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

March 5, 1997

36th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

L173 - Wed 5 Mar 1997 / Mer 5 Mar 1997

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING

FRENCH-LANGUAGE HOSPITAL SERVICES

ATHERLEY BRIDGE

NIAGARA ESCARPMENT COMMISSION

NATIONAL GROCERS

GLAXO WELLCOME

YOUTH EMPLOYMENT PROGRAMS

GOVERNMENT SERVICES

HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING

EASTER SEAL SOCIETY

ORAL QUESTIONS

FRENCH-LANGUAGE HOSPITAL SERVICES

PROPERTY TAXATION

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

HOSPITAL STAFF

HOSPITAL FINANCING

NIAGARA ESCARPMENT COMMISSION

YOUNG OFFENDERS

HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING

ONTARIO HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

LABOUR DISPUTE

ONTARIO RANGER PROGRAM

WRITTEN QUESTIONS

MOTIONS

COMMITTEE SITTINGS

PETITIONS

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

FIRE SAFETY

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

FIRE SAFETY

BIBLIOTHÈQUES PUBLIQUES

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

PRIVATE MEMBER'S MOTION

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

FIRE SAFETY

HOSPITAL FINANCING

TVONTARIO

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

FIRE SAFETY

NORTH YORK BRANSON HOSPITAL

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES

ORDERS OF THE DAY

LOCAL CONTROL OF PUBLIC LIBRARIES ACT, 1997 / LOI DE 1997 SUR LE CONTRÔLE LOCAL DES BIBLIOTHÈQUES PUBLIQUES

FAIR MUNICIPAL FINANCE ACT, 1997 / LOI DE 1997 SUR LE FINANCEMENT ÉQUITABLE DES MUNICIPALITÉS

The House met at 1332.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING

Mr Gerard Kennedy (York South): I rise today to present to the House a message from the people of Bruce county. They delivered to my office yesterday copies of letters that they had presented to the Grey-Bruce District Health Council in response to itsreckless and insensitive recommendations on the future of health care in their area, these recommendations of course made necessary by the cuts to hospitals of this government.

These letters are coming from people specifically supporting the Bruce hospital in Walkerton. After a general mailing to 9,000 households, the hospital received 7,946 letters in return in support of the hospital and against the restructuring plans of the Grey-Bruce District Health Council. Eighty eight per cent of the residents took time to respond to the restructuring plans. This is an overwhelming show of support and contrary to the actions of the government which made it necessary.

As the House is aware, the Minister of Health has asked the Grey-Bruce District Health Council to postpone his report until he can develop his last-minute rural health policy. We hope the House will recognize that it is these 7,946 people who want the government to draft a policy that will allow them to have quality and complete health care in their home communities.

The people who wrote these letters have a commitment to their hospital that this government cannot afford to ignore. They donate every year to support its activities. They are scared that if their hospital is gone their doctors will also be lost. They know that change is necessary, but these 7,946 people want the government to listen to their concerns.

FRENCH-LANGUAGE HOSPITAL SERVICES

Mr Len Wood (Cochrane North): I rise today to give my support to SOS Montfort and to the Franco-Ontarian community in its efforts to save Montfort Hospital.

The recommendations of the Health Services Restructuring Commission appointed by this government do not reflect in any way the fact that Montfort is the only community hospital in the country that offers a full medical training program in French. Doctors are trained to practise in smaller hospitals in urban and rural areas. This is crucial for northern Ontarians, to have French doctors who receive training that really reflects the needs of our northern communities. This hospital also provides training for 14 other health care specialities. In the last five years, more than 1,000 students have trained at Montfort.

Many of my constituents of Cochrane North have been hospitalized in Montfort for specialized care, and all agree that it is not only reassuring but also crucial to be able to communicate with staff and doctors in their mother tongue. I would also like to stress that 77% of Montfort's clientele is French, and in terms of long-term and psychiatric care, this figure goes as high as 98%.

In the last week the francophone community has been mobilizing its efforts to fully inform the commission, the government and the public of the crucial importance of this institution. I'm urging today the minister of francophone affairs to wake up and do his job and stand up for the Franco-Ontarian community. Stop hiding behind the commission and take action.

I might point out that if it wasn't for Bill 26, which was brought in by Mike Harris and this Conservative government, we wouldn't be seeing hospital closures across this province, especially Montfort Hospital, which is crucial to the people --

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Thank you. Statements?

ATHERLEY BRIDGE

Mr Allan K. McLean (Simcoe East): I'm pleased to rise in the House this afternoon and comment on an important project in my riding of Simcoe East. The project is the twinning of the Atherley Bridge.

The constituents in my riding have shown great concern over the frustrating traffic congestion on the bridge, especially during the peak summer tourist season. The opening of Casino Rama, while it is a wonderful benefit to the area, did add a tremendous load to the already heavy traffic over the bridge at the narrows. This was not properly planned in the previous government's casino approval.

I've personally worked hard and long with the local municipal council and the Ministry of Transportation expressing the importance of the widening of this bridge. Just over a year ago I forwarded a memo to the Ministry of Transportation urging them to act as quickly as possible to correct this situation. With the opening of Casino Rama in July, I knew an explosive situation was about to happen.

I am pleased to see this project is becoming a reality. The Ministry of Transportation has announced they expect the bridge project will be tendered in the next few weeks. Currently the ministry is working on an agreement with the Ontario Casino Corp to fund the three-year project, which is expected to be in the neighbourhood of $16 million to $18 million. This funding will come from the 20% the government collects from casino revenues in Ontario.

Special care will be taken to protect the fish spawning beds located in the area.

I commend the city of Orillia and Ramara for the hard work they have done.

NIAGARA ESCARPMENT COMMISSION

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): Behind closed doors and in secret, the Harris government is taking a major step backwards in the protection of the environment.

While the attention of the province is riveted on the Toronto amalgamation issue, the municipal downloading and the closing of hospitals, the Harris regime is taking responsibility for the Niagara Escarpment Commission away from the Ministry of Environment, which is there to protect the environment, and giving it to the Ministry of Natural Resources, which has jurisdiction over the exploitation of our natural resources.

The Ministry of Natural Resources has no interest in the protection of our unique escarpment lands. In fact, we can expect to see more gravel pits and all kinds of development on an environmental gem which has been designated by the United Nations as a world biosphere.

Besides placing the Niagara Escarpment Commission under the control of the Ministry of Natural Resources, a ministry with a dreadful record in the field of environmental protection, Premier Harris is removing Norm Sterling, the minister in the Davis government responsible for establishing the Niagara Escarpment Commission and the only minister with a commitment to preserving and protecting Niagara Escarpment lands, from responsibility for this important file.

This is a shameful day for the Conservative government of Mike Harris and a mighty sad day for the environment.

NATIONAL GROCERS

Mr Tony Martin (Sault Ste Marie): Earlier this week, on Monday to be exact, I brought Mary Carlucci to this place to share with us the stress that she's under, incurred by National Grocers as they tried to take away her store. In light of the fact that this is 1997 and Saturday is the day the international community sets apart to recognize the role of women in society, some of her comments are interesting. She says:

"National Grocers also lied to me when they got me into this franchisee arrangement; they told me, `Don't worry, you will make money in our stores.' I trusted them. I believed what they told me. I quit a job I had with Loeb and brought the National Grocers store from $9 million a year volume to $22 million. Now they want the store for their own, just like the Loeb situation. They make me buy products at a high price and sell it at a low price so the store loses money. They also don't want me running one of their stores because I'm a woman. I'm the only one in the entire chain.

I was good enough when they wanted my family name and my experience to build up the store business. Now, after using me, National Grocers thinks they can toss me aside. I've been told I shouldn't be running a store, that I should be at home where I belong. Can you imagine that kind of attitude? I've even been told how to dress by the National Grocers old boys' club. Discrimination? Yes, I think so....

"I even wrote a personal letter to all the board of directors...including its chairman, Galen Weston, and to Mrs Hilary Weston. (I thought she should know what kind of company her husband is operating.)" Today --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Members, thank you. That's improper. Please bring it down. I'm warning you to take it down. The members for Sault Ste Marie and Cochrane North, I'm warning you. Statements?

GLAXO WELLCOME

Mrs Helen Johns (Huron): In an innovative and inclusive process, more than 400 employees of Glaxo Wellcome responded to a survey asking for ideas on where the company should focus its charitable contributions. The majority chose hospice care.

Hospice gives people with life-threatening illnesses the opportunity to be cared for at home surrounded by people they love. The goal of hospice care is to make the final months of life in the home comfortable and peaceful. Volunteers, who are the hands and heart of hospice, provide emotional support, practical help and companionship during times of grief.

Glaxo Wellcome is the largest research-and-development-based pharmaceutical manufacturing firm in Ontario and the second-largest in Canada. Through R&D investments, Glaxo makes significant contributions to the health care of Canadians. In this partnership, they plan to build a model to address the issues affecting Canadian society using the powerful combination of expertise, volunteerism, partnership and funding to make a difference. This kind of initiative, this government supports. This partnership should be a model for other companies who want to make meaningful contributions in the charitable field.

I would like to thank Paul Lucas, the employees and the management of Glaxo, and I would like to thank Janet Napper and the board of Hospice Ontario for their commitment to the patients and families in Ontario.

YOUTH EMPLOYMENT PROGRAMS

Mrs Sandra Pupatello (Windsor-Sandwich): This is an open letter to the Minister of Education, Mr Snobelen:

"Last year at this time, we were very concerned about the cancellation of the summer jobs program for youth. So too were students from across Ontario. In fact, in very short order, you heard from student groups across Ontario, begging you not to cancel the programs. Thanks to their efforts, they saved the programs, although you scaled them down severely.

"Minister, one year later, your government's policies have created alarm in a great number of young people across Ontario.

"The unemployment rate for young people is worsening. In fact, the standard rate is 2% higher in Ontario than in the rest of Canada. You are forcing tuition fees to soar. This is hardly helpful.

"This is not the time to eliminate student summer jobs programs. Unfortunately, I understand that this is exactly what you intend to do. Once again this year it is your intention to scrap the youth jobs programs. Instead you plan to tell young people to go find their own jobs and maybe some companies possibly could, perhaps, be eligible for a $2-an-hour cheque at the end of the work period.

"Minister, this is not acceptable. For example, non-profit organizations find the Environmental Youth Corps program vital...."

It is just not acceptable.

GOVERNMENT SERVICES

Mr Gilles Bisson (Cochrane South): I stand here today in order to speak out on behalf of what is going on across this province and how Mike Harris's cuts to government are affecting people in their lives.

Government says over and over again that it wants to cut through red tape. They want to do this in order to make government more efficient for the people of Ontario so we can get business done.

I have a group in my riding which for the last 14 months has tried to get incorporated. The SPCA in Timmins, by Marg Kilgore, has been trying for 14 months to get themselves incorporated. They can't get their application from the bottom of the pile to the top because the government has laid off a majority of the employees within those offices, so the normal processing of simple things like incorporation papers cannot be done in a timely fashion.

Is this common sense? I say it's nonsense. You're supposed to be there and the government is supposed to deliver services to assist businesses and assist individuals to do business in this province. Well, this ain't the case. The government with its cuts is making it more difficult for people to access government, making it increasingly longer for people to work their applications through the system. We have yet another example where in Timmins Marg Kilgore and the SPCA have now waited 14 months to get their thing through, and it's not there.

HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING

Mr W. Leo Jordan (Lanark-Renfrew): Every dollar wasted in the hospital system is a service lost for patients who need care. We spend more than any other jurisdiction in the world, yet Ontario's health care system is not reaching its real potential.

Taxpayers expect nothing less than a hospital system that puts patients first. The restructuring commission will achieve this by removing waste and maximizing the dollars that go to direct patient care. Restructuring is long overdue. In the last 10 or 15 years, 30 district health councils have looked at restructuring 134 hospitals.

My friends in the third party were also familiar with the need for change. They will recall that the Perth hospital exhausted every avenue with that government to obtain funding for a capital project. When I met with the then minister, the honourable member for Beaches-Woodbine, she agreed that funding would be available if the Perth and Smiths Falls hospitals restructured.

The boards and the DHC and I worked through a restructuring plan that merged two administrations into one. This restructuring was the first for small hospitals in Ontario and has saved over $4 million to date.

A condition of the merger is that investments would be made in chronic care beds in Smiths Falls, which we are currently addressing with Minister Wilson. I congratulate the officials.

EASTER SEAL SOCIETY

Hon Janet Ecker (Minister of Community and Social Services): May I have unanimous consent, Mr Speaker, to make a statement regarding Easter Seals today?

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Unanimous consent for a statement on Easter Seals: Agreed? Agreed.

Hon Mrs Ecker: On November 28, 1922, the Ontario Society for Crippled Children, now known as the Easter Seal Society, was created to help raise funds and enable thousands of children with disabilities to receive the help they need regardless of their parents' ability to pay. Over the last 75 years the society has opened its arms to these special children and developed community services and supports to respond to their needs.

It is my pleasure today to congratulate the Easter Seal Society as they celebrate their 75th anniversary. I would also like to introduce two very important guests with us today, the Easter Seal children who will be the ambassadors for all children with disabilities. I am sure all members will join me today in welcoming the 1997 provincial Easter Seal Timmy, T.J. Perry from Oshawa, and also Anna Mejewska, from Brampton, who is the 1997 local Easter Seal Society Tammy.

The Easter Seal Society continues to make a positive difference in the lives of children with physical disabilities and their families by providing a unique and wide range of direct programs and services. These include direct and consultative nursing services to help families care for their children in their homes, schools and communities.

The society provides families with support through educational workshops and information about treatment facilities, clinics and other services that are available. The society also offers financial assistance for medically prescribed equipment, parent relief, summer camps, preschool programs, transportation and other supports.

Through the Easter Seal Research Institute, the society funds research, development and professional training in the prevention, treatment and management of physical disabilities in children.

Over the last 75 years, the Easter Seal Society has helped these children and their families through fund-raising in the community. March is when the society asks all of us to contribute to this important work; I would encourage us all to do so. I wish the society much success in this year's campaign and much success to this year's Timmy and Tammy.

Mrs Sandra Pupatello (Windsor-Sandwich): We can't tell you, T.J. and Anna, how pleased we are to help say happy 75th anniversary to Easter Seal.

There was a Rotary Club of Windsor president named Arthur Fitzgerald, and in 1922 he made a phone call to a Rotarian he knew in Alleyria, Ohio, and at that time he said: "We really need help here in Ontario. We have young kids we're just not able to help. Let's do something about that."

As a result of one phone call, many Rotarian presidents got together for a remarkable meeting. That meeting happened in Windsor several months later, and that was the founding of the Ontario Crippled Children's Society at that time. Over the years, of course, it's become so well known and represented by that Easter Seal stamp that all of us know so well, and it is in fact the Easter Seal Society of Ontario.

Many communities across Ontario participate in the Easter Seal Walkathon and the Easter Seal Telethon, and that gives all of us an opportunity to meet our local Easter Seal kids. What's most important to people in Ontario is to know that these are extraordinary kids, and we want to help extraordinary kids do very ordinary things.

In Windsor we had Very Special Experiences, just as they've had in Pembroke, one of the best telethons in Ontario, which probably raises the highest per capita of all telethons across the country.

We met a young man named Chris Hornsby. As a result of the funding by Easter Seal, this child from Windsor was able to participate in summer camp; in fact he went several times. The older he got, he used to come home to his parents with pretty remarkable stories for a nine-year-old. At the end of one summer, he came back with an earring, much to his parents' chagrin. The summer after that, he came back with a girlfriend. This certainly shows us that these kids are in fact extraordinary kids doing very ordinary things.

All of the Rotarians, all of the Kiwanis, all of the service organizations, the Knights of Columbus, genuine folk who watch the telethon and claim and call in their pledges, all of them do that to help the Easter Seal Society of Ontario continue in its mandate, and that is: helping extraordinary kids do very ordinary things.

On behalf of all of us in the House, T.J. and Anna, the kids you represent, happy anniversary to the Easter Seal Society of Ontario.

Ms Frances Lankin (Beaches-Woodbine): On behalf of the New Democrat caucus, I'm delighted to have this opportunity to welcome T.J. and Anna to be with us this afternoon. It's great to see you here. I want you to say a big hello to all the kids you represent.

It's fun to be part of a celebration, and this is something worth celebrating, 75 years of the Easter Seal Society putting kids first. There's a lot of rhetoric at times in this House about the lofty ideals we all share, and putting kids first is one of them, but here's an organization that does it well, that does it in spades and to whom we all in our communities owe a lot.

The Easter Seal Society makes a really positive contribution to our communities. They make a positive contribution to children and their families by providing a unique and wide range of services.

Some of those services that they operate are a province-wide community nursing program that's so important in providing that individual counselling and help in families' homes; the camp, and you've heard my colleague from Windsor speak about some of the experiences some of the kids she knows have had at the wonderful camp; financial assistance to families to get equipment such as wheelchairs, braces and communications devices, all of those tools that help kids in ordinary functions of life and just make it so much easier to accomplish that; respite care, where trained caregivers can go into the home and give family members a break; integrated preschool programs; transportation assistance, which is really important to get to hospitals and preschools and treatment programs; parent-to-parent links -- the northern clinics have a network of parent delegates which is really important in helping to support parents and develop their advocacy skills so they can represent their issues to themselves; research -- the minister spoke about the research activities and the advocacy network that has been set up.

Organizations like Easter Seal really try to fill the gaps that governments leave. Governments can't fill all gaps, so we know it's really important work, and of course it's necessary in these days more than it ever has been.

While we are celebrating some 75 years of hard work and dedication in our communities that the Easter Seal Society has provided, I want to pay a special tribute to all the volunteers who make their work a reality. There are more than 240 Rotary, Kiwanis, Lions, Kinsmen and other service clubs, as well as countless volunteers, over half a million volunteers and donors who help raise the funds that provide these direct services to families, to children, in partnership with Easter Seal, and 86 cents of every dollar that is contributed to the society goes directly to providing those services for kids.

The majority of the money raised for Easter Seal comes from individual donors and corporate sponsored events. Because of their support, the support of the people who give of their time and their financial resources, these kids can look forward to a brighter future which includes full individual potential and greater independence.

There's an opportunity to get involved. While there are half a million volunteers already, we can always use more. It's important work. Individual volunteers can get involved in the society by doing things like chairing a task force or planning committee; providing office support by proofreading publications; participating in group activities like mailings, folding and stuffing envelopes, getting those mailings out, those appeals out.

You can help out on special event committees or on the activities, the days of special events. You can be a "day of" volunteer to help coordinate and be there. You can participate in many events by collecting pledges or by entering a team.

There's a whole list of activities that corporations can do to provide that kind of support that's so necessary, and of course service club partners that are already very active participants in the Easter Seal campaign have a whole range of activities they organize.

You can help. All of us can help. It's such an important contribution that we as individuals and organizations can make, and one I urge all of us to participate in.

I would like to wrap up by reading the mission statement of the Easter Seal Society. It reads as follows:

"We are dedicated to helping children with physical disabilities achieve their full individual potential and future independence. Easter Seal people make a difference in the lives of children and their families by providing direct services, programs, research, advocacy and public education. There is much more to do."

I agree with that. There is much more to do and it is a continuing challenge to all of us -- organizations, volunteers and governments -- to work together and to try and ensure we are truly meeting the slogan of the Easter Seal Society, "Putting Kids First."

The Speaker: Thank you to the minister, the member for Windsor-Sandwich and the member for Beaches-Woodbine.

To Timmy and Tammy -- T.J. and Anna -- welcome. I hope you enjoy this period, and I'd be interested in hearing your comments once you've finished watching.

ORAL QUESTIONS

FRENCH-LANGUAGE HOSPITAL SERVICES

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): My first question is for the Minister of Health. I want to come back to the issue of the closing of the Montfort Hospital. This issue, as I'm sure you will now recognize, is of great importance. It's not only about accessible health care, it's about the protection of minority language rights.

To Ontario francophones, this issue strikes at the very heart of their identity and in fact the place they occupy in Ontario society. It's about respect and it's about equality. Surely you can understand and respect why the closure of the Montfort Hospital, the only francophone hospital in Ontario, is seen by our francophone friends as a slap in the face. Will you not at least, here and now, acknowledge the tremendous symbolic importance of the Montfort Hospital for Ontario's French-speaking minority?

Hon Jim Wilson (Minister of Health): I have tremendous respect for the work that's being done at that hospital, but also, in saying that, in no way do we want, and I don't think the honourable member wants, to demean the valuable work and the valuable training that's being done in the French language at other institutions like the Civic, the Royal Ottawa, the heart institute and in other parts of Ottawa-Carleton where they're also providing French-language health services to the people who need them.

Mr McGuinty: I believe the minister, in fairness, is not aware that the Montfort is the only hospital in the province where medical records are kept in French, where francophones can communicate with all their doctors and all their nurses in the French language and where francophone doctors are trained and educated in their own language. There are eight anglophone hospitals in the province of Quebec. There is one francophone hospital in Ontario and you are now moving to close it.

In closing the Montfort, you're doing more than just shutting down a hospital. You are removing a very real and concrete expression of the respect we hold for our minority group, the francophones. Minister, why is it --

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Thank you. Minister of Health.

Hon Mr Wilson: I don't understand why the honourable member doesn't direct his comments more directly to the people who have cut health care spending in this country, and that's the Liberal Party of Canada, some $2 billion; second, the honourable member has a lot of nerve when it was his party that cut 700 beds out of Ottawa-Carleton beginning in 1988-89. So you've closed the beds and all the commission -- not this government but the commission -- is trying to do is to find the administrative savings, merge the programs on to fewer sites and free up dollars for the badly needed health services that the people, including the francophones of Ottawa-Carleton, need.

Mr McGuinty: The minister may not want to hear this, but some things are of greater value to us as Ontarians than simply money. Quality health care, for instance, and protection of rights for our francophone minority are things of that nature. The closure of the Montfort is of national significance. The Prime Minister himself, provincial premiers and political leaders have pleaded with you to intervene on behalf of our francophone minority, not because they want to meddle in our affairs but because they recognize the symbolic importance of this hospital.

Francophones everywhere in Ontario right now are waiting with bated breath for your response. They have no interest in your commission because they understand, as I'm sure you do, that when it comes to the protection of minority rights, that is hardly the responsibility of an unelected commission, but that is clearly the responsibility of this government.

Minister, will you or will you not take this opportunity right now to tell us that you are going to intervene and ensure that Montfort Hospital will not close?

Hon Mr Wilson: The commission in its interim report went to great length, I think, to ensure that French-language services would be in place for the people who need them in that part of the province and in other parts of the province where they've been.

The honourable member knows, and he said in his question, that some people have no interest in the commission. I say with respect that everybody better get interested in the work of the commission, because the law is clear in this province that that commission has the authority to restructure the health services system and to actually create a system because of all the beds and the federal budget cuts that your party's imposed on this province.

They're now going to create a health care system so at the end of the day we have modern hospitals with new technologies, the newest drug therapies, more nurses and more doctors available to cure more people. I would ask that during this period the Montfort Hospital and others direct their concerns, provide their data and evidence to the commission, which has given this period of time for all of us to direct our concerns to them before they make their final submission.

PROPERTY TAXATION

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): In the absence of the Premier and the Deputy Premier, I'll go to the Chair of Management Board, I guess. For the past six weeks, my colleague Gerry Phillips and I have been engaged in a very productive exercise. We have travelled the province, met with community groups and determined what the consequences of the downloading are going to be for Ontario communities. They told us that the number one effect is going to be an increase in property taxes. London Deputy Mayor Hopcroft said property taxes are going to go up by 20%.

Timmins Mayor Vic Power said property taxes in that city are going up by 40%. Kingston Mayor Bennett said commercial property taxes are going to go up by 42%. Will you now admit that your government was wrong when it claimed that its policies of downloading will not lead to an increase in property taxes in Ontario?

Hon David Johnson (Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet, Government House Leader): I certainly won't admit that. The whole process is one that municipalities have been looking forward to for many years.

Mr John Gerretsen (Kingston and The Islands): They never asked for social services to be downloaded. Come on.

Hon David Johnson: The previous governments attempted to do this under disentanglement, as the former mayor of Kingston will realize. This government has proceeded to install accountability measures, to clarify which level of government is going to deliver what service. That will make the whole situation more accountable, less expensive, and I believe provide the possibility and the likelihood for municipal property taxes to go down.

Bear in mind that one of the major components and the most expensive service, bar none, is the cost of education, and this government finally, after years and years of requests by municipalities, by people, by businesses across the province, is saying, "Let's take the cost of education at least off the residential component," and that's exactly what we've done.

Mr McGuinty: If everything is going so swimmingly and all is truly well in Camelot, why is there such desperate, mad, frantic scrambling going on behind closed doors inside the Minister of Municipal Affairs' office? They're trying to salvage this botched proposal. There's only one description for this: It's policy on the fly, and policy on the fly always makes for bad policy.

Let me tell you what Terry Cooke, regional chair of Hamilton-Wentworth, said about the downloading: "The disentanglement process is fundamentally flawed. My fear is we will divide this province into a series of communities, some of which have and others which have not."

Not only are we talking about Ontarians paying higher property taxes; they're going to get a province unlike this one. They're going to get a province where some communities, many communities, will not have the wherewithal to care for their needy.

Minister, the plan is fundamentally flawed. Will you now admit you've downloaded the wrong services?

Hon David Johnson: It's called consultation; what's going on is called consultation. I know it's a word that may be foreign to the opposition parties. It's called consultation.

The head of the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, Terry Mundell, is integrally involved in the consultation process. Committees have been set up involving the municipalities, involving the Association of Municipalities of Ontario. They are working with the province to make this separation of services work, and they're confident and I'm confident that this will work to the betterment of the people of Ontario. At the end of the day there is only one taxpayer, and what we need to do and what we're working on for that one taxpayer is to separate these services, to make them more accountable and to make them more effective and efficient.

Mr McGuinty: When I was elected leader, I promised that I would not merely criticize but put forward some positive alternatives.

Mr E.J. Douglas Rollins (Quinte): Let's hear them.

Mr McGuinty: I'm coming to that; hang in there. Here's my advice. You've got to go back to the drawing board and bring us a solution that reflects the following four basic principles:

(1) The province must in all instances retain its capacity to care for our needy, especially children and seniors. We cannot devolve that to municipalities.

(2) Any new transfer responsibilities should be, must be, an even swap.

(3) The province should be responsible for soft services like welfare, child care and senior care, and the municipalities for hard services.

(4) Finally, and this is a novel concept to the government, the public must be involved. They've got to be involved in developing changes.

I developed these four principles together with my colleague. We travelled the province. That's based on consultation. Minister, will you tell us today that you're going to bring back new proposals that meet those four principles?

Hon David Johnson: When the leader of the official opposition indicated that he had some advice to offer, I thought perhaps he was going to recommend the commercial concentration tax again. Of course this is the kind of approach that we had from the Liberal government in the 1980s.

This government has ensured that the needs of the elderly and the needy are protected through the new welfare approach, through the approach to long-term care, the integration of the health services at the local level, where those within their communities will realize what services are required for the people who live within those communities.

This government has brought forward a proposal that not only is neutral, but we've brought forward a proposal which through accountability measures, through efficiencies, will involve lower cost to municipalities and lower municipal taxes.

Finally, this is a consultative process --

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Thank you. New question.

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

Mr Howard Hampton (Rainy River): I wanted to ask this question of the Premier. He's not here. I wanted to ask it of the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. He's not here. So I will try --

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Could you ask it to the people who are here, leader of the third party?

Mr Hampton: I'll try to ask it of the government House leader. Today I joined my NDP colleagues in welcoming hundreds of people to Queen's Park. They marched from Toronto city hall to officially present you with the referendum results. No one came out to see them. No one came out to talk with them. In fact, you treated them with extreme disrespect and arrogance.

Minister, the people voted against your megacity bill. They didn't say, "Tinker with the bill." They didn't say, "Work on it." They said no to it. They don't want it. When are you going to listen to them? When are you going to listen to the people of Toronto who are trying to give you some helpful advice?

Hon David Johnson (Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet, Government House Leader): The government's approach to the referendum on Monday is indeed to listen, and there's no question that there are messages being conveyed through that. This government intends to take its time and get this right. The government is listening to the messages that are conveyed.

I'll tell you some of those messages. Some of those messages are concern about the possibility of tax increases. We believe that certainly won't happen, but there is concern about tax increases. There's concern about the impact on the welfare system. There's concern about communities and the retention of neighbourhood communities, and that communities fear it within Metropolitan Toronto. Those are a few of the concerns that are being expressed. The government is listening to those concerns. The government is going to, in the fullness of time, deal with them and bring forward amendments to address those very concerns.

Mr Hampton: We heard yesterday about the government's plans for amendments. We heard that the government is, in effect, going to introduce amendments into committee of the whole. But the fact is, and the House leader would know this, under the time allocation motion there's only going to be one hour for committee of the whole. In other words, there's going to be no debate, no discussion. You haven't changed anything. You'll introduce a few amendments and then ram it through in an hour.

Minister, don't you get it? People have had it with your arrogance; they've had it with your disrespect for democracy; they've had it with the fact that you don't listen. They're trying to send you a message: "Withdraw Bill 103. Withdraw it." Will you do that?

Interjection.

The Speaker: Order. I want to just quickly caution the gallery. There's no applause, there's no shouting out, there's nothing in the way of a demonstration.

Mr Peter Kormos (Welland-Thorold): But you can smile if you want.

The Speaker: The member for Welland-Thorold, I appreciate all your help, and you're as helpful as usual, but I would ask you -- it's difficult, I'm sure, as it is.

Hon David Johnson: This government some time ago embarked on a very lengthy, time-consuming process and it was called democracy. The process involved over 100 hours of public hearings. Over 600 people came to advise the government. Then there was the referendum in the various municipalities over this past Monday.

The government, out of respect for that democratic process, is going to listen; it's going to analyse the results. It has heard a number of concerns that have been raised. The government is going to take its time and the government will come forward with an approach to address the many concerns that have been raised through this process. At the end of the day, through the committee of the whole process, we will see amendments to address those concerns.

Mr Hampton: The government House leader says they're listening. Thousands of people marched here today and your government did not even have the sense of decency or respect to go out and meet them. The mayor of Toronto was here, the mayor of East York was here, the mayor of Scarborough was here, several city councillors were here, and you didn't even have the respect to go out and meet them and talk to them. So how can you say you're listening to anybody?

The gig is up. You're moving according to the same

schedule you were moving on before, exactly the same schedule. You want the House to come back in the first week of April and you want no more than one hour of debate in committee of the whole and third reading of your so-called amendments. That's not listening, that's not consultation and that's not showing respect for democracy.

We gave you a proposal yesterday that allows you to go back to the drawing board and begin a real consultation process: Scrap Bill 103. Go back to the drawing board. Start talking to people. Will you do that and show some respect for democracy?

Hon David Johnson: This government has talked to people and is listening to people. This government has just gone through a process where over 600 people have had the opportunity. I wonder how many bills brought forward by the previous government had the opportunity of over 100 hours of public participation. How many bills from the previous government had over 600 deputations to speak to --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Minister.

Hon David Johnson: The message delivered today was received by the Premier's office. The Premier himself has indicated that we need to take our time and to get this right. This was one of the messages, I may say, by the mayor of the city of Toronto: "Take your time. Get it right." That's what we intend to do. We have listened to the people through the public hearings; we have listened to the results of the referendum. We're going to analyse that, take our time, bring forward the amendments, address the concerns and get it right.

The Speaker: New question; leader of the third party.

Mr Hampton: We know what this government's version of consultation is. It's to look in the mirror and say, "Mirror, mirror on the wall."

HOSPITAL STAFF

Mr Howard Hampton (Rainy River): My next question is to the Minister of Health. On the eve of your Metro hospital closure announcement, you need to know the current state of patient care in hospitals. On Monday at the Hospital for Sick Children, seven children were turned away from their scheduled appointments for cancer chemotherapy -- seven children in one day.

Catherine Gordon's 10-month-old son Paul is one of those children suffering from cancer who was turned away. Why were Paul and six other children suffering from cancer turned away? The hospital admitted it was because there weren't enough nurses that day. The hospital's official line is, "There is no staffing problem," but they admit that if children get sick in clusters, if a couple of nurses are off sick, if there are several emergencies in one day, they can't meet the situation.

Catherine Gordon wants to know, what are you going to do to ensure that those seven children receive the --

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Thank you.

Hon Jim Wilson (Minister of Health): I appreciate the question from the honourable member. I think the examples he's raising speak volumes for the need to restructure. These are today's problems that need to be solved because we need every dollar into front-line services.

We spend enough money on health care. The leader of the Liberal Party has said that many times. The federal government has said that. We spend 6% more on health care per person in this province than any other jurisdiction in Canada, than any other province. But we need to better target that money to more nurses, more services and modern hospitals. That's what restructuring is all about and that's the road we're on, to improve those services.

We'd expect you to be constructive during this period to help hospitals to beef up their services and get rid of their administration and their excessive overhead and duplication and put every dollar into the patients, because it's the patients we have to focus on.

Mr Hampton: The minister thinks he'll just repeat that bunk and people will believe it. The fact of the matter is, you've taken $800 million over the last two years out of hospital budgets. That's why hospitals are laying off nurses. That's why when children go to get cancer therapy they can't get it, because there aren't enough nurses there to provide it every day.

We raised with your predecessor a couple of weeks ago --

Interjections.

Mr Hampton: I know the Conservative bench doesn't want to hear about this.

We raised with your predecessor a couple of weeks ago that because of your hospital budget cuts in many hospitals across the province, registered nurses and registered nursing assistants are being laid off while other hospital staff are being asked to take over their duties with minimal training.

At Matthews Memorial Hospital at Richards Landing near Sault Ste Marie, where the emergency services of the rural hospital are being severely cut back, there was a suggestion to the hospital board that housekeeping staff should be used for medical emergencies; in other words, that cleaners should down their mops and give CPR.

The Speaker: Thank you, leader. Minister?

Hon Mr Wilson: As you know, the government doesn't own the hospitals. The 209 hospitals in the province are owned by their community boards. Those community boards have quality councils that monitor the quality of the health care being delivered by those hospitals, including nurses on those boards. This matter would be a matter of first dealing with the hospital. If you are suggesting the government go further, I'd like to hear that suggestion, but we would expect your backing if you'd suggest the government go further than to bring the matter to the board and make sure they have appropriate staffing in their hospitals.

Again, we are trying to clean up the mess created by the inaction of the previous governments, and yes, we need more services for people. The population is growing older and it's growing and we need to drive every dollar to patient services. That's what we're doing.

Mr Hampton: The problem at Matthews Memorial Hospital is this minister has already affected them. He's already put them through a restructuring and then cut their budget such that they don't have the nursing staff they need. But let me take the problem a bit further.

Because you are closing hospitals and because you are not providing the community services up front, what in effect is happening is that patients across the province are having to carry the load. I'll give you a typical result: Here is Margot Grabarger. She called our office. She reports that in order to stay alive, she needs to spend $28 for nasal pillows. These used to be provided at a hospital but she gets put out of the hospital and she has to pay the $28 for these nasal pillows. Then there's $95 out of her pocket for this humidification chamber.

That would have been provided in the hospital but you cut that and she's forced out of the hospital. She's on home care and she has to buy it herself. Then there's this filter for $27 that she has to buy. What's clear here is this: You go around the province and tell people you're saving money. What you're doing is throwing people --

The Speaker: Thank you.

Hon Mr Wilson: It is absolutely ridiculous to suggest that we're saving money from hospitals, absolutely ridiculous, when the member knows that the health care budget is up from $17.4 billion to over $17.7 billion. The honourable member knows full well that we've seen no more in savings of $300 million from hospitals. This year alone we forgave, in one-time accounting changes --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order.

Hon Mr Wilson: We've reinvested close to $1 billion into health care, three times more than we've seen in any savings that we've tried to achieve in working with our hospital partners. All of that is out in the public. Today we have better dialysis services and ambulance services and home care services as a result of those reinvestments, and more to come. Included in our reinvestments is the addition of 377 new drugs, free drugs, on the seniors and social assistance formulary, and that's contrary to the 250 drugs --

The Speaker: Thank you, Minister. New question; official opposition; member for York South.

Mr Gerard Kennedy (York South): I think the public watching must be wondering, what is it going to take --

The Speaker: Your question, sir; is it to the Minister of Health? Thank you.

HOSPITAL FINANCING

Mr Gerard Kennedy (York South): The public must be wondering, what will it take for this minister to show an ounce of accountability or responsibility for the health care system that's now back again under his watch? We have some clues from the Premier's statement today to the media, where he likened the nurses losing jobs in hospitals to hula-hoop workers who lost their jobs in factories.

Minister, I'm going to ask you to respond today to somebody much more credible on health care than the person just mentioned, someone who is one of the top cardiologists, Dr Bernard Goldman, the chair of the Association of Cardiac Surgeons of Ontario. To the minister he says that $2.5-million Band-Aid he put up, as much as it was welcomed, represents a degree of political opportunism.

Minister, will you do what this doctor asks? There is a need to have long-term, realistic commitments from the minister.

Hon Jim Wilson (Minister of Health): I remind the honourable member that our historic reinvestment of $170 million into home care which began last year creates 4,400 new jobs for nurses and other front-line providers as we go through this transition period. That's historic and something we should be very proud of.

When we made the announcement last week about another $2.5 million, which builds on our unprecedented level of funding of $16 million last year and a 20% increase in cardiac surgeries, I said we would be coming out very shortly -- and people have been working at it for the past several months, along with the Cardiac Care Network and ministry officials -- with a comprehensive plan for cardiac care in the province. I expect to make that announcement in the very near future.

Mr Kennedy: Minister, you will start being a tiny bit credible when you put a date behind that intention.

You need to understand that the Rykene family suffered because of your cuts. You have cut hospitals such that Leie Rykene died February 11 after five days of waiting for a bed for an angiogram so that she might benefit from some of the money you announced.

Today I got a copy of a letter sent to your predecessor on January 13 from a cardiologist, Dr David Fell, and he says it's the cuts, Minister, your cuts signed for on your desk to Toronto Hospital and a 30% cut in the heart catheterization lab budget, which are jeopardizing cardiac patients in this province. Now, stand in your place and speak to the people of this province who need those cardiac services and tell them you'll stop the cuts to hospitals and you'll take responsibility as the Minister of Health and you won't hide behind anyone else.

Hon Mr Wilson: Again the honourable member has his facts wrong. Since this government came to office cardiac programs in all of our hospitals are protected programs. They've not been cut one penny. We added $16 million last year. We added $2.5 million. What is happening, if the honourable member would like to get into contemporary health care, is that the population is growing faster and older than anyone predicted, including Dr Gold, including all the good folks at the Cardiac Care Network.

We will very shortly announce Ontario's first comprehensive plan for cardiac care, because I agree with the honourable member and some of the experts in the field that government can't keep playing catchup to the population, that we have to get ahead in terms of our funding and our programming, as we've done on dialysis and other projects that we've tackled. By God, we're going to bring in a cardiac program that nips this problem once and for all in the bud and gives us absolute world-class heart care in this province.

NIAGARA ESCARPMENT COMMISSION

Mr Howard Hampton (Rainy River): My question is for the Minister of Environment and Energy. The minister will know that the Niagara Escarpment is a unique treasure of Ontario's environment. We are all proud of the work that has been done by governments of all three parties to preserve and to protect the escarpment. It has been recognized by the United Nations as a world biosphere reserve.

Now your government, the Harris government, has decided to give responsibility for the escarpment to the Ministry of Natural Resources, a ministry that's been busy privatizing all of its environmental responsibilities. Environmentalists across the province are outraged. Minister, how can you defend this decision to remove responsibility for the Niagara Escarpment from the Ministry of Environment? How can you defend that?

Hon Norman W. Sterling (Minister of Environment and Energy): As the Niagara Escarpment Commission is now a responsibility of the Minister of Natural Resources, I will refer the question to him.

Hon Chris Hodgson (Minister of Natural Resources, Northern Development and Mines): In reference to your answer, this was an internal change on government administration when we announced Lands for Life last week as a process to protect nature's best. It's the role of the MNR to protect nature's best. The Niagara Escarpment, as you've mentioned, is a world-class biosphere that's been recognized by the United Nations and we're going to be consulting on how to protect this in a more permanent fashion. The commission will be kept, the act will be kept; there will be no changes to that. I'll be happy to meet with any of your --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Hold on. Supplementary.

Mr Hampton: I think we know what's going on here. The announcement was barely made and the king of severances on the Niagara Escarpment, the member for Grey-Owen Sound, was over asking the minister for a round of severances.

The reality is that you're the Minister of Natural Resources who has already given the aggregate producers basically free rein in terms of opening new gravel pits and new aggregate bases. You're the minister who has already privatized most of MNR's other environmental responsibilities. This is a tragic day for anyone who cares about the environment. It's a tragic day especially for the member for Carleton. Creation of the Niagara Escarpment Commission was an excellent achievement for Ontario.

Are you going to guarantee for us that the Niagara Escarpment Commission is going to continue? Are you going to guarantee for us that the Niagara Escarpment is going to be protected now as it has been in the past? Are you going to give us those guarantees?

Hon Mr Hodgson: I'm not sure it's appropriate that he malign the character of the fine, upstanding MPP from Grey-Owen Sound and my parliamentary assistant for Northern Development and Mines. For the MNR, with Lands for Life, we're going to protect nature's best.

Yes and yes is the answer to your two questions. Is the commission going to remain in place? Yes. Is protection going to be continued? Yes. In fact, I think we can make it better. That's the role of the MNR: to balance the interests of resource users with protecting what is nature's best.

Last week's announcement on Lands for Life, which is a process to protect nature's best, was endorsed by the World Wildlife Fund, the Wildlands League and the Federation of Ontario Naturalists. To quote from the World Wildlife Fund, Monte Hummel: "Though Ontario was in the lead nationally in 1989, its performance has faltered since then." I wonder who the Minister of Natural Resources was during those years? I wonder who the government was when we took a leadership position and faltered --

The Speaker: Thank you, Minister. New question.

YOUNG OFFENDERS

Mr Jim Brown (Scarborough West): My question is to the Attorney General. Minister, a little over a year ago Christie Christie was brutally murdered by shotgun-wielding young offenders. One of the suspects was a 12-year-old. After being shot, Christie lived for two and a half hours. Her wounds were so severe that her mother knew she would die. Christie's dying wish was for her mother to look after her younger brother.

Ishmael Spence had his throat cut at the Kennedy Road subway station a year ago by a young offender.

I know you recently talked to federal Liberal Justice Minister Allan Rock about the Young Offenders Act. Tracey Christie, the Spence family and many more of my constituents are waiting for action on the Young Offenders Act. Would you please tell the House what Mr Rock said he plans to do about the YOA?

Hon Charles Harnick (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs): I had discussions with the federal minister last week and I advised him that Ontarians are fed up with legislation that protects young offenders from the consequences of their actions.

I've urged the federal minister to lower the age to 15 from 17. I've urged him that if he doesn't want to lower the age, at least to rationalize the transfer provisions. I've said to the minister that the criminal justice system has to have a role when an offender is younger than 12, that the criminal justice system can't be left out. I've urged the minister to allow publication of names of young offenders and I've urged him to permit legal aid only in situations where young offenders' parents can't afford to provide counsel to a young offender.

Mr Jim Brown: Minister, what more can I tell my constituents about the Young Offenders Act? Some 65% of young offenders are repeat offenders, and federal Justice Minister Rock has done nothing. Louis Ambus was murdered by two young offenders nearly two years ago. What can I tell his mother and his family?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Members for Kingston and The Islands, Scarborough North and Hamilton Centre, please come to order.

Mr Ted Chudleigh (Halton North): I take it they support the Young Offenders Act.

The Speaker: Member for Halton North, I don't really need your help right now.

Hon Mr Harnick: There is absolutely no doubt about it that young offenders treat the Young Offenders Act as a joke, and the reason they treat it as a joke is because it doesn't provide any sense of deterrence.

The Liberal government in Ottawa isn't helping matters any. They've cut funding to the youth justice system in Ontario by $200 million since 1989, and instead of getting tough on young offenders, they're asking us to end a system that can jail young offenders who commit serious, violent crimes.

Quite simply, I think we have to have a new look at the Young Offenders Act. Tinkering won't do. The public tells us that, and I hope the federal --

The Speaker: New question, the official opposition.

HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING

Mr Richard Patten (Ottawa Centre): My question is to the Minister of Health. Last week your health restructuring commission rolled into town and imposed a conveyor-belt health care program on the residents of Ottawa-Carleton, a set flow of patient traffic that will be in and out of hospital doors.

Your commission, in determining the number of beds required, got rid of acute care beds occupied by patients awaiting more appropriate placement. The alternative level of care indicator is assumed to be zero -- absolutely incredible.

You're taking away any flexibility in the system to deal with fluctuations in the need for beds caused by any extraordinary medical disaster. In short, you're underservicing the health care needs of Ottawa-Carleton and you're instituting conveyor-belt health care.

Minister, will you direct your commission to go back to the drawing board, use reasonable assumptions about the required number of beds, and instruct them to use a scalpel and not a meat cleaver?

Hon Jim Wilson (Minister of Health): If the honourable member feels the commission has some of its data wrong or some of its assumptions wrong, he must bring that to the attention of the commission. That's what this period of time is for and I'd urge the member to do that. The commission I don't think pretends to be perfect, and the chair of the commission, Dr Duncan Sinclair, has said on many occasions that he wants to hear if they did get some of the data wrong, particularly with the ALC mention you just made.

Mr Patten: Minister, according to Bill 26 you have the ultimate responsibility for these decisions, but your restructuring commission performed elective surgery on the Ottawa hospital community instead of improving the quality of care. The recommendations have placed Ottawa's health care community into critical care.

Ottawa, as you well know, has the lowest rate of hospital beds for its population in all of the western world, and Ottawa-Carleton is well below the Ontario average. This is largely due to good utilization of management practices. Ottawa-Carleton at the moment has a hospital acute care utilization rate of 551 patient-days per 1,000. The district health council expected that this could decline to 506 by the year 2000, but your restructuring commission is forcing a targeted rate of 416 patient-days by the year 2003.

The commission, fuelled by the $1.3-billion cuts, of course, went too far. You're forcing people to move out of hospitals quicker and sicker, and according to the physicians I've talked to, hospitals will be discharging people who haven't recovered and rested fully from surgery and other medical treatment.

I ask you again: Will you instruct the commission to go back to the drawing board and --

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Minister of Health.

Interjection.

The Speaker: Member for Ottawa Centre, when I stand, that means you have to sit.

Hon Mr Wilson: The commission's targets and time frame on the surface don't appear to be unreasonable. You've mentioned yourself the year 2003. Nobody is moving tomorrow. It's a substantial time frame to adjust, and we already have hospitals in this province that are below those benchmarks, so we already have hundreds of hospital beds in this province that are operating efficiently, and we don't recognize the fact that some parts of the province have already undergone restructuring and have achieved those targets. Quality improved, surgeries went up, and that has been the experience in other jurisdictions.

When you get rid of the overlap and duplication, the excessive administration and the waste in the system, you have dollars to make sure you have more services.

Throughout this whole process, the quality councils of the hospitals are in place -- we announced last year a quality council in association with the Institute of Clinical Evaluative Sciences -- to ensure that quality is maintained and indeed enhanced. That is the motivating factor behind the commission, and that will guide all of the decisions taken by the commission over this next period of time.

The Speaker: New question.

Mrs Marion Boyd (London Centre): My question is also for the Minister of Health. You have tried to calm the waters with your calm assurances that everything is going to be all right, but we have real concerns about what will happen as these restructuring plans go through. Your commission was going to announce tomorrow its plans for Metro Toronto, and we know already that those plans will include the closure of some chronic care beds and possibly entire chronic care hospitals.

The problem, and it's a real problem, is already here in Metro Toronto, because you have a list here of over 4,500 patients waiting for long-term accommodation, and that list grows by 210 patients every month, because 550 patients are requiring placement and only 340 can be placed. Those figures are according to the placement and coordination services for Metro Toronto. The list is already out of hand because Metro hasn't seen any of the long-term dollars that you trot out every time we talk about this concern.

When this announcement is made tomorrow, will you --

The Speaker: Thank you very much. Minister of Health.

Hon Mr Wilson: Again, a lot of nerve, coming from someone who was in government for five years, that's the NDP -- and the Liberals in 1988-89 froze nursing homes and homes for the aged beds. Not one was added during your entire five years, and now you get up and wonder about the waiting list.

We're going to add beds. Recommendations will be coming forward from the commission to add beds, and as we've followed up in Thunder Bay and as we're following up in Sudbury and as we will follow up in Ottawa and London, we will make the reinvestments to ensure that new beds are added to the system. That's our commitment. We will live up to that commitment as we've lived up to all of our commitments since forming the government.

Mrs Boyd: You can do the math and I can do the math. At 310 additional needed beds per month, we can count back the months. You know the problem started in a big way in Metro Toronto while you were Minister of Health, and you are making it worse with this restructuring committee, because you will be closing wards and closing chronic care hospitals. What you never take into account is the anguish that is caused to those 4,500 patients and their families while they wait for these promises to come true.

All we're saying to you is the reason you are facing so much hostility is that you don't seem to understand the human cost for people who are waiting now, who are being thrown out of hospitals now, because of the change in policy that has been put in place by your government. What we're asking for is not that you wait, not that you make these golden promises, but that when people know their hospital is going to close, they will know they or their loved one has somewhere to go. That's what we're asking.

Hon Mr Wilson: We monitor very carefully the need for new beds, and we'll be reinvesting dollars. So that everyone doesn't panic, the large number that's used, over half those people are already in facilities. They're waiting for placement in more appropriate facilities, which is what restructuring is all about. Fifty-six per cent of the people on that waiting list are currently in a bed but they're in the wrong bed. They're waiting for a more appropriate placement for long-term care and for the programs that go with long-term care in our nursing homes and homes for the aged, and we'll be doing that.

I don't need any lectures from the honourable member from the NDP, whose only legacy in health care and only legacy in government was to leave a $50-billion debt and no new beds. That is something we must never repeat for our children and grandchildren. You doubled the province's debt and you don't have one new nursing home bed to show for it. Our record will be far better than that because we're already reinvesting money in patients and we're going to open beds in this province.

ONTARIO HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

Mr Gerry Martiniuk (Cambridge): My question is to the Minister of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation. The opposition delights in confusing the public with talk that your ministry will eliminate the Ontario Human Rights Commission. We heard some of that last week again. In response to the tabling of the ABC task force, the leader of the third party said the government was poised to eliminate the Human Rights Commission.

Minister, my constituents are concerned about these rumours. Can you please tell the House today what this government's position on this issue really is and what your plans are with regard to the Ontario Human Rights Commission?

Hon Marilyn Mushinski (Minister of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation): I'd like to thank the honourable member for his question. I think it's pretty typical that the NDP, unless we're finding new ways and creating ways of spending taxpayers' money, thinks we're going to eliminate everything. I've said repeatedly that throwing more money at the Ontario Human Rights Commission won't solve the problems at the commission. Unlike previous governments which spent money any way they liked, we're more interested in improving the overall effectiveness of the commission.

The reason for the reform is simple: Discrimination in this province is against the law and the Human Rights Commission is the primary body to respond to those issues. That's why this government is moving on its plan of restructuring and reform. Justice delayed is justice denied. They didn't do anything about it. We are.

Mr Martiniuk: Thank you, Madam Minister, for that response. Could you also update the House and my constituents on some of the reforms that have taken place to date and the result of those reforms?

Hon Ms Mushinski: It's a pleasure to report for the first time in recent memory, certainly in the last 10 years, that the commission is closing as many cases as it opens in a year, and that means for the first time in years the backlog of cases will actually get smaller. We can see that in the case of numbers, the average time a person now has to wait for their case to be resolved has decreased from 22 months, when they spent millions of dollars to increase it in 1992, to 16 months in 1996. Clearly the reforms that are taking place are working for the citizens and the taxpayers of Ontario.

LABOUR DISPUTE

Mr Frank Miclash (Kenora): My question is to the Minister of Labour, and it concerns the Goldcorp strike in my riding which is now in its ninth month. Minister, as you're aware, negotiations between the management and the union have broken off and no end to the strike seems to be in sight for both the families and the community of this area.

Let me read from a local newspaper

article on what effect the strike is having on these workers and their families. "`You are scared, you're really worried and you're not yourself,' one couple recently told the media." Because of this strike we have workers who have had to relocate to other mines, resulting in separation of dad from his family. Parents for the first time ever are feeling they are unable to take care of their families.

Minister, you are condoning by your inaction what Goldcorp is doing to these families and this community. Why are you doing this?

Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Minister of Labour): The situation at Goldcorp unfortunately is one that has been ongoing now for a long time, since June 1996. I actually had an opportunity last week to communicate with some people in the local community. I know there certainly is a desire on behalf of individuals to see this issue resolved as quickly as possible. Although we've made attempts to help out with mediation, unfortunately at the present time there isn't a new agreement and there is no conclusion to the resolution. We have certainly made the mediation services available to both sides.

Mr Miclash: Let me continue reading from this recent article: "Another wife hates watching her husband and his co-workers walk the line while there are scabs on the property. It just doesn't seem right to her. Another father of four worries that his kids feel the stress and tension of being on strike."

Minister, your government's replacement worker legislation is a large part of the cause of the continuation of this strike. I ask you again, will you commit today to make whatever resources are necessary available to encourage or in essence demand that Goldcorp return to the table and bargain in good faith? Will you do this today?

Hon Mrs Witmer: I indicate once again to the member opposite that certainly we have made all of the services of our ministry available to the parties. I also indicate to you that last week I was in communication with people in the community, and we are endeavouring to do whatever we can to bring the entire issue to a resolution. We desire as much as you do that this particular problem can be resolved, because we know that unfortunately there is an impact on the community. I will certainly commit to you personally that if there is anything additional that we can do, we are quite prepared to do that.

ONTARIO RANGER PROGRAM

Ms Shelley Martel (Sudbury East): I have a question for the Minister of Natural Resources. For the last 52 years the Ontario government has supported the Ontario Ranger program. This program run by your ministry has provided thousands and thousands of young people with a valuable outdoor summer experience, and in return these students have provided a valuable public service for minimum wage.

Last week we confirmed with your staff that there are no assurances this program will be funded and that application forms have not gone out to high schools, even though by now your ministry staff should be selecting the applicants. Minister, are you going to fund the Ontario Ranger program? Yes or no?

Hon Chris Hodgson (Minister of Natural Resources, Northern Development and Mines): The honourable member is aware that at this time of year every department in the government reviews their programs and takes forward what they think are the priorities in their ministry. These are times when we have to balance the budget, we have to live within fiscal constraints.

We realize the importance of Junior Rangers, but there are tough decisions that have to be made. There has been no final decision made on the future of Junior Rangers. However, I don't seem to recall the member's protest when she was in a cabinet that in 1992 reduced the program's participation from 900 to 438 17-year-olds and closed 14 Junior Ranger camps in this province. If she did stand up and make public pronouncements that this was devastating and, for all the reasons she stated, bad public policy, I don't seem to recall it. If she wants to clarify that record, I'd be glad to hear it.

Ms Martel: Minister, the real rate of youth unemployment in this province is higher than ever before, and your only answer is to cut the very programs the government has put in place to try to provide jobs to youth.

When I was minister at the Ministry of Northern Development and Mines, I put in place a youth unemployment program called Nortop. Nortop is a cost-sharing program with employers in the public and private sectors, a program which is now under review by your ministry, Minister. Some 3,000 students had a job because of the Nortop program last summer. There is no assurance that this program will continue. Are you going to fund Nortop. Yes or no?

Hon Mr Hodgson: I didn't hear an answer to the question when their government reduced the program by 14 camps and from 900 17-year-olds to 438. Did you protest? No. There might be more effective ways to deliver youth programs than having a 24-hour-a-day camp environment.

With regard to Nortop, when she was minister, yes, they did fund programs. Last year, though, when our government was in, we had more youth jobs through Nortop than at any time in your government's mandate, and our record stands for itself. She knows full well that these discussions are evaluated at budget time and there will be announcements following. Again, I know that last year I didn't see her press announcement congratulating the Harris government on a record number of youth employment opportunities through Nortop. Thank you. That's it.

WRITTEN QUESTIONS

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Point of order, member for London Centre.

Mrs Marion Boyd (London Centre): Mr Speaker, I wrote to you earlier today to tell you that I would be raising a point of order on standing order 97 regarding written questions.

It's my belief that there has been a serious breach of the standing orders and I felt I should bring it to your attention. The standing orders are very clear about written questions. All members have a right to submit them and ministers must respond within 14 days. Of course, ministers routinely miss the deadline and members have a right to bring that to the attention of the assembly, as I have done in cases where the minister's response was many months overdue.

The standing orders also state that the minister must inform the member of cases in which more time is required or, I am quoting here, "that the minister has declined to answer," as the case may be. That's standing order 97(d).

I have sent you three representative sample responses of questions that I raised with the Attorney General, and those are order paper questions 819, 820 and 826. I would stress these are representative sample answers only. I know that it is not your position as the Speaker to talk about the veracity or the legitimacy of answers to questions, so I want you to be very clear. I am not asking you to comment on either the veracity or the legitimacy of the answers that I was provided by the Attorney General.

What I am asking you to determine is whether the responses I have received from the Attorney General in fact constitute answers as contemplated by standing order 97. The Attorney General, if he does not wish to answer a question, can decline to do so, but to send along supposed answers to questions which read like the tape recording of this government's message as opposed to an answer to a specific question is not appropriate. The minister should be on the record as declining to answer the question, not giving a lot of pap around the question without any answer to the question.

I will read only the shortest one of these so that people understand what I'm talking about, and that is order paper question 826. I asked the Attorney General, "Would the Attorney General provide the number of judicial positions and the number of judicial vacancies for December 1993, December 1994, December 1995 and December 1996."

I asked this question on January 28 and this is the answer that I got last week:

"The Attorney General has made eight appointments to the Ontario Court (Provincial Division). The Attorney General, in consultation with the Chief Judge of the Ontario Court (Provincial Division), has been making appointments to fill vacancies for those positions that have been identified by the Chief Judge as being a priority. The minister will continue to work with the Chief Judge to ensure that Ontario has a sufficient judicial complement."

Mr Speaker, this is not an answer to my question, which asks for simple figures: the number of judicial appointees and the number of vacancies.

The Speaker: To the member for London Centre, firstly, I'd like to thank you for sending me the letter today. It was most appreciated. It also allows me to rule, obviously, the day you submit your point of order.

Having heard your point of order in writing and now orally, and I've checked the standing orders, it appears to me there is nothing in the standing orders that compels the Speaker to measure responses. Measuring responses is a decision that this House would take or the Attorney General would take. I can't measure the written questions nor can I measure the responses.

I might add the answers are truly bizarre but it isn't my decision as to whether they're applicable to the question that was placed. I would suggest possibly that maybe the Attorney General may want to review these on his own time. I can't do that for you. So your point of order is not in order other than to simply say it's curious, your responses. I can't explain it and I don't really expect you to understand it and all I can suggest is maybe the Attorney General would like to take this up with you.

Mrs Boyd: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: Just to respond to you about the Minister reviewing the answers, he signed the answers.

The Speaker: With all due respect, there's no response, the ruling's been made and I appreciate your point of order.

MOTIONS

COMMITTEE SITTINGS

Hon David Johnson (Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet, Government House Leader): I believe we have unanimous consent with regard to the

schedule of committee hearings over the next few weeks.

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Government House leader, I think you need consent before you go ahead. Agreed to consent? Agreed.

Hon David Johnson: I move that the following committees be authorized to meet during the weeks of March 17, March 24, April 7 and April 14, 1997, in accordance with the

schedule of meeting dates agreed to by the three party whips and tabled with the Clerk of the assembly to examine and inquire into the following matters:

The standing committee on administration of justice to consider Bill 84,

An Act to promote Fire Prevention and Public Safety in Ontario and to amend and repeal certain other Acts relating to Fire Services, and Bill 105,

An Act to renew the partnership between the province, municipalities and the police and to enhance community safety;

The standing committee on finance and economic affairs to consider matters related to pre-budget consultation, and Bill 106,

An Act respecting the financing of local government;

The standing committee on general government to consider Bill 109,

An Act to amend the Public Libraries Act to put authority, responsibility and accountability for providing and effectively managing local library services at the local level;

The standing committee on government agencies to review intended appointments to the public sector;

The standing committee on resources development to consider Bill 98,

An Act to promote job creation and increased municipal accountability while providing for the recovery of development costs related to new growth, and Bill 107,

An Act to enact the Municipal Water and Sewage Transfer Act, 1997 and to amend other acts with respect to water and sewage.

The Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

PETITIONS

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

Mr Mario Sergio (Yorkview): I have another petition addressed to the Legislature.

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

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

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

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

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

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

I will support it by adding my signature to this.

Mr Len Wood (Cochrane North): I'd like to present a petition from the staff of l'école Cité des Jeunes de Kapuskasing, which reads as follows:

«Nous, soussignés, demandons au gouvernement de reconsidérer sa décision de fermer le seul hôpital francophone de l'Ontario, l'hôpital Montfort, et appuyons les efforts du personnel et de l'équipe SOS Montfort.»

This petition is signed by 43 residents of Kapuskasing, Opasatika, Moonbeam, Harty, and I've signed this petition as well and support it.

FIRE SAFETY

Mr Tom Froese (St Catharines-Brock): I have a petition that reads:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

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

Signed by a number of people in St Catharines.

M. Gilles E. Morin (Carleton-Est) : «À l'Assemblée législative de l'Ontario :

«Attendu que la recommandation de la commission de restructuration des soins de santé en Ontario ordonne la fermeture de l'hôpital Montfort et que cette décision constitue le rejet de la volonté de l'entière communauté francophone de la province et de la communauté de l'est ;

«Attendu que 40 % des francophones de la province de l'Ontario résident dans l'aire de service de l'hôpital Montfort, soit à l'est de l'Ontario, où la population connaît un des plus hauts taux de croissance dans toute la province, que le comté de Russell n'a pas d'hôpital et qu'en plus, Montfort dessert le nord le l'Ontario, où le nombre de francophones est très élevé ;

«Attendu que la fermeture de Montfort éloigne et diminue grandement l'accessibilité à une salle d'urgences pour plus de 150,000 personnes ;

«Attendu que l'on fait disparaître l'hôpital qui a un des meilleurs rendements de la province et qui, pour fins de comparaison, constitue l'exemple de choix du ministère de la Santé ;

«Nous, soussignés, adressons à l'Assemblée législative de l'Ontario la pétition suivante :

«Nous demandons que le premier ministre de la province intervienne auprès de la Commission de restructuration des services de santé de l'Ontario afin que soit préservé l'emplacement actuel de l'hôpital et que soient consolidés la vocation, le mandat et le rôle essentiel que joue Montfort auprès de sa communauté.»

Il me fait énormément plaisir d'y apposer ma signature.

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

Mr David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre): I have a petition sent to me by Shannon Dobson, who is a member of a health and safety committee in the community of Harrow. The petition is signed by many citizens of that community and it reads as follows:

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

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

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

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

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

I proudly add my name to theirs.

FIRE SAFETY

Mr E.J. Douglas Rollins (Quinte): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

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

It's from 140 people from the Quinte area, and I affix my name to it.

BIBLIOTHÈQUES PUBLIQUES

M. Jean-Marc Lalonde (Prescott et Russell) : J'ai ici une pétition qui vient de la bibliothèque publique de la ville de Rockland.

«Aux membres de l'Assemblée législative de l'Ontario :

«Étant donné que nous croyons fermement que la responsabilité provinciale dans les bibliothèques publiques en Ontario est un droit fondamental de tous les Ontariens et toutes les Ontariennes ;

«Nous, les soussignés, demandons aux membres de l'Assemblée législative de l'Ontario de sauvegarder la responsabilité provinciale dans les bibliothèques publiques en s'assurant de maintenir ce qui suit :

«

(1) Les subventions provinciales qui permettent d'assurer à tous les Ontariens et à toutes les Ontariennes un accès équitable aux documents et aux services de bibliothèque publique ;

«

(2) La coordination des programmes de partage des ressources tels que le système de prêt entre bibliothèques et l'accès au réseau Internet ;

«

(3) Une politique permettant d'assurer l'existence du réseau des bibliothèques publiques de l'Ontario ;

«

(4) L'aide directe de la part du gouvernement provincial au niveau du service, par exemple par l'entremise du Service des bibliothèques de l'Ontario-Sud et du Service des bibliothèques de l'Ontario du Nord ;

«

(5) Une loi maintenant l'autonomie des conseils d'administration des bibliothèques publiques.»

J'y ajoute ma signature.

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

Ms Frances Lankin (Beaches-Woodbine): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario signed by citizens from across the greater Toronto area, including a number of residents of my constituency, Beaches-Woodbine.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

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

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

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

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

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

I am proud to affix my signature, as I am in complete agreement.

PRIVATE MEMBER'S MOTION

Mr John O'Toole (Durham East): I appreciate the privilege to speak here in the House today.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Liberal member from Windsor-Sandwich, Ms Pupatello, presented a resolution during private members' period on Thursday, February 27, 1997, in the morning;

"Whereas the resolution was poorly worded and indeed contradictory;

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

"To either ignore resolution 67 or caution the Legislative Assembly's standing committee on social development of the contradictions inherent within the wording of the resolution.

"Furthermore, we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to return to the original Progressive Conservative mandate to ensure that every Ontarian has equal access to high-quality health care.

"Furthermore, that the government of Ontario is encouraged to have the federal Liberal government in Ottawa pay its fair share.

"Therefore,

be it resolved that resolution 67 is considerably seriously flawed and unjust for many Ontarians."

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

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

Mr David Ramsay (Timiskaming): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the government of Ontario is proposing to restructure completely the provincial-municipal relationship without having consulted the people of Ontario; and

"Whereas this restructuring proposes to download to municipalities the cost of transportation and such critical social services as welfare and long-term care for the elderly and the chronically ill; and

"Removes school boards' ability to tax, eliminating any effective local control over schools and school programs; and

"The government's actions fail to guarantee existing levels of funding and fail to recognize the unequal ability of local communities to bear the cost of these new burdens, thus producing inequitable access to essential services; and

"Whereas the government's lack of meaningful public consultation and disregard for public response pose a serious threat to democracy;

"We, the undersigned residents of Ontario, because we care about the quality of life in our province and the wellbeing of our children, neighbours and communities, register a vote of non-confidence in the government in the province of Ontario."

I have affixed my signature on this.

FIRE SAFETY

Mr David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre): I have a petition forwarded to me by Brad Grimwood, who's a Cambridge firefighter, and Mark McKinnon, who's a Toronto firefighter. Their petition reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

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

This is signed by many citizens from Oakville, and I add my name to theirs.

HOSPITAL FINANCING

Mrs Barbara Fisher (Bruce): I'd like to present a petition on behalf of some of the constituents in the riding of Bruce.

"Petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

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

"Whereas Ontarians feel that health services are suffering; and

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

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

TVONTARIO

Mr Michael Gravelle (Port Arthur): I have a petition sent to me by Ms Chris McLean of Thunder Bay, who's a strong supporter of TVOntario.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas TVOntario has served Ontarians of all ages for more than 25 years with quality non-commercial television that continues to focus 70% of its programming on education and children's programming; and

"Whereas TVO is available to 97.4% of Ontarians and for some uncabled communities is the only station available, making it a truly provincial asset; and

"Whereas TVO continues to work towards increasing self-generated revenues;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly to ensure that TVOntario continue to be a publicly owned and funded educational broadcaster."

I'm proud to sign my name to this.

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

Mr David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre): I have further petitions signed by citizens from Harrow and Windsor:

To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

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

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

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

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

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

I add my name to theirs.

FIRE SAFETY

Mr Gerry Martiniuk (Cambridge): I have a petition of 150 good citizens of Cambridge. It's directed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

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

Pursuant to the standing orders, I affix my name to it.

NORTH YORK BRANSON HOSPITAL

Mr Monte Kwinter (Wilson Heights): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas the final report of the Metropolitan Toronto District Health Council hospital restructuring committee has recommended that North York Branson Hospital merge with York-Finch hospital; and

"Whereas this recommendation will remove emergency and inpatient services currently provided by North York Branson Hospital, which will seriously jeopardize medical care and the quality of health for the growing population which the hospital serves, many being elderly people who in numerous cases require treatment for life-threatening medical conditions;

"We petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to reject the recommendation contained within the final report of the Metropolitan Toronto District Health Council hospital restructuring committee as it pertains to North York Branson Hospital, so that it retains, at minimum, emergency and inpatient services."

I have affixed my signature.

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

Mr Tony Silipo (Dovercourt): I beg leave to present the 33rd report of the standing committee on government agencies.

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Does the vice-chair wish to make a brief statement? No?

Pursuant to standing order 106(g)(11), the report is deemed to be adopted by the House.

STANDING COMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES

Mr Gerard Kennedy (York South): I beg leave to present a report from the standing committee on estimates.

Senior Clerk Assistant and Clerk of Journals (Mr Alex D. McFedries): The standing committee on estimates presents the committee's report as follows --

Interjection: Dispense.

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Dispense? Dispense.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

Hon David Johnson (Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet, Government House Leader): Mr Speaker, I believe we have unanimous consent to call the 19th order and have a division on second reading of Bill 109 and that there would be a five-minute bell.

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Unanimous consent? Agreed.

LOCAL CONTROL OF PUBLIC LIBRARIES ACT, 1997 / LOI DE 1997 SUR LE CONTRÔLE LOCAL DES BIBLIOTHÈQUES PUBLIQUES

Resuming the adjourned debate on the motion for second reading of Bill 109,

An Act to amend the Public Libraries Act to put authority, responsibility and accountability for providing and effectively managing local library services at the local level / Projet de loi 109, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les bibliothèques publiques de façon à situer à l'échelon local les pouvoirs, la responsabilité et l'obligation de rendre compte concernant la fourniture et la gestion efficace des services locaux de bibliothèque.

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): It will be a five-minute bell; call in the members.

The division bells rang from 1526 to 1531.

The Speaker: All those in favour of Bill 109, please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

Barrett, Toby

Hardeman, Ernie

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Bassett, Isabel

Harnick, Charles

Parker, John L.

Beaubien, Marcel

Hastings, John

Pettit, Trevor

Boushy, Dave

Hodgson, Chris

Rollins, E.J. Douglas

Brown, Jim

Hudak, Tim

Ross, Lillian

Carr, Gary

Jackson, Cameron

Sampson, Rob

Carroll, Jack

Johns, Helen

Shea, Derwyn

Chudleigh, Ted

Johnson, David

Sheehan, Frank

Cunningham, Dianne

Jordan, W. Leo

Smith, Bruce

DeFaria, Carl

Kells, Morley

Snobelen, John

Doyle, Ed

Klees, Frank

Spina, Joseph

Ecker, Janet

Leadston, Gary L.

Stewart, R. Gary

Elliott, Brenda

Marland, Margaret

Turnbull, David

Fisher, Barbara

Martiniuk, Gerry

Vankoughnet, Bill

Flaherty, Jim

McLean, Allan K.

Villeneuve, Noble

Ford, Douglas B.

Munro, Julia

Wilson, Jim

Fox, Gary

Murdoch, Bill

Witmer, Elizabeth

Froese, Tom

Mushinski, Marilyn

Wood, Bob

Galt, Doug

Newman, Dan

Young, Terence H.

Gilchrist, Steve

O'Toole, John

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

Nays

Bartolucci, Rick

Gravelle, Michael

Phillips, Gerry

Boyd, Marion

Kormos, Peter

Pouliot, Gilles

Bradley, James J.

Kwinter, Monte

Ramsay, David

Caplan, Elinor

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Ruprecht, Tony

Castrilli, Annamarie

Lankin, Frances

Sergio, Mario

Cleary, John C.

Marchese, Rosario

Silipo, Tony

Cordiano, Joseph

Martel, Shelley

Wildman, Bud

Curling, Alvin

Martin, Tony

Wood, Len

Gerretsen, John

Miclash, Frank

Grandmaître, Bernard

Patten, Richard

Clerk of the House (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 59; the nays are 28.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried. Shall the bill be ordered for third reading?

Hon David Johnson (Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet, Government House Leader): Mr Speaker, it goes to the general government committee for public input and debate.

The Speaker: So ordered.

FAIR MUNICIPAL FINANCE ACT, 1997 / LOI DE 1997 SUR LE FINANCEMENT ÉQUITABLE DES MUNICIPALITÉS

Resuming the adjourned debate on the motion for second reading of Bill 106,

An Act respecting the financing of local government / Projet de loi 106, Loi concernant le financement des administrations locales.

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): The member for St Catharines.

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): I'm glad that so many members are interested in my remarks right now --

The Speaker: You seem to have an interesting habit of clearing a room, member for St Catharines. I'll just give them a moment to find their way out. Don't worry if you hear an echo as you speak. Member for St Catharines.

Mr Bradley: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker, for the opportunity to address this particular piece of legislation. I know that those members who have to leave at this time will be watching it on the television sets in their offices. The member for Beaches-Woodbine has already said that she's even going to rush there so she can catch the remainder of my speech on this bill.

This is an important bill, there's no question about that, but we have to look at the reason that this bill is being introduced. I know it's against the wishes of some members of the Conservative caucus. I know the government whip, for instance, the minister for Don Mills-York Mills in his case, must be very concerned about the implications for the people in his riding. Ms Bassett, who was in the House today, will be very concerned about the implications for her riding.

What's happening is that the government is doing this while it is doing everything else. They don't want people to know what they are doing in this particular case so they are putting this in the context of the downloading that is taking place, the hospital closings that are taking place and many other initiatives that are taking place. We know it will affect many people adversely and that those people will certainly be speaking to the members of the government.

Mr John Hastings (Etobicoke-Rexdale): On a point of privilege, Mr Speaker: I'd like to point out to the member for St Catharines that I believe it's the tradition and the rules of the standing orders that we refer to members by their ridings, not by their names. The member for St Catharines is a veteran here. I thought he would know that. I'm totally surprised and shocked.

The Acting Speaker (Mr Gilles Pouliot): Your point is well taken. The member for St Catharines will indeed acquiesce.

Mr Bradley: I'll absolutely acquiesce, but the problem is that many people who watch this on television, and there's an audience of millions, I should say to my friend the member for Etobicoke-Rexdale, don't know the members by their ridings. I should perhaps correct it to say Isabel Bassett, the member for St Andrew-St Patrick, which I think is a reasonable way of putting it. People don't know necessarily who the people are for each riding and I want them to be able to know that out there.

Mr Hastings: On a point of privilege.

The Acting Speaker: The member for Etobicoke wishes to be repetitious.

Mr Hastings: My point is that the member ought to be following the names of each of the ridings from which the members come. This weak excuse that the viewers don't know just doesn't cut it. Let's get back to tradition. The member is always talking about tradition and integrity in the House. Then let him carry through on his words for a change and address the members by the actual names of their ridings, not their surnames.

The Acting Speaker: The point has been made. Thank you.

Mr Bradley: Thank you for taking up so much of my time on trivialities this afternoon. I will remember that when you are up. This debate may not end today.

The Acting Speaker: Now what?

Mr Hastings: Now what, since you think it's so much of a "now what," I didn't think that any of the members in here could be referred to as trivialities or irrelevancies. I think the point of privilege is that the member ought to be addressing members by their ridings, not by their names. How many times do you have to make the point, Speaker?

The Acting Speaker: Obviously not as often as you are attempting to do. Thank you. The member for St Catharines, please.

Mr Bradley: Again I hope we are able to complete the debate because I want to tell you something. When we get interrupted this way, sometimes we are unable to complete the debate because we don't get all of our words on the record, and when we have to do that, sometimes the debate goes into the next day. I wouldn't want to see that happen because I know that the government House leader is very concerned that this bill get through today. That's all I worry about, because I know the government is eager to rush its agenda through.

You would know, for instance, that today is a very difficult day. This is a difficult week for the government. They just lost the referendum in Toronto. They lost a major referendum where the people said to the Conservative government of Mike Harris, the Premier of Ontario, the member for Nipissing, that they did not agree with his government trying to ram the megacity bill past the people of Metropolitan Toronto and in overwhelming numbers, some 76%, they said to the government, "We reject what you're trying to do."

You noticed, Mr Speaker, as I did today, the news that the Minister of Environment, the member for Carleton, I believe, is his riding -- Norm Sterling as he's known to the members in this House, but the member for Carleton as he would be known in his own caucus -- was removed from the position of overseer of the Niagara Escarpment Commission.

It looks as though the good old boys have won that particular battle, because the parliamentary assistant, my good friend the member for Grey-Owen Sound, who was noted in his past incarnation for being in favour of a number of severances -- he gladly calls himself "the severance king." I know he has said that in years gone by. He smiles as I say that. He doesn't object to that. He has now been placed in the position, as parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Natural Resources, of having some say over who's going to get appointed to the Niagara Escarpment Commission.

Can you imagine the Niagara Escarpment Commission with the appointees that are recommended by my good friend the member for Grey-Owen Sound, who has been one of the strongest opponents of the work of the Niagara Escarpment Commission over the years? I know he's happy I said this because in his riding this will be perhaps an asset, but I think that in the rest of the province there may be a disagreement with that. But I don't want to get into that subject at great length.

Mr Bill Murdoch (Grey-Owen Sound): Point of order.

The Acting Speaker: Member for Grey-Owen Sound, which standing order?

Mr Murdoch: I'd like to point out that I'm parliamentary assistant, Northern Development and Mines, not Natural Resources.

The Acting Speaker: Thank you kindly.

Mr Bradley: I'm glad you made that clarification. What I wanted to point out -- but the member for Rexdale was annoyed that I was using names. In this case, I'll have to say it. He's the parliamentary assistant to Chris Hodgson, who is the Minister of Natural Resources, as well as the Minister of Northern Development and Mines.

So he's the parliamentary assistant to the minister who will have jurisdiction over the Niagara Escarpment Commission and that is, I can tell you, a great worry to the many environmentalists, including Conservatives, in this province who now see that the one individual who was committed to Niagara Escarpment preservation -- I'll give him his credit, as I have on many occasions. If I didn't agree with anything else, I would say that Norm Sterling was very committed as the Minister of Environment to preserving the Niagara Escarpment.

He was the person in the Davis administration, when he had the position of Provincial Secretary for Resources Development, responsible for establishing the commission and I know we all had his assurance that he would be there to protect the Niagara Escarpment.

Premier Harris has now removed him from that responsibility and turned it over to the Ministry of Natural Resources. The Ministry of Natural Resources could never be accused of being pro-environment. You could never accuse them of being raving environmentalists. My friend the member for Grey-Owen Sound would know that, which is why he smiles now that the Niagara Escarpment is in someone else's jurisdiction. It is a sad day for the environment. I think everyone agrees with that.

Interjections.

Mr Bradley: Some members don't. Some members obviously resent the fact that the Honourable Norm Sterling was getting credit for being a person who cared about the preserving of the Niagara Escarpment. They resent that.

I can understand why the minister today, when asked a question, flipped the question over to the Minister of Natural Resources, because he has had the knees kicked out from underneath him. He's had his legs severed by the Premier by taking away this responsibility. The one person in the cabinet who I knew -- maybe there are others -- cared about the Niagara Escarpment and its lands has been removed from that.

The member for Bruce is happy. The good old boys are in charge of it now. Bill and the boys are now in charge of it, and the good old girls I guess, if you're allowed to say that -- whatever. The good old women, the good old men are in charge of it now and Norm Sterling is taken out of that responsibility.

Every person with an environmental concern in this province -- I'm talking Conservatives too -- is going to be shocked and saddened by this development by the Premier. I don't know whether it's a sop to some of the rural members because he's closing their hospitals; I don't know whether that's the reason and so this is a way to try to make up for it. But whatever has happened, it is a bad day for the environment, and I think the government should be ashamed of itself.

I know those who genuinely care about the environment will be raising this with the Premier in the caucus of the Conservative Party next time it meets, because there have to be some people -- I look across at my friend the Minister of Labour. I'm sure she must be shocked and saddened and surprised by this particular development, because she's a moderate on this issue; she's a person I consider to be a moderate in the cabinet. Although I may not agree with the policies she brings forward in labour, I happen to think she is a moderate and an open-minded person on a number of issues. She must lament the loss of Norm Sterling as the protector of the Niagara Escarpment.

I know this is a matter of great concern to the government members now. They're hearing me talk about this. They're saying, "How on earth does this relate to this bill?" How is it related to the bill? It's related to Bill Murdoch, that's how it's related.

There are many people in the environmental movement who are surprised today, particularly that this was done so sneakily, so quietly. Behind closed doors in a very secretive fashion the torch is passed from the man who cares about the Niagara Escarpment and its protection to the unknown, to the Minister of Natural Resources and his parliamentary assistant, the member for Grey-Owen Sound, who, along with my friend the member for Lincoln, have been campaigning for this to happen for some period of time.

It may get you some marks with certain people. We may be seeing severances. We'll probably see the Escarpment Hilton, the Escarpment Holiday Inn, the Escarpment Howard Johnsons. We'll see pits and quarries all over, we'll see garbage dumps, we'll see all kinds of development, and the severances will be aflowin'. It'll be like the good old days when my friend the member for Grey-Owen Sound was in municipal government, granting severances willy-nilly at that time. I think it's unfortunate.

The Speaker: The member for St Catharines, I just got back in the chair, and I was certain when I left we were debating the financing of local government. I'm lost.

Mr Bradley: I thank the Speaker for pointing that out. I was saying that this is because we must look at these bills in the context of the entire government program and all the initiatives.

I have here a very important report that would relate to this. It's called The Mike Harris Plan..."Fundamentally Flawed," and it is authored by Dalton McGuinty, MPP, and Gerry Phillips, MPP. It's a report of the community impact review committee of the Ontario Liberal caucus, which actually went out and spoke to municipal politicians about the problems that exist. It's an important report.

Everybody in the province, including you, Mr Speaker, will want a copy of this report, because it is one which really exposes what this government is up to. Who exposes it? The municipal politicians. You remember; you were a municipal politician. You would have been shocked, I'm sure, Mr Speaker, because you were that kind of person, a dedicated municipal representative. He would have been, I assure you. This Speaker would have been very concerned if he heard the Premier calling him a whiner.

I wouldn't have called this Speaker a whiner. I was the Minister of the Environment when this gentleman, the Speaker in the chair, Chris Stockwell, the member for Etobicoke West, was a municipal councillor. When he had something to say, he said it. He wasn't always complimentary of what the Ministry of the Environment of the day was doing, but I didn't call him a whiner. I didn't say he was a whiner; I said: "He is entitled to that point of view. I'm glad to see this vigorous debate." He may have been wrong, but he was not a whiner, of that I can assure you.

I know that all members of the public and all members of the news media will be interested in this document, which has many quotes from municipal politicians, the people the Premier calls "whiners," about what is happening as a result of the downloading. I suspect they're even talking about this bill. I would say they're talking about this bill.

I look at the names quoted here, and I can tell you there are a lot of Tories on here or people who might have supported the Conservatives in the last election who are absolutely astounded that they are going to be forced either to raise taxes very significantly -- property taxes, that do not take into account a person's ability to pay -- or they're going to be forced to impose user fees, which are hardest on the lowest-income people in our society.

In other words, the kids who have to play hockey -- the rich kids will continue to play hockey because their parents will have enough money to pay a registration fee which must take into account the cost of ice and other services provided by the municipality. Municipalities are going to be forced to do that or severely cut services. As we all know, rich people, the privileged people in our society, can afford those services, can buy them privately, can go elsewhere to get those services, but the average person in our society can't do that.

That's why this report produced by Dalton McGuinty and Gerry Phillips, a report that took the input that came from various municipalities, is such an important report. No doubt some of the people commented on the provisions of this bill we have before us today as well as all the downloading, because municipalities are having huge new costs and huge new responsibilities thrust upon them, responsibilities and costs which are best borne at the provincial level as opposed to the local level.

I was pleased that the St Catharines city council passed a resolution -- I think it was 11 to 2 -- calling upon this government to stop its downloading, to reconsider its position so that municipalities would not feel this adverse impact, so we wouldn't see gigantic increases in municipal taxes and of course the blame that goes with either the raising of those taxes or the cutting of important services while this government gives an income tax cut to the richest people in our society.

The Speaker: Questions and comments?

Mr Tony Silipo (Dovercourt): I'm glad to rise and congratulate the member for St Catharines for his, as usual, broad view of this bill and most of the bills he speaks to, certainly for his ability to connect the various pieces this government has, really of its own doing, put in front of us: Bill 106 that we're dealing with today, which will increase property taxes on many residences, people who live in their homes or people who rent, as well as on small businesses. I'll have a chance to talk a little more about that when I get up in a little while.

The member for St Catharines clearly linked what happens in this bill to the whole downloading of costs that this government is putting through in all the various measures.

We certainly have seen that in spades in terms of their announcements to take education from the property tax but to replace it with something that will make the situation far worse by having costs like social services and a number of health care service costs put on to the property tax base, clearly things that don't belong on the property tax base and things that now even this government, because many people across this province are realizing that is wrong and saying it is wrong, is beginning to at least understand they've made a big mistake about.

It will be interesting to see how they deal with that. If you judge from some of the statements we've heard today and statements in the media that ministers are looking at making some changes, particularly on the social assistance side, it will be interesting to see what they come up with. But clearly the message is there, they've received the message, and I think the member for St Catharines has tied that message very well to the specific provisions under Bill 106 that will help that download which the government seems to b