts of the world. Yet we still find excuses not to do enough to protect these oh, so essential resources for our future generations.
So my hope for my daughter is that her natural life expires before our planet does. But at the rate we're going, that's a fairly faint hope. It's not the fault of one political party or one government, and all
the politicizing of this issue is not going to solve it; it is every single individual working together and in partnership to actually get the job done, and that's a fact.
So maybe, just maybe, my daughter's generation will take to heart the lesson of the Lorax, as told by Dr. Seuss, more so than the many, many generations before her.
Mr. Jim Wilson (Simcoe-Grey): It's nice that everyone likes to get up and say that it's non-partisan in here on Thursday mornings. But I just switched to Thursday mornings, so I'm not quite
into that routine yet, as you might discover in the next four minutes.
I think it's commendable, though, that Mr. McNeely has brought forward this particular bill. I think his timing is unfortunate, perhaps for himself. I'm a former Minister of the Environment under the Ernie
Eves government, and I've never seen a report, nor would I even contemplate a report, as scathing as what Gord Miller, the Environmental Commissioner, put out yesterday.
In the three minutes I have, I'd just quote from the Windsor Star yesterday. Dave Battagello wrote:
"Ontario's government is failing on nearly every level of environmental management and its residents -- today and in the future -- will suffer the consequences, a watchdog group has warned.
"Environmental Commissioner of Ontario Gord Miller's annual report called `Neglecting Our Obligations' says the province has fallen short on climate change, Great Lakes protection, transportation emissions,
industrial pollution and keeping drinking water safe.
"`There are a lot of things coming down the pipe for needs,' Miller warned. `The consequences are real if we don't have the resources in place.'
"Solutions must be found in months and not years, he said."
He went on to point out that Ontario has about a $75-billion annual operating budget and it's only providing $300 million for the environment ministry under the current government. He notes that we spend far
more than that -- 40 cents of each dollar -- on health care and we're only spending a fraction of a cent of each dollar on the Ministry of the Environment.
As politely as I can say, the Liberals, in the 16 years I've been here, always, always said they would out-green, and always pretended to out-green, the Conservatives, and we were always painted -- somehow we
ran the province wonderfully for 50 of the last 60 years and we had the best place in the world to live, but we were always blamed for not being green enough. We did more for the environment -- I'd even note that on the world stage Mr. Mulroney
actually got the top award in the world earlier this year for his environmental stewardship, in particular in the area of climate change. So no party has a corner on greening the earth.
I just want to remind Mr. McNeely that his own government record in the last three years is horrible. It's the worst in the history of Ontario at probably the most critical time in our history. The
Environmental Commissioner goes on to report that you ain't seen nothing yet in terms of floods and bridges going out and sewers backing up and infrastructure falling apart.
You've had three years. Your own minister kind of hasn't been completely factual about this issue. When asked by our party recently, she said there was a climate change strategy or a strategy for Ontario to do
its part to fight global warming. Mr. Miller says he has checked every website that the government has across all ministries and, on page 61 of his report, that he actually specifically asked the Ministry of the Environment if they had a written
climate change policy anywhere in government, and you don't.
You promised, as part of your 231 promises, that you would act on this file. I encourage the people who are here this morning to talk to the Premier, talk to the Minister of the Environment, talk to the
Minister of Finance and do more. If you live on Georgian Bay or in Wasaga Beach like I do, you see the effects of climate change every day. I call upon Mr. McNeely to not only recognize April 21 as the day when we want do more about climate change
and make greater awareness, but also to get his own government to act on this very serious issue.
Mr. John Wilkinson (Perth-Middlesex): I look forward to entering the debate on behalf of my colleague Mr. McNeely. What I would like to do first of all is praise Phil. I want to say to the
students who are here from his riding that they should be proud of him and of the fact that in a private member's bill he has issued a clarion call to this place at this time, when we have a chance to debate an issue free from the constraints of
partisan politics. You'll notice that there are certain partisan politics that fall into this place -- maybe not everyone is used to Thursday morning just yet, I say to my friend Jim.
But what I want to talk about in the little bit of time I have here is, when I was the age of the children, when I was young, we had a threat, and that was the threat of nuclear annihilation: that we would not
slowly kill our planet but swiftly and brutally kill humanity because of crazy, crazy people running the world who thought that the idea of mutually assured destruction would keep us safe. I think that generation -- the generation I belong to --
has gone a long way to reducing that threat. And now, I say to the new generation, the challenge of the 21st century is, how can we build a society -- a just society, a prosperous society, right across this world -- and do it in a sustainable
fashion? That is the great challenge. I say, and I admit freely, that our generation has not solved that problem.
I look at the report of the Environmental Commissioner -- and we appreciate his wonderful work in this regard, because he always calls on us to solve the problem of the day and of the future. What he's saying
is that, despite all the work that has been done, that challenge has not been adequately addressed, and that challenge of the 21st century to our young people is, how can we be sustainable? That is the challenge that I believe that generation,
with our encouragement and support, will actually meet. I am not a pessimist; I'm an optimist. I want to thank my member for allowing that we will have an annual focus through it
The Deputy Speaker: Mr. McNeely, you have two minute to respond.
Mr. McNeely: I'd like to thank all my colleagues who participated in the debate here this morning. It was a great pleasure to have input from Jeff Leal of Peterborough, Jennifer Mossop of
Stoney Creek and John Wilkinson of Perth-Middlesex. I also wish to thank the member for Haliburton-Victoria-Brock, the member for Toronto-Danforth, who has a great background in the environment, the member for Waterloo-Wellington and the member
for Simcoe-Grey.
I see major changes occurring in our ministries now. I see changes in transportation, energy, the building code, agriculture, with ethanol, the green plan, the Places to Grow. We will close the coal plants. So
we are making a lot of progress.
I'd like to read from The Lorax:
"Mister!" he said with a sawdusty sneeze,
"I am the Lorax. I speak for the trees.
I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongues."
I think it's very, very important that we have to be there speaking for the natural environment, because the natural environment is what this is all about.
The challenge ahead of us is much bigger than Sir John A. Macdonald had building the railway from sea to sea. It's much bigger than the US putting a man on the moon. It's much bigger than that. I think that's
why it's important to spread the word.
I think some members mentioned that it was not a great time, with the Environmental Commissioner's report coming out. I think it's an ideal time for this issue to come forward. In his report yesterday, the
Environmental Commissioner stressed the importance of educating our children about the environment. How can we transform our economy and society so that we can respond to the environmental challenges that are facing us if we raise a generation of
ecologically illiterate children? So I think that's one area that is going to be very easy to act on. That is an area that we are acting on, and that must be done. That is what this legislation is all about. A poll shows that only 50% of Canadians
are aware of the climate change.
I would just like to read a last quote from The Lorax:
"But now," says the Once-ler,
"Now that you're here,
the word of the Lorax seems perfectly clear.
Unless someone like you
cares a whole awful lot,
nothing is going to get better.
It's not."
WORKPLACE SAFETY
AND INSURANCE AMENDMENT ACT
(BOB SHAW), 2006 /
LOI BOB SHAW DE 2006
MODIFIANT LA
LOI SUR LA SÉCURITÉ
PROFESSIONNELLE ET L'ASSURANCE
CONTRE LES ACCIDENTS DU TRAVAIL
Ms. Horwath moved second reading of the following bill:
Bill 111,
An Act to amend the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997 with respect to occupational diseases and injuries of firefighters / Projet de loi 111, Loi modifiant la Loi de 1997 sur la
sécurité professionnelle et l'assurance contre les accidents du travail relativement aux maladies professionnelles et aux lésions des pompiers.
The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Pursuant to standing order 96, you have up to 10 minutes. The floor is yours.
Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): I want to start by saying how proud and honoured I am today, as this is my first opportunity as a member of this Legislature to have one of my private
member's bills get to second reading debate. It's a bill that any one of the members here in this Legislature would have been proud to bring forward, and I know that. It's a bill that I request all members to support when the time comes,
regardless of party. For me personally, it's a bill that brings full-circle a major part of my own political career, because it is so entwined with the fact that I am actually here in this House today. Some would actually even call it karma.
On July 9, 1997, at 7:45 p.m., the city of Hamilton's professional firefighters were called to a blaze that was later labelled the worst environmental disaster in recent memory, an inferno being fed by 400
tonnes of polyvinyl chloride plastics, or PVCs, that raged for four days in the thick of a residential neighbourhood. Firefighters from forces all around pitched in to help. A toxic cloud blackened the sky for days. The falling toxic soot covered
the surrounding neighbourhoods for dozens of blocks. Hydrogen chloride, dioxins, benzene, PAHs and metals were some of the toxins firefighters were exposed to during those four days.
Four months later, that November, I ran for Hamilton city council on a platform of being actively involved in solving these kinds of neighbourhood problems. Plastimet was a dangerous stockpile of hundreds of
tonnes of plastics. It was a disaster waiting to happen. It was a low point in Hamilton's history. It was a disaster that left an entire community concerned about its health. It was a disaster that to this day takes its toll on firefighters and
their loved ones psychologically, emotionally and physically. The blaze has most certainly forever changed our firefighter family in Hamilton.
Captain Bob Shaw, the hero whose name is part of this bill, was one of those firefighters. Captain Shaw, a previously healthy, strong and vital man, succumbed to esophageal cancer less than seven years later,
in 2004, having never really obtained his previous level of health. The day of Captain Shaw's funeral was the same day that former member for Hamilton East Dominic Agostino was laid to rest in Hamilton.
I was unable to attend both of those services that day -- my obligation and commitment was to the firefighter community -- and although I didn't meet Captain Shaw's family until well after winning the Hamilton
East by-election, they later thanked me for having been there. That is when I promised Nathan and Jackie Shaw that I would do everything I could to take up the cause of presumptive legislation for firefighters in this province. It was
inconceivable to me that their claim had been denied, that they were made to endure the insult of being told that Bob's sacrifice, their sacrifice, had nothing to do with his occupation. The reams of information, studies and evidence that Nathan
had put together and the support he had from the Hamilton Professional Fire Fighters Association and the Ontario Professional Fire Fighters Association meant nothing at all. That is why I am very proud to be here today, asking you to join me in
showing our Ontario heroes that not only do we appreciate the dangerous work they do but we are prepared to acknowledge that they are exposed to a toxic mélange of chemicals and poisons throughout their careers as firefighters, and when these
exposures result in the dreaded diagnoses of various cancers outlined in
section 15.4 of the bill, we no longer will turn our backs on their compensation claims.
Instead, we will reinforce our appreciation for their courage and sacrifice by ensuring that they and their families are not made to fight an undignified final battle with the WSIB for compensation, that their
claims for compensation are dealt with expeditiously, with sensitivity and acknowledgement that their ultimate sacrifice was noted, is appreciated, and that they and their families should not be made to suffer through a callous battle with a WSIB
like some 300 families are currently doing, adding insult to the injury they sustained from occupational disease.
I want members to be clear: Ontario is lagging behind other jurisdictions. Bill 111 will bring us back to a leadership position in recognizing the link between exposure and occupational disease in
firefighters. Ironically, those jurisdictions that have passed Ontario over the past decade or more have relied on some of the irrefutable science amassed here by our very own firefighter organizations in Ontario. Manitoba, Alberta, Saskatchewan,
British Columbia and Nova Scotia all recognize the occupational diseases of firefighters. How can they not, when -- and I'm quoting now from the OPFFA fact sheet that I provided to members -- "firefighters are regularly exposed to burning
chemicals and other toxins. There are 70,000 toxic substances on file with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the US. In reality, when these substances burn together, there are 70 million possible combinations that are created in a fire.
Firefighters routinely endure exposure to these burning toxins in the course of protecting the lives and property of their fellow citizens"?
What other specific diseases are outlined in the bill?
"For the purposes of
section 15, if a worker who is a firefighter contracts a disease specified in subsection (4), the disease is presumed to be an occupational disease that occurred due to the nature of the
worker's employment as a firefighter unless the contrary is shown."
In other words, the onus is on the board to show that it wasn't an occupational exposure that caused the disease, and those diseases are listed: primary-site brain cancer; primary-site bladder cancer;
primary-site kidney cancer; primary non-Hodgkin's lymphoma; primary leukemia, including multiple myeloma; primary-site ureter cancer; primary-site colorectal cancer; primary-site lung cancer; primary-site testicular cancer; degenerative
neurological disease; primary-site esophageal cancer; primary-site stomach cancer.
The bill also speaks to the propensity for firefighters to suffer heart injuries following the attendance at a fire or an emergency:
"For the purposes of
section 13, if a worker who is a firefighter sustains an injury to the heart while attending at a fire or other emergency in the performance of his or her duties as a firefighter, or
within 24 hours after so attending, the injury is presumed to be a personal injury by accident arising out of and in the course of the worker's employment as a firefighter," again, "unless the contrary is shown," putting the onus on the board to
prove that it was not a workplace injury.
Members, I have provided you with packages of information. The science is clear. In study after study, firefighters are shown to have higher incidences of these cancers -- period. Bill 111 is supported by the
Ontario Professional Fire Fighters Association, all of their locals and members across this province the Ontario Association of Fire Chiefs; firefighters' families; the general public; editorial boards; and the following municipal councils:
Hamilton, Georgina, Pickering, Richmond Hill, Toronto, Kingston, Ottawa, Smiths Falls, Cambridge, Kitchener, Midland, Waterloo, Oakville, Chatham-Kent, London, St. Thomas, Sarnia, Windsor, Sault Ste. Marie, Timmins, Thunder Bay, Arnprior, Woolwich
township, Coleman township, Loyalist township, the township of Papineau-Cameron, the township of Oro-Medonte and the town of Latchford.
At this past Sunday's annual memorial service to fallen firefighters, the first to be held at the new monument at Queen's Park, practically every Speaker -- including the Premier; the Ontario fire marshal,
Bernard Moyle; the president of the OPFFA, Fred LeBlanc; and Toronto Mayor David Miller -- acknowledged occupational disease as a reason why we were there honouring our fallen firefighters.
We have an historic opportunity to do this again today in a way that they will know we meant it. So, please, join me in supporting Ontario's heroes. I ask you to please support Bill 111 and help me in making
sure it becomes the law in the province of Ontario. Heed OPPFA President Fred LeBlanc's words, who says: "I strongly encourage all members of the House to support MPP Andrea Horwath's Bill 111. The legislation reflects what firefighters and their
families need to effectively deal with the often tragic circumstances of occupational disease. Our concentration should be put on rehabilitation and prevention, without the worry of proper recognition."
I want to thank all of the firefighters and their families from across the province who have contacted me to encourage me to bring this bill forward, particularly in a time of desperate grief: Michelle
Adamkowski, who lost her husband, Joe, in May; Rebeccah Erskine from Ottawa, who lost her husband, Mark Johnston, in April; and to all of those who have sent letters and e-mails, and I have stacks of them, thank you for your support. It is in the
name of Bob Shaw, but we all know there are hundreds of families who will benefit from this legislation. It's the least that we can do to make sure it gets passed.
I want to acknowledge that we have guests here with us today, including the vice-president of the Ontario Professional Fire Fighters Association, Brian George; I know that Fred LeBlanc was looking to get here
but couldn't make it. I see the president of the Hamilton Professional Fire Fighters Association, Henry Watson, is here as well; of course, Jackie and Nathan Shaw, thank you again for being here; Colin Grieve and Paul Atkinson, who are workers'
compensation professionals from the Toronto and Hamilton firefighters' associations; and all of the other firefighters who are here. Thank you very much for coming to support the bill.
The Deputy Speaker: Further debate?
Mr. Dave Levac (Brant): Let me start by saying two things: Number one, I will be supporting this bill, straight up. Number two, I want to extend my deepest sympathies to the families of all of
the firefighters who have fallen as a result of diseases and the work that they do day in and day out. I've had the unfortunate opportunity, if you'd call it that, to witness some of these situations, to be a participant in some of these
situations, and to indeed attend funerals. Those are things that are not wanted by anybody.
On October 1, I attended the Ontario Firefighters' Memorial ceremony here in Toronto with firefighters from my hometown of Brantford. While at the memorial service, we heard these important words about
firefighters' lives:
"The men and women of today's fire service are confronted with a more dangerous work environment than ever before.
"We are forced to continually change our strategies and tactics to accomplish our tasks.
"Our methods may change; the goals remain the same as they were in the past: to save lives and to protect property, sometimes at a terrible cost.
"This is what we do; this is our chosen profession.
"This is the tradition of the firefighter."
In that quote, you did not hear them talk about themselves in terms of putting their lives on the line. It was to save other lives and property.
I was involved with supporting firefighters well before I was elected in 1999. In Brantford, I headed a fundraising initiative to purchase thermal imagers for firefighters so they could have the most modern
equipment available to them. We raised over $150,000 and purchased six thermal imagers for the firefighters of Brantford and Brant county. These tools save precious time while in a situation, reduce the time spent searching for hot spots and
people, reduce damage to property and, finally and most importantly, provide them with the potential to save lives. Seconds matter.
While in opposition, I recommended the purchase of thermal imagers for every fire service in Ontario. Our government responded when elected and provided $30 million to fire services across the province to
assist them in purchasing those things. I was also the author of Bill 107, the Firefighters' Memorial Day Act, which passed unanimously in December 2000. Finally, again in opposition, I recommended many of the provisions that eventually became our
Bill 206.
I believe that we need to protect those who protect us. One of the most dangerous parts of the firefighter's job is the unknown. When a firefighter does not know what they will face in a given situation -- for
example, in a brownfield -- it makes it more difficult to effectively fight that fire. When brownfield sites are abandoned, as they have been in my riding, many, many unknown chemicals are stored on those sites illegally -- sometimes legally --
and they do pose a danger if there is a fire. On a personal note, the RCMP showed up to investigate one of the brownfields in my riding because the combination of particular chemicals that were stored there were classified as weapons of mass
destruction. That's what firefighters face when we do not take care of this unknown entity.
I support the concept of presumptive legislation for firefighters and will continue to work with the firefighters and all stakeholders on moving Ontario forward. I commend the member from Hamilton East. The
bill moves that debate forward.
Both the Minister of Labour and his staff have had, and continue to have, productive discussions with firefighter representatives on diverse issues which are important to them, including presumptive
legislation. In fact, the minister asked his parliamentary assistant, Mario Racco, the member from Thornhill, to undertake consultations on this very issue. The member has consulted with, among others, WSIB, the fire marshal, AMO, the city of
Toronto and, of course, the firefighters. The minister told me directly that he is in the process of digesting the report and asking for feedback from stakeholders, on top of what we are asking for in this bill today.
We have been working with and continue to work with firefighters to protect them. We understand that this is an important and complex issue.
One point that I would ask the member to understand as we, hopefully, get this to committee, is that if we do pass this bill, retroactivity will take us back to 1915. That's difficult for us to calculate at
this time, and I'd like to see us do the research on that.
We are working with firefighters, the WSIB and the fire sector stakeholders to ensure that Ontario is, indeed, the leader when it comes to firefighting and health safety. I look forward to the day when we can
say that firefighters are better protected because of the work that this Legislature, this member and the government is doing to protect our firefighters and their families.
The government has also suggested that the Fire Service
Section 21 Committee develop guidelines that we will help and try to support. The Ministry of Labour is also participating on the occupational disease
working group to help the prevention of occupational diseases and illnesses.
Finally, this is the right thing to do. I ask and urge all of us to support this legislation to continue that very important work of making sure that the families of those who gave up their lives are
protected.
Mr. Jim Wilson (Simcoe-Grey): As my party's labour critic, I'm pleased to support this legislation. In talking to members this week, I think all my colleagues who will be here this morning
will support this legislation. I want to congratulate the member for Hamilton East, Andrea Horwath, for bringing forward this legislation. She has been tenacious about it. I see it goes back to May, I think, of 2004. It's very good of her to keep
fighting on behalf of Ontario's firefighters.
I want to welcome the firefighters and the representatives who are in the galleries today and say that this bill is long overdue. I note that Manitoba, Saskatchewan, British Columbia, Alberta and Nova Scotia
have some compensation for some kinds of cancers resulting from exposure during fires.
In the short time I have today, though, I want to congratulate Nathan Shaw. This bill, of course, is named after his father, Bob Shaw. Of course, Mrs. Shaw -- Jacqueline -- is here today. His is probably one
of the best letters I've received in 16 years in this place. It's not only very well written; I'm sure your dad would be very proud of the cause you've taken up in his name. I'm sorry I didn't know your father, but for people at home watching, he
fell victim, not too long after the Plastimet fire, to esophageal cancer, which, as Nathan says in his letter, is a horrible disease. I'll read the letter, if the family doesn't mind. It's dated August 23, 2006, to Premier McGuinty.
"Dear Premier McGuinty:
"I write to you on behalf of myself and my mother, Jacqueline, to convey our disappointment towards you and your government for the delay in handling presumptive legislation for firefighters in Ontario.
"On Thursday, May 4, 2006, a private member's bill was introduced in the Legislative Assembly of Ontario by Hamilton East MPP Andrea Horwath entitled Bill 111, Workplace Safety and Insurance Amendment Act (Bob
Shaw). On that day, my mother and I were present in the House prior to the bill's introduction.
"Bill 111 is named in my father's honour. Robert N. Shaw was a dedicated firefighter with the city of Hamilton for 27 years. Tragically, he passed away on March 24 of 2004 at the young age of 55 years old. He
died from cancer of the esophagus, an occupational disease obtained while fighting the Plastimet fire, a warehouse fire here in Hamilton that burned PVC plastic for four days in 1997. Plastimet has been called one of the worst industrial disasters
in North American history. Burning plastics create a huge number of toxic chemicals, including compounds called nitrosamines, which are known to be associated with the development of esophageal cancer. My father was the first to pass away as a
result of what happened at that fire, but more men have since gotten ill and died due to their extreme toxic exposure. Medical experts support my father's death as an occupational disease.
"Esophageal cancer must be included in presumptive legislation.
"Based on all the facts and expert analysis presented, it is clear to all except the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board ... that my dad's illness was the result of his job. Whether it be his family
physician, his oncologist or a highly respected epidemiologist who specializes in occupational diseases for firefighters -- they all support his death as being caused by his job. Esophageal cancer is a horrible disease, and it is devastating that
my own province is denying firefighters like my dad who make the ultimate sacrifice.
"Ontario law must catch up to what everyone else has already concluded. Premier, now is your chance to step up and take a position of leadership on the issue of occupational disease for firefighters.
"Bill 111 is a law that ensures Ontario firefighters and their families never again have to suffer the indignity of having their compensation claim denied for a work-related illness. Too many firefighters and
their families endure crippling financial, emotional and physical burdens as a result of their occupational disease not being recognized.
"The unjust system of forcing ill workers, their widows or other survivors to prove the cause of illness before the WSIB is wrong. It should not take years and numerous costly appeals for sick firefighters to
get the compensation they deserve. Justice delayed is justice denied. Of the 463 compensation claims for work-related illnesses, like my father's, at the WSIB, almost 300 have been rejected. The injustice must end.
"The science is clear. Full-time firefighters are two to three times more likely to die from cancer than the general population. Increased toxic exposures as a result of their job means an increased risk of
contracting cancer. Firefighters are the only occupational group that legally cannot refuse to undertake work that is dangerous and harmful. These heroes obtain occupational disease from their livelihood, not their lifestyles.
"Firefighters and their families are not alone in this call for change. Countless broadcast and print media have weighed in and done reports supporting Bill 111 and the approval of firefighters' cancer claims.
Fifteen municipalities in Ontario have now passed official motions supporting presumptive legislation, with more to come. And momentum continues to grow in the general public, who want the government to treat Ontario firefighters and their
families fairly and recognize them properly for the heroes that they are.
"It is time for Ontario to stop trailing other provinces, stop denying firefighters the recognition they deserve, and stop leaving families of fallen firefighters behind. It is time for Ontario to lead.
"Premier, you have before you a tremendous opportunity to bring a sense of closure and fairness to firefighters and their families right across the province. I ask you from the bottom of my heart to do what
you know is right.
"Pass Bill 111.
"I ask for the opportunity to meet with you to discuss this issue further. I look forward to your response on this matter, and appreciate your time in reading my letter."
A thank-you to Nathan Shaw. As I said, I'm sure your dad would be very, very proud of you, as firefighters should be. I thank you on behalf of my colleagues in my party for working with Andrea to bring this
matter forward.
I note, for those who are worried about the financial consequences of this, because they may be notable, when you've got 15, 16 municipalities, many of them pay the WSIB premiums on behalf of their
firefighters as part of the negotiated agreements. Certainly in volunteer areas like mine -- or mostly I have volunteer firefighters in Simcoe-Grey -- the local taxpayers foot the bill, and I think they'd be happy to do that. They obviously have
expressed that on 15 or 16 occasions through motions from their councils, speaking on behalf of the ratepayers. I think that deals with the financial aspect of this.
I just urge the government to send this to committee so we can find out the cost and iron out the details. But don't waste time. When I went to the library -- I was only there 10 minutes -- I got 40 articles
on fallen firefighters with occupational diseases who are not being covered right now, or their widows or families are going through a horrendous fight with the WSIB.
I note that an
article that was in the Windsor Star, quoting firefighters in Ottawa and the Ontario Professional Fire Fighters Association, said that there's now a database of some 600 firefighters, many of
whom have died since they were put on the database, and that's sad. We all remember 9/11. Certainly every month in my riding we do something to honour firefighters. As politicians, we're often opening new stations, renovating, getting equipment or
whatever, so there have been lots of occasions since 9/11 to thank our firefighters and to recognize them for the heroes they are. If your house is on fire or you're in a car accident or whatever, you're sure glad to see the red trucks pull up and
the emergency vehicles come to your rescue and the rescue of your loved ones.
As Ms. Horwath has pointed out and as Nathan pointed out, Ontario professional firefighters have to go in and rescue people. They don't have the luxury of standing on the sidewalk or at the side of the road
letting people die. It's their job. It's a sacred oath they take to the people of Ontario, whom they serve. The least we can do is back them up when they get sick and support their families in their time of need.
Mr. Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): I'm pleased and proud to be able to speak in support of this legislation.
People will know that New Democrats Andrea Horwath and Peter Tabuns attended the first firefighters' memorial service last weekend at the monument that's been erected to pay tribute to firefighters who have
died in the course of serving their community. While those memorial services are important and the establishment of that type of monument is very relevant, I say to you that all of the monuments, all of the memorial services, all of the flowery
speeches and platitudes don't address the tragedy of a firefighter suffering the diseases enumerated here -- the cancers.
Let's take a look at some of them: primary-site brain cancer; esophageal cancer; colorectal cancer. There are far too many of us who have lived with family members, loved ones, or have neighbours who have
suffered these cancers, who know how incredibly tragic, painful and overwhelming they are.
I, for one, am not worried about retroactivity. Dammit, these people don't live a long time. You die when you have these cancers. I'll be damned if I as a member of this Legislature, or any of us, should be
putting firefighters or their families in a position where firefighters who suffer these diseases as a result of performing their incredibly valuable and heroic duties on a daily basis should have to spend the rest of their living days not only in
pain as a result of the disease they acquired in the course of doing their job, but also with fear that their families might not be cared for once they're gone because they can't establish eligibility for WSIB compensation.
Let's not kid ourselves. This bill is not going to stop firefighters from getting these diseases. They know it. While we should be working along with the firefighting community to ensure that as many, and more
and more, devices as can be developed to help safeguard firefighter safety when they're performing their duty are indeed developed and made available to firefighters -- that's one thing. Oh, I hear so often in this Legislature that it's one thing
to talk about the technology that's available; it's another to make sure that firefighters have it out there. You know what I'm talking about.
This bill isn't going to stop firefighters who, as a result of their exposure to toxins in the course of suppressing a fire, are going to get esophageal cancer, stomach cancer, colorectal cancer or brain
cancer, and whose lives are going to be cut oh, so short and whose families are going to be left desperate, who leave behind kids -- bright, talented kids -- who will fear that they won't be able to go to university or college or pursue the
careers that they aspire to because their mom's or dad's death will be unrecognized by a workers' compensation system that will be far less than what it should be without this legislation.
I want people to know right here and now that New Democrats aren't going to tolerate more studies, more inquiries, more consultations. You have provinces like Saskatchewan, Manitoba, British Columbia and
Alberta that have already adopted these standards. There is a need to tinker with some of the language. Let's get it in committee; we'll do committee next week. I tell you, as House leader for this group of dedicated legislators, New Democrats, I
will commit myself to having a committee hearing any of the days of the week that the government wants -- morning, afternoon or evening. We'll sit to midnight, if need be, to accommodate this bill in committee.
We'll do anything that has to be done to accommodate its passage so that maybe this Christmas, 2006 -- not 2007, not 2008, not 2009, not 2010, not after firefighters have died and been buried -- some families
might understand that a parent, a mom or a dad, who suffers one of these diseases as a result of doing their duty will be able to pass away knowing that there will be some support for their spouse and their children. I encourage speedy support of
second reading, speedy accommodation of this bill in committee and speedy entertainment of third reading.
Mr. Khalil Ramal (London-Fanshawe): Before I start, I would like to extend my deepest sympathy to the loved ones of those firefighters who have died.
I think this is an important bill. That's why, as my colleague from Brant said, we have nothing else except support on this bill because we recognize as a government, as people of this province, the job, the
hard work that firefighters do on our behalf to protect us on a daily basis.
I had the chance last year to visit firefighters stationed in my riding to experience for one day the firefighter's job and how much firefighters face on a daily basis: the heat, the fires, the difficulties
when they battle blazes or wildfires, how they climb into high-rise buildings to try to save and rescue victims who got caught in a fire. It's a very difficult job. I want to commend the firefighters across Ontario for the great job they do on
behalf of us on a daily basis.
I think as a government we've been working with the firefighters since we got elected. We work with them; we try. We passed the OMERS reforms that protect and give firefighters some kind of supplemental
benefit. We also worked to support them by giving them $30 million as a grant to distribute among 385 Ontario municipalities. And we passed so many different regulations to prevent fires from happening.
Having said that, we're still working with firefighters to address all these issues. I and my colleagues last year attended a seminar at the London Health Sciences Centre, organized by firefighters, to tell us
how much firefighters face on a daily basis and how much hazardous material they see and face that will cause some kinds of diseases. That's why we are supporting this bill. Hopefully this bill will go to second reading and third reading and will
pass, to give a great indication to firefighters in this province and a recognition of the very hard work they do on behalf of us and of all the people of the province.
It has been mentioned by my colleague across the way and my colleague from Brant how much firefighters face on a daily basis, how they work hard to rescue people in car accidents, how they rescue people in
fires, how they go to any environmental disaster to rescue people in very tough weather, very hard conditions. They come for us all the time. I think it is our duty as elected officials to pay them respect by passing this bill and by working with
them to address the issues.
As I mentioned, I met a couple of firefighters who contracted an occupational disease last year. They explained to me how much they suffer psychologically and how much their families are suffering from the
diseases they contracted from the fires they battled when they were trying to rescue people.
I want to commend the member for Hamilton East for bringing this bill forward. I hope all the members of the House support her, not just for herself but to support firefighters across the province and
recognize the great job they do to protect us and work for us to have a safe environment. I also want to commend the Minister of Labour, who asked his parliamentary assistant to conduct an intensive review to see how we can prevent fires in order
to have safe workplaces to protect not just the firefighters but all the workers across the province of Ontario.
I want to support this bill and hopefully all the members of this House will support the bill too.
Mr. Peter Tabuns (Toronto-Danforth): I really want to thank the member, Andrea Horwath, for bringing forward this bill. I was at the memorial service this past Sunday at the monument to the
firefighters just down here. I know that the firefighters in this province, the firefighters in this community, have made extraordinary sacrifices for us. They put their lives on the line so people can live, so that cities are not destroyed.
We know what happened a century ago in the great fires in Toronto, San Francisco and other places. The ability to control fire, to contain it, is crucial for us. But when people go into a modern fire, they're
dealing with problems they didn't have a century ago. They are dealing with an extraordinary range of toxic chemicals mixed and reshaped in novel and unpredictable ways, and it's clear from the statistics that firefighters are dying from the
impact of those chemicals. They must not be put in a situation where they have to fight for compensation. There should be no question. They have been extraordinarily generous with us -- generous with their heroism, generous with their lives. At
the very minimum, we can be fair with them. Adopt the bill put forward by the member and truly show respect and honour for the firefighters in this province.
Mr. Ted McMeekin (Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Aldershot): On October 1, 2006, Premier Dalton McGuinty. at a memorial service honouring firefighters. uttered these words: "It takes a special
kind of person to crash through a door of a building filled with smoke, to face chemicals that are as dangerous as they are invisible. It takes a special kind of person, one who is prepared to die so that others might live. In a world coloured
with so many shades of grey, we don't often speak of heroes. But when danger strikes, when the world is black and white, we need heroes."
Yes indeed, we do need heroes.
On March 24, 2004, Hamilton lost two of its heroes. One was 55-year-old Robert Shaw, a dedicated Hamilton firefighter of some 27 years. According to the medical reports, which of course I have reviewed, Mr.
Shaw died from an occupational disease obtained while fighting the famous Plastimet warehouse fire, a fire that burned PVC plastic for four days in 1997.
Like his father, Harry, who was also a firefighter, Bob Shaw clearly understood the risks associated with his calling, and right up to the time of his death, he wouldn't complain or cast blame. He simply told
his friends, "I was just doing my job."
His wife, Jacqueline, who is with us here this morning, reports that when Bob came back from his first day battling the Plastimet fire, eyes burning and coughing up phlegm, he wouldn't heed her plea to stay
home because he "didn't want to let the other guys down."
His son Nathan, in a letter to the Premier, has this to say:
"My dad gave his life for his job. For his case to be rejected in such a way by his own province is indescribable. The WSIB is so powerful and steadfast in their unjust ways that I feel helpless when it comes
to challenging their flawed policies in the areas of recognition and compensation for Ontario firefighters.
"You and your government," Mr. Premier, "have done much to honour living firefighters through various policy initiatives. Now it is time to step up and honour those firefighters who are sick, ill, injured or
have died tragically like my father.
"I am a 21-year-old university student who no longer has a father. For my own province not to recognize who my dad was, what he did or why he is gone is indescribably painful and wrong.
"I lost my dad, my best friend and my role model. Our community lost a hero.
"I ask you from the bottom of my heart to please do what you know is right."
Friends, while I believe that our government will ultimately move to correct this injustice through government legislation, in the meantime I intend to support this private member initiative, to stand shoulder
to shoulder with Jacqueline and Nathan Shaw and with our professional firefighters --
Interjections.
The Deputy Speaker: Order. Can we take the conversations outside, please? Thank you.
Mr. McMeekin: -- to ensure that we do more than engrave the names of fallen firefighters on a wall, but also etch their memory in our hearts.
I mentioned two heroes who died on March 24, 2004. The other was my good friend and mentor Dominic Agostino. Dominic repeatedly raised the tragedy of Plastimet and warned of the illnesses that would surely
follow. Dominic was a friend of Hamilton but especially the men and women who placed their lives on the line for us every single day. If Dom were with us today, I know he would be standing in his place and speaking out. I'm also sure he would join
me in congratulating Nathan Shaw, Bob's son, who has fought a long and difficult battle to win justice for his family.
Nathan, thank you for having the wisdom and the courage to keep at it. Your dad and your granddad would be very proud of you. So am I. Thank you for reminding us that we do need heroes and for being that hero
for us today.
Ms. Cheri DiNovo (Parkdale-High Park): I first of all want to say thank you to our member, Ms. Horwath. I quote her when she describes the situation in this province: "They hang workers out to
dry in this province. Firefighters and other workers who contract diseases from exposure to workplace toxins have no protection in this province. That's not only wrong; it's immoral."
I also rise in this House to speak to that morality. My job before being a member here was as a minister at Emmanuel Howard Park United Church in the west end of Toronto. One of our members there is a
firefighter: Mark Reynolds. His family are very active in our church -- Mark and Carol Reynolds and their children Denis and Charlotte. I know what it's like to be in a congregation that depends on someone like Mark. Whenever we watched the news
and saw an incident where Mark would be called out to a fire, such as the one that killed your father, Nathan, we would all, as a body, pray for that family.
I also rise because I lost my husband and the father of my children 14 years ago. He died in a traffic accident, and the first people on that scene to help save him -- unfortunately, they were unsuccessful --
were firefighters. So I thank you, on behalf of my family, my children, for what your father, Nathan, and your husband, Jacqueline, and other firefighters do for all of us. I don't think there's a member in this House who hasn't dialled 911 and
knows that the first people on the scene are the firefighters. We all are indebted to you, and I absolutely urge that Bill 111 be passed as soon as possible.
The Deputy Speaker: Further debate? Is someone going to stand up? Waterloo-Wellington, thank you.
Mr. Ted Arnott (Waterloo-Wellington): I was standing up, Mr. Speaker.
I'm pleased to have an opportunity to speak briefly on Bill 111,
An Act to amend the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997, with respect to occupational diseases and injuries of firefighters.
This bill has been brought forward, as we know, by the member for Hamilton East. When she brought it forward on May 4 earlier this year, I believe the same day or approximately the same week she had a press
conference, which was an effort to raise awareness of this issue. The member deserves credit for her sincere effort to bring forward an important public issue in the Ontario Legislature affecting firefighters.
This bill is an expression intended to amend two rebuttable presumptions relating to health conditions affecting firefighters:
"Subsection 15.1(3) states that if a firefighter gets certain types of cancer or a degenerative neurological disease, the cancer or disease is presumed to be an occupational disease that occurred due to
employment as a firefighter. The presumption applies for a cancer or disease if the worker has worked as a firefighter during at least the prescribed period or series of periods.
"Subsection 15.1(7) states that if a firefighter suffers heart damage while attending at a fire or emergency, or within 24 hours after attending at a fire or emergency, the heart damage is presumed to be a
personal injury by accident that occurred due to employment as a firefighter."
I have had a number of other things that I've had to do this morning, including a meeting outside of the chamber. So unfortunately, I haven't heard all of the debate, but in a brief conversation that I just
had with the member for Brant, it's my understanding that the government is expressing support for this bill in principle and that it's the intention of the government that this bill should go to committee. Certainly, I think that is the
appropriate course of action that should be pursued.
I think that what's most important is ensuring that the organizations that are supportive of this bill -- I understand that the Ontario Professional Fire Fighters Association is in support and the Ontario
Association of Fire Chiefs has expressed support as well -- should have the opportunity to bring forward their scientific and medical evidence that demonstrates that these illnesses need to be compensated, that people who have these illnesses or
these severe health conditions, and their families -- surviving families, in some cases -- be compensated appropriately. It's something that I would support.
In fact, I have a private member's resolution that I brought forward a little while ago, and it called upon the government to establish a benefit for the surviving families of any firefighter who loses their
life in the course of their duties. It's something that I brought forward some time ago. It's actually before the order paper. I don't have the information right in front of me, unfortunately, but it is on the order paper right now. It is a
similar resolution, similar in principle to what the member for Hamilton East is bringing forward: the idea that we owe a great debt to any firefighter -- or any emergency responder, I would suggest -- who loses their life in the course of their
responsibilities protecting the rest of us. Obviously, we have to be prepared and willing to ensure that those families are looked after. That's why I support this bill.
I know there may be some concerns about the cost, and I would expect that, in the course of discussion, there would be an estimate of what this is going to cost. Certainly, I think that's something that needs
to be brought forward and discussed. But through the public hearings process, all of the concerns and all the ideas relating to this issue can have a full public discussion, a full airing. I would certainly welcome an opportunity to participate,
if possible, if my
schedule permits, to some degree in terms of those public hearings and discussions that might take place at a standing committee.
In closing, I want to express my appreciation to all our firefighters across the province. As you know, Mr. Speaker, I have had an opportunity to raise many issues with respect to the fire service during the
16 years that I've been privileged to sit in this House. In 1994, I brought forward a private member's bill to allow volunteer firefighters to use the flashing green light on their personal vehicle when they're going from home or work to the fire
station or to an emergency. That was a bill that was passed by the NDP government while I sat in opposition, something that I very much appreciated.
In the late 1990s, I brought forward legislation with respect to workers' compensation for volunteer firefighters, because there was a need to ensure that municipalities, if they wished, would be given the
opportunity to purchase the highest level of workers' compensation coverage for their volunteer firefighters. That bill was brought forward in the Legislature. As it turned out, shortly thereafter, there was an identical government bill standing
in the name of the Minister of Labour of the day which was, in fact, passed by the Ontario Legislature into law.
Most of the members will recall the double-hatter firefighter issue, which I've been involved in for some time. I continue to express my personal belief that full-time professional firefighters who may live in
a small town nearby should be permitted to serve as volunteer firefighters, protecting their neighbours in their home communities, if they wish to do so. I continue to hold that view very strongly and continue to advocate for it.
Most importantly, this Bill 111 is before us today. Again, certainly it is a bill that I support in principle. I hope that as the bill moves forward for public discussion at committee, all of these issues can
be reviewed and that we can do what we can to support our firefighters in the province of Ontario.
The Deputy Speaker: I would ask the members present to join me in welcoming, in the members' east gallery, the mayor of Mississauga, Hazel McCallion. Welcome.
The member for Beaches-East York.
Mr. Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): I rise in support of my colleague Andrea Horwath's Bill 111. I have to tell you, in the 18 years now that I have been in public life as a councillor, as a
mayor, as a megacity councillor and as an MPP, I have never once had a constituent have anything but praise for our fire departments, for the people who work in them and for the service they provide. I have to tell you as well that if there are
any heroes that are constant in the public mind, they are firefighters. On those terrible days when a firefighter succumbs at the scene of a fire or an industrial accident or the places where they put their life on the line, everyone in the
community mourns, everyone commends and remembers the bravery of the firefighter, and everyone gives thanks that they were willing to, and did, put their lives on the line.
Since the 1990s, we have known only too well that firefighters who go out to fires, particularly to big industrial fires, put their life on the line in more ways than one. We have known that many of them will
succumb, unfortunately, to industrial disease. Five provinces have recognized those studies that took place in Ontario. Ontario, sadly, has never recognized its own research. Today, when a firefighter succumbs months, years after a tragedy, there
is silence in Ontario. Worse than that, worse than the silence that they experience, is the fact that when they go before the workers' industrial safety board, when they go before WSIB, they are denied something which is absolutely apparent to
them and absolutely apparent to everyone who lives in this province. They have got an occupational disease: and they have got it from their job.
We need to pass this bill into law; we need to do it very quickly. Firefighters are our heroes. They do what no one else will do. They put their lives at risk when no one else will, not only at the scene of
the fire but in the events and the days and the months and the years that pass, when they find themselves subject to occupational disease.
Mr. Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): There are moments like this when I stand tall as a New Democrat and am proud to be a New Democrat and to be in a caucus such as one that has people who
are prepared to take on the tough issues that face our society. We know that far too often, workers -- in this case, firefighters -- by way of duty, have died because of exposure to the toxic chemicals they're exposed to as they rush into a fire
to save a life and to try to make property safe for those people who live in those communities.
I've got to say to my good friend Andrea Horwath: This is a job well done. It's one that should have been done, unfortunately, a long time ago. There have been attempts, but it looks like you're going to be
successful. To you, I tip my hat and say that today I am proud to be a New Democrat and part of a caucus that is able to take on these issues.
I say to other members in the House, I'm hopeful and I believe that all members will vote for this legislation. It's high time. Unfortunately, far too many firefighters have been exposed and continue to be
exposed to the toxic chemicals that are in those burning buildings and, as a result, become ill, and eventually some of them succumb to those illnesses.
Actually, on October 18, the Timmins Fire Department, which we all know very well, will be holding a memorial as a result of the death of Tom McGee, who died in 1995 of colon cancer that was related to his
exposure to some of those toxic chemicals in a fire he had fought. I'm hoping that I can be there. Unfortunately, it's on one of those duty days when we're here in the Legislature, but I know that our thoughts are with him.
I say to all those families out there who have unfortunately been affected negatively by the illness of a loved one that there is hope in the future. I'm hopeful that this bill will not only pass second
reading but will get the support it needs at committee so that it finally can become law and, in the end, give justice to those people who deserve that justice.
To you, as firefighters, I say here today, as a New Democrat, we want to thank you for the support in helping us bring this bill forward and for helping my good friend Andrea Horwath, and we look forward to
better times ahead.
The Deputy Speaker: Ms. Horwath, you have two minutes to respond.
Ms. Horwath: I want to thank the members for Brant, Simcoe-Grey, Niagara Centre, London-Fanshawe, Toronto-Danforth, Parkdale-High Park, Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Aldershot,
Waterloo-Wellington, Beaches-East York and Timmins-James Bay -- I hope I didn't miss anybody -- for their kind remarks.
I thought I'd use my last two minutes to quote from a document that Nathan Shaw sent in February:
"The WSIB should presume occupational diseases and deaths of firefighters like my father are caused by their exposures to toxic substances. The unjust system of forcing ill workers or their widows and other
survivors to prove the cause of illnesses is immoral. Based on all the facts and expert analysis presented, it is clear to all except the WSIB that the esophageal cancer my dad suffered and that killed him was the result of his job. The onus
should be on the WSIB to prove it was not."
Later on in the letter, he says:
"It is understood that being in harm's way is part of a firefighter's career. But it is expected those firefighters' families will be taken care of if something tragic does indeed happen. It is horrible enough
that I used to worry my dad might not be coming home. Now, after that worry has become reality, my mother and I should not have to also deal with the loss of financial security and our future.
"My dad gave his life for his job. For his case to be rejected in such a way by his own province is indescribable. The WSIB is so powerful and steadfast in their unjust ways that I feel helpless when it comes
to challenging their flawed policies in the areas of recognition and compensation for Ontario firefighters."
We're here to tell Nathan that he's not helpless. We're going to fight with you and get this done for the firefighters of Ontario.
In fact, at the memorial service last Sunday, the Premier, talking about the firefighters being memorialized, said, "Each of them was fearless. Each of them died in the line of duty. But it wasn't one fire, in
particular, that killed them. It was all the fires. All the smoke. And all the chemicals."
We know that, and we're going to make it better for firefighters and their families in the province.
The Deputy Speaker: The time provided for private members' public business has expired.
CLIMATE CHANGE
AWARENESS DAY ACT, 2006 /
LOI DE 2006 SUR LA JOURNÉE
DE SENSIBILISATION
AUX CHANGEMENTS CLIMATIQUES
The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): We will first deal with ballot item number 49, standing in the name of Mr. McNeely.
Mr. McNeely has moved second reading of Bill 139. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.
Pursuant to standing order 96, Mr. McNeely, this bill will be referred to committee of the whole. Agreed?
Mr. Phil McNeely (Ottawa-Orléans): Mr. Speaker, I would like to see this bill referred to the committee on general government.
The Deputy Speaker: Mr. McNeely has asked that the bill be referred to the standing committee on general government. Agreed? Agreed.
WORKPLACE SAFETY
AND INSURANCE AMENDMENT ACT
(BOB SHAW), 2006 /
LOI BOB SHAW DE 2006
MODIFIANT LA
LOI SUR LA SÉCURITÉ
PROFESSIONNELLE ET L'ASSURANCE
CONTRE LES ACCIDENTS DU TRAVAIL
The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): We will now deal with ballot item number 50, standing in the name of Ms. Horwath.
Ms. Horwath has moved second reading of Bill 111,
An Act to amend the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997 with respect to occupational diseases and injuries of firefighters. Is it the pleasure of the
House that the motion carry?
All those in favour, say "aye."
All those opposed, say "nay."
In my opinion, the ayes have it. Carried.
Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): Mr. Speaker, I'd like this bill to be referred to the standing committee on general government.
The Deputy Speaker: Ms. Horwath has asked that it be referred to the standing committee on general government. Agreed? Agreed.
All matters relating to private members' public business having been dealt with, this House is adjourned until 1:30 of the clock.
The House recessed from 1201 to 1330.
MEMBERS' STATEMENTS
GREEN LEGACY PROGRAM
Mr. Ted Arnott (Waterloo-Wellington): The Environmental Commissioner of Ontario has issued the McGuinty Liberal government a devastating and damning critique in its annual report to the
Legislative Assembly. Entitled Neglecting Our Obligations, this urgent clarion call for action includes 224 pages of constructive suggestions and stern admonishments directed primarily at the provincial government.
It is abundantly clear to the people of Waterloo-Wellington that the protection of our natural environment for the benefit of future generations must be one of the government's highest priorities. Even as this
government fails to show leadership, local communities are showing us the way.
A perfect example of local people taking action to protect our environment can be found in Wellington county, with its impressive Green Legacy tree-planting program. Originally launched in 2004 as part of the
county's 150th anniversary celebrations, the bold vision, set out by Warden Brad Whitcombe and the county's chief administrative officer, Scott Wilson, was that we'd plant 150,000 trees in Wellington county in one year.
The county formed partnerships with the Grand River Conservation Authority, the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Wellington County Stewardship Council. Working together, they have teamed up with local
environmental groups, service clubs, schools, municipalities and private landowners, including farmers. Not only was their ambitious objective of 150,000 trees in 2004 achieved, now they have made it a permanent county program, with 151,000 trees
planted in 2005 and 152,000 trees planted in 2006.
I want to again my express my sincere appreciation to the hundreds in our county who have made Green Legacy such a success, showing leadership on the environment that the rest of humankind should follow.
AL BIRNEY
Mr. Brad Duguid (Scarborough Centre): I rise today to pay tribute to a constituent and a friend, John A. Birney, known to most of us as Al. Al Birney passed away quite suddenly last June.
In my city council days, I came to know Al as a devoted husband, father and grandfather. He was involved in his community and concerned with its well-being. But I really got to know Al as a passionate
supporter and advocate for the Schizophrenia Society of Ontario. Regrettably, Al came to this role through personal family tragedy.
Every time I drive over the Bloor Street viaduct, I remember Al Birney. Many years ago, as chair of the city of Toronto's community services committee, a proposal came to me for consideration to erect a
barrier on the Bloor Street viaduct to prevent suicides. My first thought was that it wouldn't be too effective, but Al Birney, the project's leading advocate, persisted, asking me to read through some of the international research on what have
been referred to as "suicide magnets."
He educated myself and many other members of council about the importance of this project, about the impact it would have, about the lives it would save. It eventually went ahead and, as a result, lives indeed
have been saved. The barrier now stands as a legacy of the persistence, diligence and passion of Al Birney. In 2002, Al Birney was named as co-recipient of the city of Toronto's Volunteer of the Year Award to acknowledge his incredible
efforts.
On behalf of Premier Dalton McGuinty, my colleagues on all sides of the Legislature and myself, I extend our condolences to Al's wife, Kathleen, his children and the entire Birney family. Al will be missed by
us all.
DIAGNOSTIC SERVICES
Ms. Laurie Scott (Haliburton-Victoria-Brock): I rise today to tell the people of Ontario that, though the Minister of Health says he's fixing health problems in Ontario, patients continue to
suffer.
Recently the minister, in another one of his famous photo ops, proudly stated that the Trenton hospital will be receiving a CAT scanner. The hospital in Belleville has sent back the money you gave them for new
CAT scanning equipment, saying that they don't have enough radiologists to deal with the backlog of cases in Belleville. Minister, it is the same group of radiologists in Belleville who will be reading the images coming from the CAT scan in
Trenton.
If the minister truly cared and listened to their concerns, he'd know that where they clearly need help is in obtaining radiologists. For a hospital to send back money is an unprecedented move and is
indicative of this government's poor planning and its attitude of simply throwing taxpayers' money around with no real plan but to hope it gets them past the next election.
I respect the member from Prince Edward-Hastings. He's a tireless advocate for the people of his riding. I don't blame him for not running again. His own health minister refuses to do what's needed to help
patients in Belleville and Trenton.
This government and this minister will say anything or do anything to get elected. The minister likes to cover his failure and his lack of concern for health care in Ontario by trying to be clever and saying
that previous DNA makeup has caused the issues which he fails to properly address. I agree that there's clearly a DNA problem, but it's actually the Minister of Health doing nothing about it.
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Order.
Mr. Ted Arnott (Waterloo-Wellington): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I was listening to the statement of the member for Haliburton-Victoria-Brock, and I heard him threaten to withdraw
health services from her riding because of her statement in this House. That is another example of his abysmal conduct as Minister of Health and Deputy Premier.
Interjections.
The Speaker: Order.
Interjections.
The Speaker: Order, the Minister of Agriculture, the member for Waterloo-Wellington and the Minister of Health. We all know that heckling is always out of order, and it is particularly out of
order if one is not in their proper seat. I would caution members to not make comments when they're not in their seat.
NURSE PRACTITIONERS
Ms. Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): In Ontario today, there are far too many unemployed and underemployed nurse practitioners. Their scope of practice now allows them to provide many primary
health care services that patients need. Applying these skills and expertise benefits all Ontarians, but if nurse practitioners aren't able to work, that's a huge waste of talent, energy and skills in the health care system.
Over nine months ago, I supported an application to establish a nurse practitioner-led clinic for the city of greater Sudbury. In a city with over 20,000 orphaned patients, you'd think the McGuinty Liberal
government would be interested in supporting this proposal, especially as the nurse practitioners were going to focus their work in the outlying communities, where primary health care needs are the greatest. This excellent proposal was turned
down. There's been no change in the number of orphaned patients. The outlying communities are still underserviced. Local nurse practitioners can't get work in their field. There's something wrong with this picture.
On August 9, the Registered Nurses Association of Ontario wrote to Minister Smitherman and said, "This is a tremendous squandering of talent for the individuals who sacrificed much to become qualified for this
vital role, for the communal resources that have subsidized their training and, most of all, for the people of Sudbury who are desperately seeking access to primary care."
Doris Grinspun urged the minister to turn his attention to this urgent issue. I too urge the Minister of Health to turn his attention to this matter. We have seven nurse practitioners ready to provide primary
health care services to thousands of patients in our area. When will they be able to, and when will patients benefit from their skills and expertise? One has already been forced to leave.
PARKINSON'S DISEASE
Mr. Dave Levac (Brant): On Sunday, September 24, I participated in SuperWalk for Parkinson's 2006 in Brantford. The SuperWalk raises money for Parkinson's research, and it is something that is
near and dear to my heart. My brother was diagnosed at 49 years old and is contining to fight this dreaded disease. He's a hero in my heart.
Estimates say that 100,000 Canadians are fighting Parkinson's disease, and almost 40,000 of them live here in Ontario. Although Parkinson's has been thought of as a disease of the elderly, as I just said,
people are often diagnosed during their most productive years when they are raising families, building careers, caring for aging parents and making significant contributions in their community. People with Parkinson's pay a huge price. They lose
their ability to work, to manage simple tasks, to communicate and care for themselves. But the impacts are not borne by the individual alone. Spouses and partners and children become caregivers, so that their focus shifts away from their own goals
and aspirations towards helping their loved ones fight this insidious disease, which they do lovingly and without hesitation.
Management of Parkinson's disease involves coordination of efforts of family members, along with multidisciplinary teams from health professionals. Effective management of Parkinson's requires an integrated
system of care for the highest possible quality of life.
The number of Ontarians with Parkinson's disease is expected to increase significantly over the coming years. We need to do all that we can to help families that have people with Parkinson's.
MINISTER'S COMMENTS
Mr. Robert W. Runciman (Leeds-Grenville): Yesterday I asked the Premier to require an appropriate apology from his Minister of Northern Development for scurrilous comments made in this House
on October 3. My question followed an offensive and superficial apology from the minister that trivialized the situation and the serious nature of his insult. The minister did not explain the reason for the apology, did not offer to withdraw his
offensive comment, and then went on to trivialize the issue by extending birthday greetings to a family member. In response to my question, the Premier indicated that the minister had apologized personally to my leader, John Tory, and myself, and
that was good enough for him.
The minister did not apologize to either Mr. Tory or myself. He simply said, "I made a dumb comment." That's a statement of fact, not an apology. When a minister of the crown can say something like "Tories
abuse children" and not be compelled to appropriately apologize by his leader, that speaks volumes about his government and his party.
The Premier endorsed vicious personal attacks in the recent Parkdale-High Park by-election, politics through character assassination, and recently promoted his chief mudslinger, the Minister of Health, to
Deputy Premier status.
The Premier's own words and actions encourage comment like those spewn by the Minister of Northern Development, and it reflects badly on all members of this assembly.
YOUTH SERVICES
Mr. Bas Balkissoon (Scarborough-Rouge River): Let me take this opportunity to report about wonderful things that have happened to young people in my riding of Scarborough-Rouge River.
The Malvern community was identified by the United Way as an underserved neighbourhood in need of programs to help youth at risk. This past summer, 87 youth from the Malvern area had the privilege to
participate in the Ministry of Children and Youth Services' summer jobs for youth program. They served in many leadership and confidence-boosting roles such as camp counsellors, office staff and computer technicians. These opportunities helped
them develop self-esteem and acquire new skills. This program has proven to be tremendously successful for these youths. And there is more to report.
The Malvern Family Resource Centre welcomed two outreach workers supported by the Ministry of Children and Youth Services' new youth outreach worker program. This initiative gave the centre a one-year budget
of $128,000 to fund two outreach workers who are focusing on outreach services for highly at-risk youth in Malvern.
Recent government-funded projects and programs such as these are working in my community. They are giving our young people chances to succeed.
Focusing on education and investing in youth programs has brought meaning back into the lives of troubled and neglected youth. Clearly, this government has taken steps in the right direction.
The residents of Scarborough-Rouge River and I send thanks and praise for recognizing youth as a priority --
The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you.
WORLD TEACHERS' DAY
Mr. Jim Brownell (Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh): Today is World Teachers' Day, and it is my pleasure to rise in the House to mark this important occasion. This year's theme is "Quality
Teachers for Quality Education," and I offer my sincerest congratulations and thanks to the many teachers who work so hard to make Ontario's education system among the best in the world.
Certainly the teaching profession is very near and dear to me, having spent over 32 years teaching elementary school in my riding of Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh. It was during those years that I had the
privilege of teaching and connecting with some of the finest young people in the province. They came from all backgrounds and walks of life, and I stay in touch with many of them to this day. I can say that nothing gives me greater pleasure than
to connect with them and to see them succeed and find happiness.
The best teachers provide our children not only with the necessary skills in subjects like languages, math and history, but they ins