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

June 15, 2006

38th Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2006-Jun-15 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Thursday 15 June 2006 Jeudi 15 juin 2006

PRIVATE MEMBERS'

PUBLIC BUSINESS

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

ARTS EDUCATION WEEK ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR LA SEMAINE DE

L'ÉDUCATION ARTISTIQUE

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

ARTS EDUCATION WEEK ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR LA SEMAINE DE

L'ÉDUCATION ARTISTIQUE

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

FIESTA WEEK

RIDING OF STORMONT-DUNDAS-CHARLOTTENBURGH

ASSISTANCE TO FARMERS

HAMILTON GAY PRIDE WEEK

DEFIBRILLATION LEGISLATION

FABRY'S DISEASE

HOSPITAL FUNDING

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

MUNICIPAL FINANCES

VISITOR

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

MUNICIPAL STATUTE LAW

AMENDMENT ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 MODIFIANT DES LOIS

CONCERNANT LES MUNICIPALITÉS

MASTER'S COLLEGE AND

SEMINARY ACT, 2006

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT LEGISLATION

VISITOR

WORLD ELDER ABUSE

AWARENESS DAY

RENEWABLE FUELS

MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT LEGISLATION

WORLD ELDER ABUSE

AWARENESS DAY

RENEWABLE FUELS

MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT LEGISLATION

VISITORS

ORAL QUESTIONS

NATIVE LAND DISPUTE

ONTARIO PROVINCIAL POLICE

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

ONTARIO HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

HIGHWAY 24

NATURAL RESOURCES

PROGRAM FUNDING

LONG-TERM CARE

STREET RACING

HIGHWAY 26

HYDRO RATES

WINE INDUSTRY

DONATION TO SALVATION ARMY

ORDER OF BUSINESS

PETITIONS

SCHOOL FACILITIES

GO TRANSIT TUNNEL

HIGHWAY FUNDING

EDUCATION FUNDING

HIGHWAY 26

LONG-TERM CARE

CAFETERIA FOOD GUIDELINES

TRADE DEVELOPMENT

MACULAR DEGENERATION

FAIR ACCESS TO PROFESSIONS

GASOLINE PRICES

LONG-TERM CARE

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

ORDERS OF THE DAY

TRANSPARENT DRUG SYSTEM

FOR PATIENTS ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR UN RÉGIME

DE MÉDICAMENTS TRANSPARENT

POUR LES PATIENTS

The House met at 1000.

Prayers.

PRIVATE MEMBERS'

PUBLIC BUSINESS

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

Mrs. Christine Elliott (Whitby-Ajax): I wish to move the following resolution:

That, in the opinion of this House, the government of Ontario should immediately increase health care funding in Durham region to the provincial average, and,

thereafter, develop and implement health care funding in Durham region based upon population growth.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Mrs. Elliott has moved private member's notice of motion number 19. Pursuant to standing order 96, Mrs.

Elliott, you have up to 10 minutes.

Mrs. Elliott: The single most important issue that arose during the course of the most recent by-election in Whitby-Ajax, which resulted in my

election as the member on March 30, was health care. That was the issue that I heard about time and again as I went door to door speaking to voters to find out the issues that were most important

to them.

Specifically, the view that most of the voters in Whitby-Ajax held to was that Durham region generally was not receiving its fair share of health care funding.

The evidence has certainly borne out this perception, which I will go into in greater detail in a moment. But I did promise the voters of Whitby-Ajax that if they saw fit to elect me as their

member to the provincial Legislature, I would continue to press the government to allow Durham region to receive its fair share of health care funding.

What I would propose with this resolution is that the government restore health care funding in Durham region to at least the provincial level, and then

implement a funding model that would recognize the explosive growth in Durham region. I intend to honour this promise, starting with today's resolution.

I would also like to recognize the excellent work done by the GTA/905 Healthcare Alliance. As you know, the alliance has spent considerable time and effort in

examining health care spending, concentrating on the four regional municipalities that are in the GTA: Peel, Halton, York and Durham. The rate of population growth in these four regions is more

than double the rate of growth for the province of Ontario as a whole. This sustained high rate of growth, combined with a population that is aging faster than the provincial average, raises a

significant concern about the ability of our local hospitals to provide access and deliver appropriate care to the residents of our community.

In saying this, I cannot stress enough the contribution made by the physicians and health care professionals in our community and the hospitals in Durham region:

the Lakeridge Health Corp. and the Rouge Valley Health System, as well as the Whitby Mental Health Centre. They've shown incredible diligence and devotion in the face of increasingly difficult

working conditions. They've been able to manage with very few resources and certainly are to be commended for the excellent work they've done, but this is not sustainable over time as the

population growth continues apace. The issue needs to be dealt with by this government, not just as a matter of fairness, but also to fulfill its own mandate. If this government is committed to the

success of its Places to Grow policy and strategy, it needs to implement a health care strategy for high-growth regions.

Let's take a look at the facts. The provincial average for per capita hospital funding is $781 while the Durham region per capita hospital funding number is only

$502, which is a difference of $279 per capita per year. In terms of the provincial average for total health care funding compared to the Durham region per capita total health care funding, there

is an even larger gap. And if that weren't bad enough, the gap is continuing to widen as the population growth continues, so the gap is going to get bigger and bigger over time if something isn't

done about this. This fact seems to be virtually ignored by the government in allocating provincial funding for hospitals. I should also note that the alliance regions are now paying $573 million

per year in health care premiums, yet there is no evidence that these amounts are being proportionately reinvested.

These are the raw numbers, but let's consider the ramifications of this chronic underfunding. First of all, the hospitals in Durham region are operating at

maximum capacity. Capacity currently stands at 94%, while the provincial average is 77%. This very high occupancy rate, combined with an underfunding of hospital and health care services, will

result in several ramifications:

Number one, there is an even greater challenge to our local hospitals to respond to local outbreaks of disease or other emergency situations. This is

particularly important in light of present events and events of the recent past, with a number of suspects being arrested for alleged terrorist activities. This is something that we need to be

increasingly mindful of and we need to make sure that our hospitals and health care facilities have the resources they need in order to respond quickly to emergencies of this nature.

The second point is that residents need to wait longer for hospital and other health care services. This government is taking credit for reducing wait times for

a number of health care procedures, including cancer surgery, hip and knee replacements and angioplasties, among others, but the fact remains that the wait times in Durham region for all of these

procedures are significantly higher than in most of the rest of Ontario.

Number three, Durham region residents, like the residents of the other GTA 905 communities, are the least able to access health care in their own communities. As

a result, it means that the residents of our communities need to travel to other communities, thereby placing a strain on the resources of those communities. Again, one of the principal strategies

of the Places to Grow formula is the need for people to have local access to quality health care services, and that's certainly not happening in Durham region.

The growth in Durham region and the health of its residents demand a solution. I would urge this government to be responsible and fair to the residents of Durham

region. Address the current situation by increasing the level of health care funding in our region to the provincial average and then develop and implement a funding formula that recognizes growth

and provides growth funding for hospitals in high-growth areas. Basic fairness requires nothing less.

That would conclude my portion, Mr. Speaker, but I do have a statement that one of my fellow members, the member for Durham, Mr. John O'Toole, has asked me to

read, which, with your permission, I will do.

Mr. O'Toole has provided the following statement:

"I would like to offer my full support to ballot item number 43 and the motion introduced by the member for Whitby-Ajax. Unfortunately, Durham region is a victim

of a growing funding gap between hospitals in the GTA-905 area and the rest of Ontario. The GTA/905 Healthcare Alliance notes that the gap was $164 per capita below the provincial average in

2005-06. The gap is expected to widen to $191 below the Ontario average by 2008-09 -- an increase of 15%.

"The GTA-905 area grows by about 100,000 new residents every year. It is home to more than three million Ontarians. We must ensure that each one of these

residents has access to quality care close to home. That is why I would urge the members to support the resolution before us today."

Thank you.

The Deputy Speaker: Further debate?

Mr. Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): I'm looking expectantly at the NDP, but it falls to us to continue this resolution of Mrs. Elliott.

First of all, let's look at the short history of what has expired. In 1998, a few short years ago, it was the Tory MP for Whitby-Ajax who sat by when the Health

Services Restructuring Commission, which was ordered by the Tory government, ordered the Whitby hospital closed. Wow. Here we have the member stating that funds should increase, and rightly so; we

recognize that. But at the same time, we should look at a bit of the history to see just how this came about and why there was a shortfall in the first place.

Imagine this, then: The Health Services Restructuring Commission ordered a number of things closed. What was the first one? The Whitby hospital. But guess what?

The people of Durham worried for five long years, and just before the 2003 election, guess what? "We will pull back from our decision to close the hospital." So congratulations to you. You must

have been the one who told the Health Services Restructuring Commission just before the last election, "Stop, because the people of Whitby don't have enough health services and certainly we cannot

afford to close the hospital in Whitby."

Let's look at the record on a continuous basis. You also cut $6,364,000 in operating funds from the Lakeridge Health Corp. That was in the first two years of

your party's government, just after the election. The Rouge Valley Health System in Ajax and Pickering cut -- again, operating funds -- in the amount of $12.7 million in your first three years in

office. That's a 10.5% reduction in funding. Why would you do that? When health care is so important, as you say -- and we agree; it is -- why would you let the people of Whitby-Ajax down? It's not

only Whitby-Ajax, but you carry that responsibility on your shoulders even today. The history is not an easy one for you when it comes to health care: Brantford closed, Ottawa Salvation Army Grace

Hospital closed, Port Hope hospital closed, Doctors Hospital in Toronto closed, St. Mary's Hospital in London closed, the Perley Hospital in Ottawa closed, Toronto Central Hospital closed, the

Great War Memorial Hospital in Perth closed, Pembroke Civic Hospital closed, St. Joseph's General Hospital in Peterborough closed, Sarnia closed, and the Toronto Wellesley Central Hospital closed.

Overall across Ontario, the bed capacity in hospitals fell by 7,110 between 1995 and 2003, creating the backlogs and shortages that we've all experienced.

What have we done? We recognize that you have a point, and you should be congratulated in doing it. I'm happy to see that the former Minister of Health is here

as well to listen to this debate. I'm sure that she will participate later on. What we're doing right now is creating the Durham West family health team in Ajax and Pickering region, which was just

approved in April 2006. We've just announced over $4 million to Durham Access to Care for acute home care services. The Lakeridge Health Corp. received in 2005-06 infrastructure renewal funds of

$835,000. We're giving the Lakeridge Health Corp. $231 million for 2006-07, an increase of $18 million, and an additional $2 million for community support services for assisted living programs.

Since taking office, the McGuinty government has given an extra $21,900,000 to long-term-care homes in the Durham region. In short, over half a million dollars to the Head Injury Association of

Durham as well to treat patients with acquired brain injuries.

So there were some significant steps that have been taken. In terms of your own response to ballot item 43, it is significant that you raised this issue. But our

party has stepped up to the plate, and as I have just indicated to you, the fairly massive amount of health care services in terms of dollars that are provided in Durham is certainly a good step in

the right direction.

I thank you for your concern.

Mr. John Yakabuski (Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke): It is my pleasure to rise in support of my colleague from Whitby-Ajax and motion number 19:

"That, in the opinion of this House, the government of Ontario should immediately increase health care funding in Durham region to the provincial average, and, thereafter, develop and implement

health care funding in Durham region based upon population growth." It seems like a no-brainer that that is exactly what people should be able to expect in Durham region.

I had the pleasure of joining Christine Elliott on a number of occasions during the recent by-election and going door to door with her and a number of her

absolutely tremendous and wonderful canvassers during that campaign. She is absolutely right when she says that the number one issue being raised at the door was health care, but more specifically,

health care in Durham region and how they felt this government was short-changing them.

Notwithstanding the address from the honourable membership from Davenport, who wants to take a long historical look, we need only look at the record of this

government. In the GTA it may be somewhat different, but if you go to Durham directly, the region which the member serves and is speaking for, the numbers are quite staggering. The per capita gap

has risen from $194 in 2002-03 to $279 in 2005-06. When you're behind and you're continuing to fall behind, that cannot help but affect the ability to deliver health care services in those

areas.

It is clear that the Durham region is one of the fastest-growing areas in the entire province, and if a government is aware of what's going on and not asleep at

the switch, as I hope the current government is to some degree, they will no doubt recognize that measures must be taken -- and quickly -- to ensure that health care in the region of Durham is not

compromised. When a population base is growing at that kind of rate, if you want to continue the economic benefits that come from that, you have to ensure that adequate health care is available. In

fact, one of the first things people look for if they're considering relocating to a specific area or a new region with their family, or even if they're without children, but particularly then if

they are aging seniors, is to ensure that the health care services they need will be there, should they be called upon. If we want to ensure that the region of Durham continues to prosper, as it

is, we have to ensure that the health care services that are required to allow that to be built on are, in fact, there.

I must say about the new member for Whitby-Ajax that one of the things I also heard during that campaign was the recognition in her community of her personal

commitment to the people; not just during the by-election, but a long-standing, personal record of involvement and commitment to her community. In fact, I believe that last year she was named

citizen of the year in Whitby or a part of that region; I couldn't tell you exactly what, but I do recall that she was named person of the year for her contributions to not only children's services

but health services in the community.

What I admire about her -- one of the things; of course, there are many -- is the fact that at the earliest possible date she has moved to follow up on the

commitment to the people of Whitby-Ajax that she made during the by-election to do whatever she could in her capacity as the sitting MPP to bring pressure to bear on this government to honour its

commitment to health care in this province and recognize that Durham is being left behind. That is something that we're very thankful for and the people of Durham are thankful for, because she has

made that commitment, and she has honoured that commitment, unlike many of the commitments that were made by this government when they took office. They haven't honoured them. We're hoping that --

not only a commitment, but an absolute responsibility to the people of Ontario and to the people of Durham -- they will in fact honour their commitment to health care by supporting this resolution,

as tabled today by the member for Whitby-Ajax.

I know I have other members of caucus who wish to speak to this resolution as well. I'm not going to use all the time. There are many, many things we could be

talking about with regard to support for this resolution, with regard to statistical backup for the need for this resolution to be supported by all parties, to ensure, as I say again, that the

health care of the people of Durham remains a priority, as health care for everyone in the province should remain and that they do not continue to be shortchanged by this government.

The Deputy Speaker: Further debate? The member for Nipissing.

Ms. Monique M. Smith (Nipissing): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It would seem our friend from the Beaches is feeling a little shy this morning, so

I'll go ahead before him. I'm happy to speak to this resolution and to talk about the investments that our government has made and our commitment to health care.

The resolution from the member for Durham reflects her view of history and not the actual history that has occurred in this province with respect to health care.

As you know, between 1995 and 2003, while the Conservative Party was in power, they cut over 7,000 hospital beds, they closed 13 hospitals, and not just that, they refused to make the necessary

investments in our health care system. So now we find ourselves with an infrastructure deficit across the province that our government is left to address.

Let me just talk for a moment about the infrastructure deficit that we had in the north. As you know, there were many hospitals that were left to languish in the

north and that were not redeveloped as they should have been. Although commitments were made and rubber cheques were presented, nothing happened. Case in point: the hospital in the Soo, which Mr.

Orazietti, our member for Sault Ste. Marie, has worked very hard to see move forward, and it is moving forward. In Sudbury, a half-built hospital was left to languish because the previous

government wouldn't move forward with it. We are moving forward with it. In my own riding, the Mattawa General Hospital, which for 27 years resided in portables, is finally going to be redeveloped

under our government, under our watch, something that has been in the works for 27 years. These people have worked hard to hold it together, practically with Band-Aids, and we're going to move

forward with a brand new hospital in that community, which I'm sure the member for Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke would appreciate, because it's actually fairly close to his riding. And of course, in

my hometown of North Bay, we're moving forward with a brand new hospital as well, something that's long overdue and long been waited for, something that was promised, something that we had lovely

blue cheques for and pictures of the former Premier digging holes that didn't go anywhere. But we will see shovels in the ground this fall, and I'm very proud of that.

I'd like to speak a little bit this morning about the spectrum of health care and the investments that we've made in the Durham region: investing $4.8 million in

Durham Access to Care for acute home-care services. In the spectrum of care, this is an incredible investment and important for the people of Durham, who are hoping to have home care and not find

themselves in hospital or long-term care.

Let me just speak for a moment about long-term care, because you know it's an issue that's near and dear to my heart, where I spend a great deal of time. In the

Durham region, we have 18 long-term-care homes. I would say that the Durham region is very well served with respect to long-term care. In fact, of those 18, nine of them are brand new or have been

redeveloped. That's exceptional. The Durham region is very well served in that area of health care. In fact, just this morning, at 10 a.m., Hillsdale Terrace is being opened, an investment of $43

million in Oshawa in a brand new long-term-care home to serve the people of the Durham region.

The people of Durham region are well served. We are making investments across the province in order to ensure that all residents deserve and receive the quality

care they are entitled to. So we are making those investments, we are addressing the infrastructure deficit, the health care deficit that we found when we came into office, that her party -- her

husband as finance minister, her government -- caused and we are addressing that as best we can and making investments where we can and ensuring that every single resident of Ontario receives

quality care.

Mrs. Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener-Waterloo): I am extremely pleased to have the opportunity to support the resolution put forward by my colleague

the member for Whitby-Ajax. The motion reads as follows:

"That, in the opinion of this House, the government of Ontario should immediately increase health care funding in Durham region to the provincial average, and,

thereafter, develop and implement health care funding in Durham region based upon population growth."

I am very pleased to speak to this resolution because I certainly share the concerns of many people in the province of Ontario about the McGuinty Liberal

government approach to health care funding. We have seen, time and time again, the Minister of Health and this government make announcements, whether it be for family health teams or for hospital

funding or for health human resources. The announcements are totally lacking in details for funding, details as to the timelines for implementation. In fact, many of the announcements go back and

all the way -- promises, supposedly, that are being made for 2009 and 2010. We all know that with this government, when they make a promise, you can't believe them.

We've had over 50 broken promises to begin with. One of the promises that has probably been most disappointing for people in the province of Ontario was the

commitment that was made by the Premier not to raise taxes. He wasn't going to lower them, but he wasn't going to raise them. Regrettably, in their first budget, they said they were now going to

implement a McGuinty health tax. They are taking from the people in the province of Ontario, at the current time, somewhere in the neighbourhood of $2.4 billion for health care. They broke their

promise not to raise taxes.

What does this mean for individuals? Some people are paying an extra $300 in health taxes; some might be paying $600; some might be paying as much as $900.

Unfortunately today, in the McGuinty Ontario, people are paying more for health care and they are getting less. Certainly this motion is testament to the fact that the people in Durham region are

not seeing increased health care funding, and this motion asks for that funding to be provided.

Prior to the election of the member for Whitby-Ajax, I indicated in a statement that I had made that -- I said this after the budget of 2006: "The McGuinty

Liberals' year-end spending spree effectively shut out Durham region. While the Liberals rushed to shove about $1 billion into a slush fund to spend on transit and roads in other parts of the GTA,

Durham region was noticeably excluded in the one-time investment to help GTA municipalities." I went on to say, "It appears that Premier McGuinty does not consider Durham region a high-priority

area."

At the same time, I went on to talk about the member who is now the member for Whitby-Ajax, and I indicated that if she was elected -- and the people in that

community certainly recognized that she was the best candidate -- she would fight for fair funding for the people in Durham. Here she is just a few months later doing exactly what she had committed

to the constituents who she now represents. I said, "She will fight for fair funding of Durham hospitals." Really, today she is doing that.

I spoke about the fact that the people in Whitby-Ajax were paying the illegal health tax while the wait-times in that riding were going up and the services and

the staff were being cut. That's exactly what's happening.

So I applaud this member. I congratulate her constituents for having the foresight and the vision to elect her to be their representative. They made a wise and

outstanding choice. Here she is today, just a few months later, doing exactly what she has committed to do.

I want to remind the government that in 1995, when our government took over, we had in this province a deficit when it came to health care. There had been no

investment in capital infrastructure whatsoever. There had been no attention paid to long-term-care beds. There had been no building in over 10 years. So in 1997, our government committed to invest

in 20,000 long-term-care beds, we invested over a billion dollars into community services, because we were going to be providing a continuum of services. We also increased hospital funding. We made

decisions to ensure that the hospitals in the province of Ontario were all centres of excellence. That meant that we had to take action, which the former NDP and Liberal governments had refused to

do. We had 10,000 empty beds in hospitals in Ontario. We were paying for bricks and mortar; we were not paying for health services.

We took the difficult decision to ensure that we provided a continuum of health services that started with promotion, that went into primary care and family

health teams. We set up new hospitals. We expanded hospital services. We increased the number of cancer facilities and cardiac facilities. We increased the number of MRIs in the province of

Ontario. We built new dialysis areas throughout the province. We took the tough decisions that were necessary.

Then, we added 20,000 long-term-care beds, because we had all of these people who were inappropriately housed in our hospitals who needed quality of care,

improved care that could only be provided within the home-like setting of the long-term-care facilities. We also invested, for the first time, in comprehensive community services.

That's what our government did. What is this government doing? They are now underfunding Durham region. In fact, they are underfunding the entire community of

the GTA. They do not recognize that between 1996 and 2005 this area grew on average by 106,000 residents annually. This represents half the annual population growth in Ontario over this period.

It's equivalent to adding the population of the city of Kingston to the GTA each and every year.

We have to remember, not only is the GTA growing, it is aging at twice the provincial rate. It is increasing culturally, and socially and economically it is very

diverse. Yet despite this growth, this aging population and increasing diversity, access to hospital services in this fast-growing area of Ontario has fallen behind the province, due primarily to

the way the government funds hospitals. My colleague today has spoken about this widening per capita gap in Durham for our hospitals. She has mentioned the chronic underfunding. She has talked

about the fact that this presents a challenge if we have an unexpected outbreak of disease, an emergency. They cannot have the services close to home as our government wanted everyone to have. I

support her resolution strongly.

Mr. Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): Perhaps for the edification of some of the members opposite, they might notice that I am alone here today.

I have the entire 15 minutes, and I thought I would participate in the debate after having heard what some of the other parties might have to say to it. As you might also be fully aware, under the

rules and procedures of the House, our party, being the third party, is often skipped.

Mr. Dave Levac (Brant): That's because you don't want to.

Mr. Prue: No. You will often notice that happens under the rules and procedures in terms of members' statements and other things. There is a

noticeable skip, and it seems to me to be --

Mr. Levac: By choice.

Mr. Prue: -- by choice. So I am here now to speak.

I would commend the member from Whitby-Ajax for bringing this motion forward, but at the time I commend her, I also have to state how saddened we are that it is

necessary for her or that she feels it is necessary for her to do so. She has come forward today because in her opinion her community is not getting the necessary resources at a time of great

population growth. As people are expanding into, moving to and living in Durham region, she sees that there are not sufficient facilities in terms of health care for that community.

It is a difficult proposition for me to talk to, and I'm sure for all members, because we have many roles in this House. One of the roles, when we are elected,

is to represent our community, to stand up, as I would on behalf of Beaches-East York, as the member from Brant might on behalf of the people in his riding of Brant, or as the member here today

talks about her riding and the people of Whitby-Ajax, which forms an integral part of Durham region. But having said that, I think we also have other obligations. When I see motions such as this, I

wonder about those other obligations, because not only do we speak on behalf of the people of our own riding, we also have to, as legislators, speak on behalf of all the people of Ontario.

When resolutions such as this come forward, it troubles me somewhat. Although I know that what she speaks about is justified, although I know what she speaks

about is correct and although I understand that the money flowing into that community for hospital and medical purposes will not be as high on a per capita basis as some other areas of the

province, it still troubles me because there are different and unique circumstances in each and every one of our ridings that need to be looked at as well.

If I can talk a little bit about that, the region of Durham, justifiably in my view, has been shortchanged by this government -- not justifiably that the

government is doing it, but their comment is justifiable; I should be very careful how I say that. Their comment is justifiable. In terms of the hospitals, we can see that there are not sufficient

hospitals and that the hospitals tend to be overcrowded. In terms of health care, the member from Whitby-Ajax has made a very strong case. In terms of transit, we have just seen the transit

allocation, seen this government's finance bill, this government's budget, come forward with a great deal of money for transit throughout the GTA, but literally none for Durham.

So I can understand how the people of Durham are feeling shortchanged. Juxtaposed to that, though, I have to ask this question, and I've heard some others talk

about it. This is a member who is before this House today asking that we spend more money in her particular riding. This is a member whose party spent less money, and certainly when times were

good.

I heard what was said about the NDP not spending money between 1990 and 1995. I was not a member of this House, but I have to tell you, times were pretty

tough. They were bad; they were really bad. We were in a depression and nobody got much of anything in those days -- and even doing that, there were huge deficits because there weren't jobs and the

worldwide economy was in bad shape. And it wasn't just here in Ontario; it was literally everywhere in North America and most of Europe. The economies were in bad shape and the money was not there

to be spent. Times started to change around 1994, 1995, 1996, Things started to get better. But in that period there were closures of hospitals and there was a chronic underfunding, I would think,

of much of the health care system in this province, to the point that many health care institutions had to go cap in hand. Many could not build what needed to be built, many services that needed to

be offered could not be offered.

This is the same party -- and I have heard them, and I wonder about this; perhaps the member can talk about this when she has a couple of minutes at the end --

that says they oppose the health tax, they oppose the $2.6 billion that is being spent on precisely what she is asking to be spent in her region of Durham.

New Democrats oppose the health tax as well -- we do -- but unlike the Conservatives, who say they are going to abolish it, we say we would abolish it but

replace it with taxation from the ordinary tax system. We think the health tax is wrong because it penalizes people at the bottom levels. We don't think it is fair that you take money from people

who can ill afford it, and that people who earn $100,000 or $200,000 or $300,000 a year pay just such a pittance towards their own health premiums. We would like to see a much fairer system. We

would abolish the health tax and replace that through the income tax to garner the same amounts of money.

On the other hand, from what I have heard from the Leader of the Opposition and from members of the Conservative Party, they would abolish the health tax,

period. I have not heard in any way that they intend to replace that money. So I don't know what happens to this resolution, and I don't know what would happen to this resolution in the event that

some 14 or 15 months from now, following the election, the Conservatives should win that election and abolish the health tax. If they do not replace the money, where does the money come from to

fund what Durham needs? I believe that Durham needs this, but I don't know where the money will come from. So I have to ask that question. I think it is central to the whole issue and, depending on

how the member might answer this, to whether or not I support her motion here today.

The expansion of Durham is a very real factor, but there are many places in this province that are expanding, and unfortunately there are some rural and

northern places that are contracting at the same time. There was a private member's bill just this past week. The member from Halton talked about recalculation. I think that was a good idea,

because we have to not just use the Statistics Canada figures every 10 years, or the mini-census that comes every five years in between, to calculate how big towns and cities and regions are,

because some of them are experiencing very quick growth. Durham is one such place. Relying on the Statistics Canada figures collected every 10 years does not give a proper indication of how large

those towns and cities are. Conversely, it is not uncommon in small one-industry northern towns, where the industry moves out, for it to depopulate fairly rapidly, yet the census figure might say

that it's still chock-a-block full of houses and people, where in reality that is not the case. We need to find another mechanism. I would suggest that his private member's bill last week would go

a long way to helping this particular circumstance as well, because I would hazard a guess that the people of Durham and the government are using the statistics from the census, which is now five

years old. I would hazard that's why you're getting that money.

There are other issues, though, that we need to talk about, because this is an important one being raised by the member from Whitby-Ajax. This is where I have

to put my hat on to speak for all of Ontario. There are areas in this province, particularly northern, near northern and rural areas, where there is isolation, where people don't have even the

crowded hospital system that they have in Durham. They don't have any hospital system, literally, at all.

If you live in small-town Ontario, particularly in northern Ontario, you will know about the isolation. You will know the great distance you have to travel to

go to Sudbury or Timmins. You will know the great distance you have to travel to Thunder Bay or to any place where there is a hospital, because your community doesn't have one. Your community may

not have a doctor; it may not even have a nursing station. I think the difficulty of trying to provide services to people in those locations has to be looked at too. That cannot be seen in

isolation and it cannot be seen in isolation of what is being said here today about Durham.

Once a year I try to go with my colleague the member from Timmins-James Bay to visit some parts of his riding, particularly those parts that are First Nations.

It is an opportunity for a boy from the city to see how people in other parts of this province live -- people from other cultures, people in the far northern and remote communities. I want to tell

you, in terms of the health care they are provided, it would make most Canadians, if they were to see it, quite ashamed.

I know that it is not totally a provincial responsibility and I know the federal government, in great part, is to blame for the conditions one finds in those

communities, but we as Ontarians need to speak out strongly in support of our First Nations people. We need to talk about the kinds of conditions they have: the fact that the nursing station cannot

adequately look after the needs of the people; the fact that medevac has to come in there to evacuate them if there's any kind of serious problem; to show the social and health conditions, where

they're drinking tainted water and they're under boil-water advisories for years, as in the case of Kashechewan; the problems of the mould in the schools and the lack of medical facilities in

places like Attawapiskat; the isolation and the remoteness of a little town like Peawanuck. If you go into Marten Falls/Ogoki and have a look at that place, you will see that all of the

infrastructure that was built has literally never been occupied -- the arena they built for the kids -- because the ice storm actually destroyed it before it could be occupied. There has never had

any money, either from this government or from the federal government, to restore it so that there is at least some facility in the town, something for the kids to do. As much as we need to talk

about Durham, we need to talk about that.

We also need to talk about the rural areas, where people live in some isolation. It may not be the isolation of the far north, but I will tell you about my own

parents who live near Bancroft. My mother had to go down to have a cataract removed. It took more than a year or a year and a half to get an appointment. It was in Peterborough. That may not seem

like the end of the earth, but that's an hour and a half. My parents don't live that far. Today is their anniversary, by the way. Happy anniversary, if you're watching.

Mr. Ernie Hardeman (Oxford): Did this come to you?

Mr. Prue: No, I'm going to phone them later too.

Mr. Yakabuski: You made a member's statement the other day.

Mr. Prue: Yes, I did a statement as well.

They don't live that far. If you live up in Maynooth or Barry's Bay, that's a long way to go if you have to go down to Peterborough or Ottawa to have just

routine kind of stuff. That's something that needs to be addressed too, because not only do we need more hospital in Durham, I would suggest we need more hospitals throughout all of Ontario. Asking

people in rural, northern and farm country to travel the distances that we do is simply not right.

We also need to talk about the urban areas and the money that is needed for the urban areas, because there are higher incidences of poverty there, there are

more people who are aged and have special conditions; there are new immigrants who come with medical problems that are perhaps unique to them and are not fully understood in this country. The money

is needed for all of them. The money is needed for everybody.

I want to hear what the member has to say to what I have raised here today. I recognize that her cause is right for Durham, but I also want to know how that

fits into the whole perspective of Ontario, for the 13 million people who live in this province, many of whom have needs that are unique and significant and need to be addressed as well.

Mr. Wayne Arthurs (Pickering-Ajax-Uxbridge): I appreciate the opportunity to add some comments for a few moments for the member from

Whitby-Ajax. This is her first resolution and I congratulate her on the opportunity to present to the House in this fashion. I apologize for not being here for her earlier comments. I was on other

government business during the earlier part of the morning, which I'll have to return to.

Both of us are new to this place -- the member from Whitby-Ajax is new in the past number of months, and myself new during this mandate -- so we don't

necessarily have direct responsibility for what has transpired in previous years. We do have some responsibility for what transpires during this time frame.

I can start by saying that there is a principle in the resolution that I endorse, and that principle is that growth in growth regions needs to be addressed as

part of the overall health strategy. Durham certainly is one of those areas, but it's clearly not the only area within the province, nor is the GTA the only growth area within the province.

To an extent, our government has been addressing this through some strategic decisions about the application of financial resources, directly from the

standpoint of hospital investments, or the distribution of family health teams throughout the province in areas that are seeing growth or the addition to or satellites for the community health

centres that are in growth-related communities. We have been addressing growth from that context.

I think it's important, though, that we reflect on how we got to the state we're in, and thus my comments about neither the member from Whitby-Ajax nor myself

having direct responsibility for that. It was in 1998 that the former government, the Tory-appointed Health Services Restructuring Commission, ordered the closing of hospitals throughout Ontario.

This included the closing at that time of Whitby General Hospital. At that time, the member for Whitby-Ajax was a member of cabinet, and yet the activity to downgrade health care and remove one of

three hospital structures in Durham was certainly a jeopardy. It wasn't until 2003, in May, as we were all anticipating a provincial election on any given day, that the government of that day moved

back from that particular call. As a matter of fact, the Oshawa, Whitby, Clarington and Port Perry This Week -- News headed off with, "Facing possible flat-line, Lakeridge Health Whitby has been

given paddles by the province to keep it afloat."

Hospitals and health care in the province and in Durham region were busy either closing or restructuring through amalgamation, and spending all their time and

energy on how to either get rid of sites or consolidate sites with little opportunity to build on what the real needs of the community were in a growth community.

Since coming to office, I know that I, on behalf of my constituents, and I would suggest constituents throughout Durham region, as the only member from the

government side of the House and having some long history in Durham region, certainly have been called upon by the health care systems, the health care providers in Durham to come to their aid. I

know that the members opposite who represent Durham have similarly lent their voices to that, but clearly, people look to the government side for assistance.

During this time, we have finalized the funding for the R.S. McLaughlin Durham Regional Cancer Centre, which will be commissioned this November and operational

next spring. We have put into our five-year rolling capital plan for 2007-08 the redevelopment of the Ajax-Pickering Health Centre as part of the Rouge Valley Health System, long-awaited, and

announced, without funding, like many other hospitals across the province, particularly those, as I was suggesting, in growth regions, in May and June and March and the like of 2003.

We have put into that rolling capital plan, so it's clear what the plan is and what the time frames are, with the funding for 2009-10, a major redevelopment at

Lakeridge, Oshawa, for, I believe, about 140-odd acute beds.

So in the limited time we've confirmed the funding that allowed the cancer centre to move forward. We have finalized the approvals and funding capacity for

both Rouge Valley Health System and Lakeridge in Durham region.

Mr. Speaker, I wish there were more time.

The Deputy Speaker: Thank you. Ms. Elliott, you have two minutes to respond.

Mrs. Elliott: First of all, I'd like to say that I appreciate the comments made by my colleagues the members from Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke

and Kitchener-Waterloo, and the statement made by the member from Durham that I read from in support of this resolution. I appreciate their comments.

We have heard from the government members about how much they've done in Durham region in recent years. My response to that would be, that is really just, if I

may say, a drop in the bucket compared to the need, that almost the existence of Durham region has been ignored by this government since it was elected in 2003. That is certainly the perception,

the view that is widely held by members in the riding of Whitby-Ajax, the many people I've spoken to during the election campaign. They feel our concerns have been ignored, not just in health care

funding but across the board in terms of education and infrastructure funding. If you look at what happened with the most recent budget, as the member from Beaches-East York mentioned, there was no

mention of any transit funding, or any infrastructure funding for the Durham region in the budget for that matter. A great deal of money went to the other regions, but east of the city there was

virtually nothing. So the residents of Durham region, to some extent, are feeling upset that their concerns haven't been addressed.

To respond to the comments made by the member from Beaches-East York with respect to the health care tax, yes, our party leader, John Tory, has been very

strong in his statement that we would eliminate the health care tax if we were elected to government, because we think Ontario taxpayers are taxed enough. That's all I would say about that, but

that is something we are very committed to.

Finally, though I don't like to rehash events of the past, because it has been mentioned by enough government members, I feel the need to respond to the

statement with respect to Whitby General Hospital. I would say that, first of all, the decision was made by the hospital restructuring commission, not by the government, and the hospital was never

closed.

ARTS EDUCATION WEEK ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR LA SEMAINE DE

L'ÉDUCATION ARTISTIQUE

Ms. Mossop moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 118,

An Act to make the fourth week in October Arts Education Week / Projet de loi 118, Loi désignant la quatrième semaine d'octobre

Semaine de l'éducation artistique.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Pursuant to standing order 96, Ms. Mossop, you have up to 10 minutes. The floor is yours.

Ms. Jennifer F. Mossop (Stoney Creek): The opportunity to put forward a piece of legislation is a rare privilege and there are countless

issues, all valid, worthy, compelling issues that might be addressed, so why, some people might be asking, would I choose something as seemingly innocuous as declaring the fourth week of October

Arts Education Week in Ontario? It's not exactly a headline grabber maybe that you might expect coming from a former journalist, but then I didn't get into this business of politics, of government,

to grab headlines, and I didn't get into the business of journalism to grab headlines. In fact, I did it because I wanted to try to make a difference. Maybe I am an incurable idealist or optimist,

but I did get into this business and into journalism to try to make a difference in the world. What I wanted to do was to make the world a better place, and to make it a better place not just for

some people but for all. I wanted it to be a more humane, a more thoughtful, a more beautiful and a safer place, not just for some but for all.

So why Arts Education Week, if that's my goal? There are dozens upon dozens of research studies from all over this world that point to the undeniable benefits

of arts education. There are direct links between arts education and academic success, higher standardized test scores -- for example, in literacy and numeracy -- cognitive development and

problem-solving skills. Arts education has also proven to be an effective way to reach those who are having trouble in school, those with learning disabilities, maybe, or children at risk. Also,

the arts engage children in learning and have proven to keep kids in school longer and to have better adult outcomes. Arts education has proven to keep kids out of trouble and keep them in their

communities as well as in their schools. It decreases anti-social behaviour and emotional problems, increases self-esteem, self-confidence and self-discipline. As a result, the costs associated

with children's aid, with health providers and with the justice sector go down. Tolerance, understanding and effective interpersonal and communication skills go up. These are the ingredients of

successful individuals and successful societies.

All these things have been proven empirically. We always seem to need that intellectual security blanket, that thing that tells us on a piece of paper or in

science that this is right, that we can back this because science tells us this is okay, it's good. But in fact we know it in more important ways. We know the importance of arts education

anecdotally. We've all heard the stories. Every one of us in this room and beyond has heard the stories or witnessed those magic moments when a child is engaged and focused, maybe even for the

first time, because they've had an experience with the arts. You can see in their eyes at that moment that a seed has been planted that's going to yield a better life.

I was talking with one of the artists who's involved in the learning through the arts program, Pier Rodier. He went to a school and helped the math teacher

give a lesson in math using artistic techniques. The next day the principal called and said, "We'd like you to come back and give our teachers a workshop in discipline. You must have wonderful

techniques in discipline, because the kids were so focused while you were here and they were so well-behaved." In fact, it wasn't that. It was because he connected with them and he engaged them in

the learning experience and in the subject matter. They took ownership of the experience; they took ownership of what they were learning.

We hear all these stories and we know that at the end of the day that's what we all are: We are stories. And if there are no storytellers, whether it's through

the written word, through song, through drama and through visual arts, then to a certain extent we cease to exist because our stories cease to exist.

Also, the arts are the expression of that intangible essential called the soul. The arts are a unique and primary form of communication and expression for

human beings. They give our creativity a voice and they fuel our imagination. So how important is imagination? There's a gentleman in the members' gallery from the Science Centre, Vishnu Ramcharan,

who told me how important it is this way. He said that if you take a young child -- perhaps they're having a difficult life or a difficult time -- and you show them a plate and you say to the

child, "What is this?" the kid looks at you and shrugs their shoulders and says, "Well, it's a plate." "Yes, but what else can it be?" And they start looking at it differently. Maybe you can put a

planter in it and it will catch the water and it can be a planter. Or you can paint it and it can hang on the wall and be a piece of art. Or if it's made of something non-breakable, you could turn

it over and fling it across the room and it would make a good Frisbee. What you do, then, is teach this child that things can be different, they can be better. So if you're having a bad day today,

tomorrow can be different; it can be better. And that gives all of us hope. That is something that each and every one of us needs in our survival kit of life.

I'm going to now move into a practical area. The arts are also where there are some very satisfying jobs, careers and businesses. Ontario, in fact, is the

third-largest employer in the cultural sector, and the cultural sector is expected to be one of the top three growth industries in the next 20 years.

There is a race on all around the world right now for communities wanting to become creative cultural communities, because they realize that that is where

people want to work and live, and if they are going to attract businesses and industries, they have to have something for those people to do. If those companies want to attract good people, they

have to have something for the people to do after they get out of work and after they get out of school. They want to be in a culturally rich community.

We talk a lot in this House of how we should be spending taxpayers' dollars. We spend a great deal of it on health care, and I understand the importance of

health care, but quite frankly, there is not a single one of us in this room that actually wants to have to use health care. None of us wants to go to the hospital, none of us wants to need health

care, but every moment of every day we are living culture, from the minute we wake up in the morning and our eyes rest on the favourite painting we have hanging on the wall, and our radio turns on

and the music starts playing, and we read the newspaper. We go to work and we walk amidst the architecture. We get to work, and we have lunch, which is culture as well. Food is culture. At the end

of the day, we curl up with a good book or we watch a good movie or we watch television. It's all culture.

So what we need to do is provide these cultural communities, these creative communities with, simultaneously, a workforce and an audience. This is where arts

education again comes in. This is not just an Ontario issue. UNESCO just held an international conference on arts education in Portugal. It was discussed at great length, but what was basically

understood was that the knowledge-based economy that we have in our world today requires the creative, flexible intelligences that are developed through artistic languages and pursuits.

Critical Evidence is one of the latest papers to come out of the United States that talks about arts education initiatives in the United States. In that it

says that 95% of people understand the benefits of arts ed and want arts education for their kids, but there is still a disconnect between that desire and making it happen. There is a fabulous

school in Montreal called FACE, Fine Arts Core Education; parents line up all over the place for this public school. They line up on the front lawn every year to get their kids into this school

because it is an arts education facility and it has proven to keep their kids in school, keep them out of trouble and raise their test scores. They have academic success. In fact, the parents say

that sometimes they can convince their kids to stay home when they're sick. That's how much they enjoy going to this school.

Educational Leadership is one of the leading documents on arts education and education. It says that we need to get serious about integrating the arts back

into our curriculum.

So this bill will set aside the fourth week in October each year to celebrate, honour and manifest arts education. Arts specialists and community arts

organizations can work with schools and with teachers to organize events for that week. They can do exchanges with other schools. They can bring artists in. They can go out to artistic events.

Projects, performances or exhibits can be held all during that week. Also, they can launch them during that week and maybe have them culminate in Education Week, which is in May.

I've talked to a lot of people in the community; some of them are here with us today in the members' gallery, from the Ontario Science Centre, the Ontario

Media Development Corp., the Ontario Arts Council, Artsaround, the Ministry of Culture, Soundscreens. I want to thank you all for being here to support this. I've been working very hard for a long

time on this initiative, because I really believe in it. I think the possibilities and the opportunities are endless, with a little imagination.

Mr. Ernie Hardeman (Oxford): I'm pleased to rise this morning and speak to Bill 118, introduced by the member from Stoney Creek,

An Act to

make the fourth week in October Arts Education Week. I want to say that it's a motherhood issue and I would expect that when the time comes to vote on this bill it will get unanimous support from

the House, because I don't think there would be anyone that would suggest it wasn't appropriate to recognize the importance of art and culture as it relates to educating young people. I think it

will be supported by all.

As recently as this week, I had a visit from one of my constituents, Linda Albright, who was in my constituency office to speak to me about the arts being used

in the education system. Linda lives in the town of Tillsonburg. For -- I'm just making a guess -- somewhere in the neighbourhood of eight to 10 years now she has been involved with using the arts

and music to deal with at-risk students. When the previous government -- the government I was proud to be a member of -- introduced the Safe Schools Act and we ended up having students who were not

able to go to school and had to be educated in a different way, Participate, in the town of Tillsonburg, took on that challenge and helped educated those children and get them back into the

mainstream.

It was an amazing feat when you saw this happen. Where these children would come into the system and get involved with the arts and music, it became such a

driving force to get them back on the right track. I want to commend Linda for doing that. I also want to say that the reason she was in my office is that she's involved with the Arts Network for

Children and Youth. They know how much art contributes to the benefit and the help of at-risk youth in the province of Ontario.

Of course, the other reason she was there: She has concerns that the system that we have in Ontario today is not funding that part of education. She was

looking for ways to deal with and getting advice on how to approach the different levels of government to support the program. The Participate program in Tillsonburg has moved out of their small

quarters. They are now in a nice area right in the town hall with the support of the town of Tillsonburg. But of course that is not sufficient to carry on as the program is growing. She's looking

for more stable funding to help make the program sustainable for the future.

I think it's important that the Arts Network for Children and Youth is in fact doing a lot of good around the province to bring together the needs of these

at-risk students and the community in general. I think it's important to recognize that it should be part of all systems in government: the justice system, the social services system. There's a

direct connection between the needs of these children and the social services that are available, that these children should be able to avail themselves of -- again, the health and of course as the

bill speaks to the education system.

I have to say that I'm concerned that this government talks a good story but has done very little to ensure that all students in all schools have equal

opportunity to experience the arts in their schools. That's the reason I bring that up, of course: The member introducing this bill is a member of the present government. I think it becomes so

important. It's more than just recognizing arts in education as an event that we need to think about one week in the year; I think it's more important to see that the government takes it seriously

and actually supports the arts in the education system.

I'll just give some examples. The government announced on May 5, 2006, a $4-million arts education partnership where they expect private-sector donors to

support the program -- big announcement, little substance and no help to the schools that are trying to educate students through the arts. It's a great system to make an announcement on, but having

matching dollars -- in fact, this doesn't provide equal opportunity for all students throughout the province. This was brought out by the People for Education news release upon that announcement in

May:

"Ontario parents will fundraise over $50 million in the 2005-06 school year to provide arts enrichment and augment their schools' budgets. This amount has

increased annually since 1998-99, and indicates a growing dependence on fundraising to provide publicly funded schools with resources.

"Relying on fundraising for necessities like books, classroom supplies, art programs and computers creates a system of `have' and `have-not' schools, because

schools' ability to fundraise depends on the amount of free time parents have, parents' capacity to raise money and the wealth of the community."

Again, of course, that's a great concern that would show that that's not equal opportunity for all children in the system. They go on:

"There are significant differences in schools' budgets for arts programs, and many schools rely on parents to supply the funding. This year, 20% of secondary

schools and 54% of elementary schools report that parents fundraise for arts enrichment in their schools.

"The government announcement of up to $4 million to `match' money raised by arts organizations does not do enough to address this issue." I point out that I

think it's important, as we agree to this bill, that we collectively encourage the government to put more money in place.

The same report from People for Education deals with the class size cap that the government has put in place, from kindergarten to grade 3. Of course, they're

obligated to have a smaller class size in those areas. Many of the school boards are taking away the dollars, the resources that they formerly were putting into the art community or art education,

and using that to lower the size of the lower classes.

Another thing I just wanted to mention -- it's kind of a personal thing -- is that the Premier went out and made an announcement, and it was written up in the

Toronto Star by one of the writers there. The reason that one caught my eye is that that is the school my granddaughter will be attending in about three and a half years when she starts school. She

and her mother were able to attend the announcement that the Premier made at the school, Palmerston Avenue Public School. It says here, as from the Toronto Star:

"With great difficulty, the teachers and students at Palmerston Avenue Public School behaved like good stage props this month when Premier Dalton McGuinty and

his entourage swept in to announce a $4-million commitment to arts education." That's the same announcement I spoke to earlier.

"What everybody at the school knew was that Palmerston's arts program, one of the best in the province, doesn't get a cent from Queen's Park. It wouldn't exist

if parents hadn't raised the money for everything from the instructor's salary to the supplies."

From the instructor's salary to all the supplies, everything was being supplied by the school, and yet the Premier was there announcing how we, as a

government, were investing that much money into the arts in that school. Obviously, not a nickel of it was coming from the province; it was all being provided by the parents and the community.

The same

article goes on:

"In fact, McGuinty's May 5 announcement at Palmerston Avenue Public School reinforced that trend. The Premier pledged to match, dollar for dollar, money raised

privately for arts education. Such `partnerships' worry Kidder" -- and this is, of course, Annie Kidder from People for Education -- "and other advocates of public education for three reasons." The

first one, of course, and the most important they feel, is that, "They widen the disparity between the `have' and `have not' schools."

I do have more here, but I know my colleague wishes to speak to this bill too, so I will leave it at that and say we support the bill, but I think it's very

important that the government realizes that if we're going to recognize arts as an important factor in educating our children, we fund it in a way that it can be used advantageously for all the

children in the system.

Mr. Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): It's my pleasure to speak --

Applause.

Mr. Marchese: You don't know what I'm going to say yet.

Interjections.

Mr. Marchese: Kathleen knows what I might say.

It's a pleasure for me to speak to this bill and to support Bill 118. I must tell you, I will be critical towards the end of my comments, but you'll have to

wait for that.

Mrs. Carol Mitchell (Huron-Bruce): Just stay positive.

Mr. Marchese: It's hard to be positive when I point out some of the weaknesses of your government, but I'll do that at the end of my

remarks.

New Democrats believe that professional and community art and culture are vital to our social and economic well-being as a society. I want to tell you my

experience, briefly, as a former Minister of Culture, and I want to say to those of you who might not remember, that in 1990, when we got elected as New Democrats, we were in the depth of a

recession. Most economists will admit that was the case, except for Liberal Party and Conservative Party members who can never acknowledge that we had a difficult economic time, but we did. But in

that recession, we did not cut, in culture, one cent. We didn't do that. I wager to say to the few cultural friends who are here that if Tories were in power in that recession, and/or our good

friends, the Liberal Party, they would have decimated culture, and I'll explain why: If Liberals can cut in a good economy, as they did this year, and I will explain that later, imagine what they

would have done in a recession, not to speak of my good friends the Tories. Because of the tremendous cuts they made in a good economy, think of what they would have done in a bad one. But we

maintained our support for the Ontario Arts Council to the tune of $47 million at that time. When the Tories were in power, by 2003 it was at $26 million; it went from $47 million to $26 million,

and in a good economy, I tell you. Imagine what they would have done if it was a bad economy.

So we maintained support for all of our big cultural institutions, including the Ontario Arts Council, and not only did we create a book and magazine -- I did

that. I created the book and magazine publishing centre to protect those publishing in magazines and books that were going down. Imagine what the other governments would have done if they were

there at that time.

What I learned in government is that the Ministry of Culture doesn't have a great deal of power, not then and not now. In spite of what anyone might tell you

in government or while they were in government, the Ministry of Culture -- I was about to say, "is the least important," but not entirely, so I'm not going to say that -- has no importance or power

in government, and the reason for that has nothing to do with the ministers, although some ministers are better than others in terms of being good advocates.

Interjection: They're all good.

Mr. Marchese: No, they're not. There are good ministers and there are some terribly bad ones. There are caretakers of the ministry and there

are those who are strong advocates. But in spite of that, it doesn't matter whether you're a strong advocate or a weak one; you're still powerless in cabinet. I don't know why some of the members

are sort of shaking their heads, because they ought to know. And the ministers know. And the minister knows. And the reason for that --

Mr. Jean-Marc Lalonde (Glengarry-Prescott-Russell): In the McGuinty government, every minister has a word.

M. Marchese: Mon ami, ce n'est pas le cas dans ton gouvernement. Je peut te dire que ce n'est pas le cas.

The reason for that is because we do not have a cultural sector that lobbies government strongly. If we did, the Minister of Culture would be one of the

strongest ministers in this government or any government. Until the cultural community realizes that the reason why ministers have no power is because they do not press governments -- until then --

they can come and we can pass this bill today and you can all feel good. The member from Stoney Creek can feel good. I can feel good in supporting it. We can all feel good, and nothing will

change.

Culture is important in this country and in this province. Just to give you some old statistics I kept a while ago, the business of culture is big business in

Ontario. Ontario's cultural industries contribute more than $5.3 billion to Ontario's economy and generate more than 40,000 highly skilled jobs in Ontario. Just to break it down, Ontario-based book

publishers generated $1.7 billion in revenues in 2001 while total revenues in Canada amounted to $2.4 billion. The direct impact on the 2002 GDP for Canadian-owned, Ontario-based book publishers

was $98 million. Film and television production spent $874 million in 2003. Domestic production expenditures in Ontario were $504 million, representing the first increase in over four years as a

share of total industry. The annual economic impact of Ontario's growing interactive digital media industry is estimated at $1 billion. Ontario's magazine industry contributed approximately $740

million to the provincial economy. Ontario-based record companies generated almost $1.1 billion in revenues. Total revenues in Canada amounted to just over $1.3 billion.

The facts are clear to anyone who wants to understand them, but what I want to say to the cultural sector people who are here today and those who might be

watching is that the facts do not matter. What matters is if you're able to lobby government and convince them that culture does matter, not just to our economy but to our identity as Ontarians and

as Canadians. Until you do that, the facts are meaningless, because we simply do not pressure governments to have them understand that culture is an important part of who we are. That's the problem

we have in this country.

Measured on a per capita basis, governments, corporations, consumers, visitors and philanthropists invest far more in operating art sectors in the great cities

of the world than we do in Toronto, which is one of the most important cities in Canada as it relates to the arts. Economic and quality-of-life returns on investment in, say, New York, London,

Paris, San Francisco, are highly attractive. In fact, nearly every centre of world trade and commerce possesses and aggressively promotes a vibrant arts sector. We know it happens in great cities,

and not just the ones I mentioned but other great cities in Europe as well. They know how vital culture is, not just to their tourism but to their economic and cultural identity and social

well-being.

We also know that those who are involved in the arts and culture in general have high levels of education. But we know there is also a high proportion of

self-employment, there is a predominance of women in the sector, and we also know there are very low earnings. People get involved in this field because they love it, not because they're going to

make money or get rich, except for the few people in some of the cultural industries. The majority of the people in the arts are poor. They're the ones who support the cultural sector, in spite of

the fact that they make so very little, and no one knows that except those who are involved in culture.

The earnings, I'm telling you, are incredibly low. Artists' earnings are the following: the average earnings are $26,800, 24% less than the average earnings in

the overall Ontario labour force. There are some other statistics that speak about even worse incomes. Another key factor in the low earnings of artists is the situation of female artists, who earn

on average $11,000 less than male artists, which is at $21,900. We know that people get involved in the culture sector not because they're going to make a whole lot of pecunia but because they feel

the arts and they love the arts, and they want to do it because of that love.

When I look at what this government has done, and I review the bill before us, which is an important one because, if nothing else, celebrating for a week

simply allows people to say that culture is here and it's important -- if nothing else. To the member from Stoney Creek, as you speak so beautifully about the arts today, I want to ask you about

your government's commitment to the arts, because when I look at the budget -- this is yours, not mine, not even theirs; it's yours. On page 95, for the cultural folks who are here, this is what it

says on the Ministry of Culture in terms of what they were getting and the cuts. They were getting $454 million, which was an improvement over the past many years when my Conservative friends were

in government. They were giving $454 million in 2005-06; for 2006-07, the period which we are in, it's gone down to $366 million.

You may not know that -- I'm not sure -- but Madame Mossop from Stoney Creek, your budget went down from $454 million to $366 million. This is a serious,

serious cut. How do you justify it? How can you justify close to $100 million in cuts? I didn't add it all up; I could have. It's close to $100 million in cuts, and then you come with a bill that

says we need to celebrate culture. They are inconsistent, in my humble view.

Where is the minister? Where are all the people who are going to speak today on the issue of culture, in terms of defending culture? Because culture is about

investing and it is about putting money in, not taking money out. We can't say culture is great and cut so much money out of the budget. We simply can't do that.

Then we go to the status of the artist legislation that provides income security and access to benefits for artists -- because we know that most of these

people are poor, income poor. They have no safety or protections whatsoever in the majority of cases. In 2003, you said, "We're going to have status of the artist legislation in two years." We're

close to the end of the third year, close to the end of this session. We still do not have status of the artist legislation. How do we defend that? This is a promise you made.

We have close to $100 million in cuts, we have no status of the artist legislation that you promised, and it's an important one, and we also have announcements

-- you were there at Palmerston school, one of my schools, and Kathleen Wynne was there, Minister Pupatello was there, Minister Di Cocco was there, the Premier was there -- who acknowledged me,

thank God. I had to thank him for acknowledging me, because usually we don't get acknowledged by the others. But the Premier was there and he acknowledged me, and that was really nice. I have to

tell you, for those of you who don't know, and publicly, because I haven't said so before, they announced, lo and behold, $4 million. They announced it as if it was one of the biggest things that

ever could have existed in the history of culture. It's $4 million in matching funds -- matching funds, which means that if a school in north Toronto -- as an example, let's say Forest Hill -- was

able to raise $30,000, $40,000 or $50,000, that $4 million coming from two ministries would match it. But if you come from some poor school in my area -- let's just pick a school: Montrose -- and

you could only raise 100 bucks, the government would match that 100 bucks for cultural purposes. The government thinks this is cool and great. Sorry. What they need are music teachers, what they

need are arts teachers, not a measly $4 million that is not going to go very far because most schools can't raise any money. They're already raising for school supplies, let alone having to raise

more to be able to get some more culture dollars to be able to buy some instruments or whatever else they need.

So, Madame Mossop, Stoney Creek member, I support your bill, but you and your members and your friends here have to go after your government -- your minister,

your ministry, your ministers and the Premier -- to say, "You've got to reinvest." You can't take $100 million out of culture and say, "This is great." When I support such a bill, I do so under the

condition that you're going to have to get that money back for culture; otherwise, this bill is meaningless.

Ms. Monique M. Smith (Nipissing): There are a number of members on the government side who want to speak in support of this bill today, and I

certainly want to put my two cents worth in because in North Bay and area we are big supporters of arts education. I'm sorry that the member for Trinity-Spadina wasn't more positive and fun this

morning, because this is a positive bill. We want an Arts Education Week. We want to recognize all the good work that's being done.

I remember in grade 6 when we wrote our own play. I remember what it was called. I remember the experience. We were taught so many different life skills

through developing that play and putting it on for our parents and families. At St. Joe's high school, which I attended, we put on various plays. We had a great music teacher in Sue Smith. Don

McNeil taught us to love Leonard Cohen and taught us that a police song could be a poem. Father J.J. Johnstone taught us that we could have a woman play God in a play. We learned great things

through our drama program in high school.

We had fabulous drama programs in the city of North Bay. At Widdifield and Chippewa, they were renowned. They were winners in the Sears Drama Festival every

year. Marty Southcott and Art Southcott at Widdifield and Rick Blair at Chippewa did yeoman service and put time and more time into those programs and those students. They produced some of the

stars of today: My friend Phil Hughes is in the troupe at Stratford; my friend Blair Williams is at the Shaw; Tamara Bernier, who we knew as Tammy Bernier in her day, played in Mamma Mia! in New

York City. These are all kids from North Bay who went on to great things in the arts because of the arts education that we had.

Our public school board and our separate school board sponsor drama programs in the summer for students, through Summer Challenge, TOROS and Dreamcoat Fantasy

Theatre. We are seeing the future actors of tomorrow. I go to these productions in the summer and I see the likes of Jack Bowness and Joshua Pride. I see the future actors of tomorrow, and it's

just terribly exciting.

I also attended Learning Through the Arts at St. Hubert school last year, a great program, where I saw kids in grade 7 and 8 engaged in Greek mythology by

writing their own plays and developing their own ideas. I saw younger children learning about arts and science through drama, through experiential learning. I know that just recently in our

community, we've signed on about eight artists, including Liz Lott, to teach in our schools in the Learning Through the Arts program.

Before I finish up my time, I really have to talk about one particular teacher in my community, Betty Farris. She has taught music for 34 years and is retiring

next week. She taught at Chippewa for 17 years, and she touched many through her talent and her experience in all the schools that she taught. Every spring there is Maytime Melodies, a great

concert that's put on at Chippewa. She's produced a number of musicians that have gone on to musical careers. A couple years ago for Remembrance Day, her orchestra played at Memorial Gardens, and

there wasn't a dry eye in Memorial Gardens. She has contributed immensely to the lives of students in our community -- in all of our community, the greater community -- through the performances

that we've all been able to enjoy. I won't be able to attend the Chippewa graduation this year so, sadly, I will miss her final concert. I know there won't be a dry eye in the place. I want to wish

Betty Farris all the best in her retirement. I know that her hundreds and hundreds of students join me in doing that, because she is what learning through the arts is all about.

Mr. John Yakabuski (Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke): I'm pleased to join the discussion this morning on Bill 118 from the member for Stoney Creek,

Ms. Mossop. All of this stuff that's been necessary from the partisan side has been covered by my colleague from Oxford and also the member from Trinity-Spadina, and they haven't really left me

enough time to be partisan. So I know the people on the opposite side are going to be disappointed this morning, but I've just got to speak about some things that actually go on in my riding with

regard to the arts, which I do support in the strongest possible way.

I want talk first about the music program at MVDHS. Mark Robbins, the teacher there, is an absolute gem. Both our kids have been in the music program, and I'm

going to tell you, it changes them. Mark's approach to music and life changes students, not just from the perspective of music but from the perspective of how they view the world and how they view

other people in the world. It is a tremendous program they have there.

I want to talk a little about the South of 60 Arts Centre in Barry's Bay. Curator Anya Blake does a tremendous job of bringing in different types of exhibits.

I want to just mention the ones that opened the season this year. One was entitled A World of Textiles, the opening display of the year, a display of fabric materials from over 30 countries, which

was quite fascinating, I am told, as I did not have the opportunity to see it myself; also, Barb Blackstein, a local artist who is becoming somewhat famous, and her husband, Fred, who is already

famous for the tremendous work he does throughout the county in supporting various important causes.

Currently at the South of 60 Arts Centre, there are the works of Boguslaw Mosielski, who is an artist born in Poland. He had been painting for many, many years

and passed away in 2004. It's called Boguslaw Mosielski: A Retrospective. His wife, Elizabeth, is working with the South of 60 Arts Centre to bring that off.

Also, appearing upstairs, is Barney McCaffrey, who is a famous personality throughout the Ottawa Valley, not only as a musician but as an artist, a poet, an

activist and an actor. Barney has covered the gamut and lives in the simplest possible way. In fact, a few years back the McCaffreys lost their home to a fire, and the community got together and

built them a new home. There was no insurance on that home, but the community around Wilno and Barry's Bay area got together, with the help of Keetch's as the contractor and various other groups,

and built them a new home. I know the McCaffreys appreciate that, and it, in only a small way, compares to the contribution that Barney has made to our area.

I also want to talk about the Stone Fence Theatre. When you talk about actors and acting, the Stone Fence Theatre has been around for a number of years and

this year they've gone a step beyond. They're going to have all their performances this year at the Killaloe Lions Hall, which is going to be air-conditioned. The last few years they've been having

them at Our Lady of Holy Angels parish in Brudenell, which, on those hot, hot, hot summer days, can be a little uncomfortable. I have attended many of these performances and I just have to tell you

what a great job Ish Theilheimer, Barry Goldie and the group of actors -- I don't think I have time to mention them all -- have done over the years with such productions as Reflections of a

Century, which was a retrospective of the Eganville Leader's first 50 years, as depicted in their book -- for the first 100 years, but they only did the first half of it in the play; Al Capone's

Hideout, which was on last year -- fantastic; Looking Back at Mac was a story about Mac Beattie, a famous Ottawa Valley musician; and this year they've got Here to Stay!, a musical about rural rage

and survival by Ish Theilheimer, and it's kind of a sequel to Reflections of a Century; Upstream to Basin Depot, by Barry Goldie and Lee LaFont -- a musical recalling shanty days along the

headwaters of the Bonnechere River in Algonquin Park. That should be fantastic. The third new production this year: Barn Dance!, produced by Ish Theilheimer, a musical tribute to the stars of

old-time Canadian country music. I can tell you it's going to be fantastic when I look at some of the people who are going be performing there, including Louis Schryer, who is a world-champion

fiddler. He's going to be performing there this year. So I want to tell you, there's lots of stuff with regard to the arts that goes on in my riding of Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke. There are some

fantastic people.

I will agree with the member from Trinity-Spadina that -- I didn't catch every word, but something to the effect that these people "ain't doing it for the

money," like they say; they're doing it because they love what they do and they love what it means to the people out there who have the privilege and the pleasure of being able to partake in what

they offer at their performances.

I wish I had become a lot more tuned in to the arts when I was in school. My children are much more interested in that than I was. Unfortunately, I can't tell

you what I was more interested in, because that might be unparliamentary. However, I wish I had spent more time in the arts when I was a little younger, to gain an appreciation at a younger age. I

am learning that as I speak, and I want to thank all of those people who do make that dedicated effort to make our lives better by enriching us with the arts.

Ms. Kathleen O. Wynne (Don Valley West): I'm happy to support Bill 118. The member for Stoney Creek is a sincere and diligent -- persistent,

even -- advocate of arts and education. She has done a terrific job in our government promoting this issue.

What I want to say is that she's not alone as a representative of the Ministry of Culture, along with her minister. The education ministry is a partner in

promoting arts and education.

I want to speak to some of the comments that the member for Trinity-Spadina made, and I want to knowledge him, not for his uncharacteristically negative

comments this morning, but for his role as a school trustee on the former Toronto Board of Education. He was a school trustee at a time when arts education flourished in this city, and in fact

there were many models that have been looked at and have been copied across the province that were developed in the city of Toronto.

I have to say, the member for Oxford, when he was talking about what we were or were not doing -- it was a little rich, from this side of the House, to be

listening to his voice on this subject now, quoting from People for Education, who have developed a tracking document that I was part of developing, when he was in office and I sat in that gallery

and I didn't hear the member for Oxford talking about the benefits of arts and education at that time. I didn't hear his leader, who was in the private sector at that time, bemoaning the fact that

we were having, in this province, to cut teachers; we were removing funding for education across this province; instruments were going unremedied; instruments were not being bought; we didn't have

itinerant teachers; we didn't have music specialists in our classrooms. That was result of the previous government's legacy.

What we're trying desperately to do now -- the Minister of Culture and the Minister of Education -- is build back the supports that were taken out of the

system during that period. In the last two years, we have invested in specialist teachers. Over the four years, there will be 2,000 more specialist teachers back into the system. That's the

systemic approach to delivering arts in the curriculum.

There are things that we can do in conjunction with the Minister of Culture, and some of the people here today come in from the outside and they deliver

terrific programs in the schools, but we have to have those building blocks as part of the curriculum, and the curriculum is there. But we need the teachers to deliver the curriculum so that they

can benefit from all the wonderful programs that people from the outside bring in. Those specialist teachers who are going back into the system as a result of our government's investments are the

critical systemic approaches that have to be in place, and we will continue to do that.

Finally, two things, quickly: I wouldn't be here if it weren't for arts and education. My mother was born in Nassau, Bahamas. She was sent up to school here,

and she was an orphan. The thing that kept her going was music in her school. She went on to the Royal Conservatory, became a singer, and that was what kept her interest. I think we have to be very

careful not to make arguments about how music helps math and that's why we should teach music. Yes, learning music helps you when you learn math, but maybe it's the other way around. Maybe learning

math helps us to understand music, and we need to turn that paradigm on its head.

Finally, I want to quote Winston Churchill during World War II. He was resisting calls for cuts to the arts spending with the words, "God, no. What the hell

have we been fighting for?"

Mr. John Wilkinson (Perth-Middlesex): I want to commend all the speakers for entering into this rather vigorous debate. As the MPP for

Perth-Middlesex, and representing my hometown of Stratford, I can tell you that the arts are integral to our community. I think we are the cultural capital of this province, and it's not just

because of the Stratford Festival.

But when I look at all of the wonderful actors who now grace the stage of the Stratford Festival, they are Canadian. Though over 50 years ago, there were many

people who came over from England to help start our festival, it has formed the basis of an amazing theatrical revolution in this country of ours, of Canada, where we have created our own

talent.

The thing that has made that happen, I think, is the fact the festival has always understood the need for us to create, to invent our new audiences. I want to

particularly thank Pat Quigley at the Stratford Festival, and the education department. They've worked so hard with all our school boards despite the travails we had to face in some years when the

arts were denigrated in this province. The Stratford Festival, our boards of education and our teachers have worked together to make that unique experience, that place where our children discover a

new part of their humanity.

I'm so happy that our children are visiting today from one of the schools in Ontario, because this debate is about your future and about what type of society

we are going to have. I'm proud to be part of a government that is re-engaging with our arts community, to say that they are valued, that they are part, that we are ensuring that is part of our

curriculum.

I want to thank my friend the member for Stoney Creek, who is the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Culture, for her passion about the need to make

arts and education the same thing. What are we teaching our children if we are not teaching them about their humanity? And what greater way is there for them to understand their humanity than

through the arts?

Mr. Dave Levac (Brant): A wonderful opportunity, to speak to Bill 118. I just preface: As an educator for 25 years, a principal in my last few

years, I can attest to the extreme importance of the arts in a child's education. But I also want to make sure that this point is understood: It's not just about children. It's about the adults who

are surrounding the children. It's about the adults who model for our children. The arts are, and the arts always will be, who we are as human beings.

I don't think there is any argument around the House, and I will make it very clear that these will not be partisan comments.

I want to talk about what my experience has been as an educator. What are the arts? The arts are learning and creating through and about the arts. The arts are

introduced in specific subject matter into the school curriculum -- that's one area -- but what's important is that the arts are also used to teach curriculum and apply to the whole person, to the

whole child, to the whole spirit of who a person is. If you do not have the arts in you as a human being, you don't have a whole human being.

That's the essence of what we're trying to celebrate, and if you understand that celebration, that's what this bill is going to give us an opportunity to do:

to focus on what that celebration is, on who we are as human beings. So I laud the member, I appreciate the member and I say to the member, thank you for making us celebrate for at least a week who

we are as a whole human being.

There are empirical reasons, and I know they've been spoken of. There's a link between arts education and general academic success, specifically in literacy

and numeracy. This was an empirical study: Students scored significantly higher -- 11% higher -- in computation and estimation after three years of sustained art programs in schools that were

compared to control school studies. That's evidence; that's empirical evidence. That's telling us who we are as a whole human being.

Standardized test scores over five years for students in the arts program rose 49% in mathematics, 63% in reading and 39% in writing. This kind of comment is

for those people who want to calculate -- left-side brain/right-side brain stuff. So if you're a person who wants to use that calculated side, this is what the arts does for that side of the brain:

It makes us a whole person. To remove the arts in any way, shape or form from who we are as human beings is tantamount to criminal. It's not an acknowledgement of who we are as human beings.

By the way, it is very clear -- there have been studies done in the business world of top executives, of the type of people they want in their upper and middle

management, and do you know the first thing they said? A liberal arts education. That's who they want.

Interjection: A Liberal.

Mr. Levac: They want a liberal arts education -- no, no, no. Non-partisan, a small-l liberal arts education. And why? Because they're critical

thinkers. They're analytical in their mind. They feed both the left brain and the right brain, and you get the whole person. What can you do but be more successful when you use the entire, whole

person in making your decisions in the business world? That's who they said they want -- people who provide a liberal arts basic foundation in their education. Only then do you move on to the other

disciplines. But they want people with arts.

It's a challenge to all of us. It's not just in the schools. It's about who we are in our communities. There isn't a member in here who hasn't stood up at any

time, during my time here, who hasn't bragged and told us about the good things that are happening in their communities involving the arts. This tells us again that this type of bill is asking us

to celebrate, focus and celebrate again who we are in the arts. It's a challenge.

In private members' time I've stood in this place time and time again and said, "This isn't about partisan politics; it's about finding the best in who we are

as people. It's about finding the best possible legislation that we can to make this a better place." And what better way to do that than to celebrate what the arts are in making us a whole

person?

It is a challenge; it will be a challenge for every single government of the day. Not Liberal, not Conservative, not NDP, nor any other party, but who the

government of the day is collectively, both sides of the House, of who we want to be as human beings. Do we want to be seen as understanding who we are as a whole person, or do we want to say we

can fragment it all and put it into silos? I say no. I say support the bill.

The Deputy Speaker: Ms. Mossop, you have two minutes to respond.

Ms. Mossop: I want to thank the members from Oxford, Trinity-Spadina, Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke, Don Valley West, Perth-Middlesex and Brant

for speaking in support of this bill. You have to wonder sometimes, though, why you do these things when you get that big push back. You know it's going to happen. It doesn't matter what you try to

do in here, you're going to get that political push back, and I didn't want to go there. But let's face it: The arts were starved into near non-existence in our schools under your government. And

you, sir, thank you very much for the things that you bring up. I agree with you; the Minister of Culture in many jurisdictions is a bigwig. Not here in North America, not very often. If I were

king, I would make it different. I would agree with you on that.

I have to say, though, that I am proud of what our government has done: $146 million a year to restore specialist teachers in our schools over four years, up

to 2,000. We're rebuilding. We have introduced legislation to have alternative diplomas in our secondary schools, one of which will likely be an arts diploma. We have success teachers. All the

studies show that smaller class sizes are necessary. We do have to incorporate that. We have put learning through the arts back into the schools and we continue that program. We have Artsaround, a

new program that we have funded as a pilot. We have arts education, which we're tweaking through the Trillium Foundation, adding some in that area as well.

The arts education partnership initiative was referenced. This is a matching program, but this is how we get the cultural organizations to come to the table

and get into the schools. As well, we have Arts Education Week, which has been subversively timed by me, so that these organizations have an invitation to go to the school boards, who make a lot of

the decisions about how our money is spent, at the beginning of the school year and say, "Let's talk arts ed. Let's talk now," and get ready for arts ed week in October and then do a celebration

during Education Week in May.

It's a little subversive maybe, but I think it's well worth it because we need the cultural organizations and we need the artists in the schools because they

are the fire that ignites the spark. Thank you.

The Deputy Speaker: The time for private members' public business has expired.

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): We'll deal first with ballot item number 43, standing in the name of Mrs. Elliott.

Mrs. Elliott has moved private members' notice of motion number 19.

Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry?

All those in favour, say "aye."

All those opposed, say "nay."

In my opinion, the nays have it. The motion is lost.

ARTS EDUCATION WEEK ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR LA SEMAINE DE

L'ÉDUCATION ARTISTIQUE

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): We shall now deal with ballot item number 44 standing in the name of Ms. Mossop.

Ms. Mossop has moved second reading of Bill 118.

Interjection.

The Deputy Speaker: I've got control of this. Don't worry.

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

Ms. Jennifer F. Mossop (Stoney Creek): I would ask that Bill 118 be referred to the standing committee on social policy.

The Deputy Speaker: Agreed? Agreed.

All matters dealing with private members' public business having been dealt with, I do now leave the chair, and the House will resume at 1:30 of the clock.

The House recessed from 1158 to 1330.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

FIESTA WEEK

Mr. Jerry J. Ouellette (Oshawa): This Sunday, June 18, Father's Day, the community of Oshawa will kick off its 34th annual cultural festival

known as Fiesta Week with a parade of floats and marching bands, followed by the fiesta concert and six days of international pavilion displays.

Fiesta Week is best described as a taste of Durham, a week-long multicultural celebration that gives residents of the region an opportunity to experience

European, Asian and Caribbean cultures and foods without leaving our hometown. Fiesta Week brings the people of Oshawa together to celebrate and appreciate our city's rich multicultural heritage.

It provides thousands and thousands of people with an occasion to examine our community's diverse culinary, dancing and musical talents from a wide variety of ethnic backgrounds. Various cultural

communities in Oshawa operate pavilions highlighting their respective cultures across the city, including Lviv, Dnipro, Odessa, Roma, Club Carib, Loreley, Belgrade, Budapest, Krakow, Greek,

Portuguese, Philippines and Poznan, to name but a few.

The Oshawa Folk Arts Council is a voluntary, non-profit community organization that oversees all aspects of the annual Fiesta Week festivities. I would like to

personally thank and congratulate all the dedicated volunteers with the Oshawa Folk Arts Council, who work diligently throughout the year to make Fiesta Week the great success it is. I would also

like to thank all the wonderful members of the various cultural organizations for the many hours they contribute towards Fiesta Week. Finally, I wish to invite all members of the House and everyone

in Ontario to visit Oshawa and participate in one of Ontario's premier summer festivals, Fiesta Week.

RIDING OF STORMONT-DUNDAS-CHARLOTTENBURGH

Mr. Jim Brownell (Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh): It is my privilege to serve the riding of Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh as it begins a

renaissance that is transforming for the better all aspects of its community: health care, infrastructure, access, you name it. In conjunction with community leaders and indeed all the residents of

the riding, this government has been working to address all the issues neglected by previous governments.

Since January, I have made numerous statements here in this House concerning the issues of my riding and asked some 10 questions about how this government is

addressing those issues. The results of all this advocacy are apparent in what has been done, with incredibly beneficial funding announcements and construction on such projects as the St. Joseph's

Continuing Care Centre in Cornwall. It is evident in what is to come with the soon-to-commence repairs to the walls surrounding the St. Andrew's cemetery, burial place of Ontario's first Premier,

John Sandfield Macdonald. Just today, it was great news when the Minister of Agriculture gave support to the Seaway Grain Processors in my riding of $6 million for the construction of their

plant.

There is more good news in store for my riding, and I certainly look forward to being the bearer of this news over the coming months. On behalf of my

constituents, I know I send a sincere thank you to Premier Dalton McGuinty for his visionary leadership and all the cabinet ministers who have made a dedication and a commitment to my riding of

Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh.

ASSISTANCE TO FARMERS

Mr. Ted Arnott (Waterloo-Wellington): Two and a half months ago, I wrote the Premier an open letter to tell him that his provincial budget

failed to provide the level of support for agriculture that is necessary to sustain it. Today, it appears that the Premier is still indifferent to the plight of Ontario's farm families.

Through this year's Waterloo-Wellington questionnaire, I've surveyed my constituents, and hundreds of them gave me advice on agriculture. Here are the

responses. They've said that the government needs to start listening, understanding and supporting our farm families. How can the McGuinty Liberal government continue to ignore 25-year-low

commodity prices, increased regulatory burdens, heavier compliance costs, rising input costs and the devastating loss of equity because of the US border being closed to Canadian beef?

Last week, the Ontario Cattlemen's Association joined us here at Queen's Park, making their case to MPPs. I had a follow-up meeting in my constituency office

with this group on Friday. The cattlemen's association appreciate the federal government's effort to get on side and be supportive through changes to the Canadian agriculture income support

program. Now they're rightly asking when the provincial government will commit to matching the federal announcement in the traditional 60-40 cost-sharing formula. They've also asked the Minister of

Agriculture to support compensation for the loss incurred when selling cull cows, similar to the support enjoyed by Quebec farmers.

My constituents want this provincial government to wake up and get behind our farm families in this time of urgency.

HAMILTON GAY PRIDE WEEK

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): I rise this afternoon in recognition of the 10th annual Hamilton Pride Festival. As a downtown city

councillor when I was there, I was very proud to have supported pride in its early days. Despite the setbacks encountered over the years, some fairly recent and painful, the LGBT community is a

strong and significant part of Hamilton. Kicking off last Sunday with the raising of the rainbow flag at city hall, celebrations continue tonight at the third annual gala pride awards. I want to

congratulate the recipients of the 2006 pride business, citizen, group and youth of the year awards. I will be celebrating with you at Saturday's parade.

Pride in Hamilton and around the world centres on the fight for equality for the LGBT community. Despite same-sex marriage finally being legal in Canada, it's

still under threat. Homophobia and heterosexism still exist. We all need to be educated not just on tolerance but acceptance of the LGBT community.

I say to the community in Hamilton, you are leaders in the movement for full and real equality. Pride week celebrates you and the contributions you've made to

our community, and those contributions are many. I am very, very proud, as an elected representative, to call you my neighbours, my friends and my allies. Today I wanted to take the opportunity to

make sure in this Legislature I could congratulate all of the activists in the LGBT community in Hamilton on pride day. Congratulations on 10 successful years of pride in Hamilton.

DEFIBRILLATION LEGISLATION

Mr. Bruce Crozier (Essex): Speaker, you and my colleagues in this House would know that just recently my private member's Bill 71 received

second reading and is now in committee. That's the Heart Defibrillator Use Civil Liability Act, 2006.

Since that time, I have met with a lovely couple, a very strong couple, by the name of John and Dorothy McEachern. They were the parents of an 11-year-old boy

from Barrie who had a heart that was so big that when he heard of the use of defibrillators in arenas and how they can save lives, he wrote to Don Cherry and asked Don's help to promote the use of

defibrillators. Since that time, young Chase has died. So I'm proposing, and will propose when this bill comes before committee, a motion that will change the name of the bill to the Chase

McEachern Heart Defibrillator Use Civil Liability Act, 2006. I hope the House leaders, I hope the members of the committee and in fact this whole Legislature will support the bill and will support

the bill that is in Chase's name. I would appreciate that support.

FABRY'S DISEASE

Mrs. Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener-Waterloo): It was almost three years ago, in the fall of 2003, that I wrote my first letter to Health

Minister George Smitherman regarding treatment for Fabry's disease on behalf of Donna Strauss, whose husband, John, was suffering from the disease. Since then, I have risen in this House on at

least 17 occasions to call on the minister to act to provide life-saving treatment for those with Fabry's, without any action from the minister to do so, despite the fact that 30 other countries in

the world, including the United States, were doing so.

Finally, yesterday an announcement from federal Health Minister Tony Clement told us that the federal government would be participating with the provincial and

territorial governments and the drug companies for a study of the disease, to allow those with Fabry's disease to gain access to treatment.

Today I want to congratulate the patients, their families and all the others throughout the province of Ontario who have worked so diligently and sent so many

letters to the Minister of Health to gain funding for the treatment of Fabry's, brave people such as Donna, Julia and Lee Strauss, Darren Nesbitt, Rick Sgroi, Carolyn Augur and Bill Taylor. These

people are our heroes. It has been a long road for them. I was honoured to work with them to bring provincial and federal pressure and attention to this issue.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Mr. John Wilkinson (Perth-Middlesex): I rise today to announce with pride multi-year funding for Listowel Memorial Hospital in my riding of

Perth-Middlesex. Listowel Memorial serves the community of North Perth in my riding, but also some communities in the townships of Mapleton and Minto, just outside of Perth-Middlesex.

For the second time in the province's history, every Ontario hospital will now know how much it's getting over the next three years instead of just one. For

the next three years, Listowel Memorial can count on more than $1 million in additional funding. The hospital will receive some $542,000 additional in this fiscal year, $275,000 in the next, and

$273,000 in the year after that.

Margret Comack, the CEO of Listowel Memorial, was pleased with the three-year commitment and the ability for the hospital to predict and plan for health care

programs more effectively over time. That's exactly why we're doing it. It's only reasonable that hospitals have a predictable source of income for the near future, yet past governments did not

commit to stable funding over multiple years. Our multi-year approach allows hospitals to make informed, sustainable decisions to meet the needs of their communities and their patients. Multi-year

funding is just the latest investment in hospitals across the whole province.

I also had a chance to see first-hand the redevelopment construction underway at Listowel Memorial. It's great to watch the province's $7.8-million investment

in this much-needed project moving forward on budget. These are just some of the latest examples of the McGuinty government's commitment to building a health system that keeps rural Ontarians

healthy, reducing wait times and providing better access --

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

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

Ms. Kathleen O. Wynne (Don Valley West): I rise to share some really important news for Ontario health care professionals and, more to the

point, the people of Ontario and their families.

Yesterday the McGuinty government announced an investment of over $20 million in expanded team-based education programs for a wide array of health

professionals. In the past, that kind of government support has only been available to our doctors and nurses, but with this $20-million investment, Ontario is now providing expanded education and

support to other health professionals such as physiotherapists, lab technologists and occupational therapists. In fact, we're supporting a wider range of health care professionals than any other

province in the country.

Here's what this means to Ontario families: It means that when we, our children or our parents get sick and need care, all the health professionals attending

to us will be better trained to work as a team and able to provide more comprehensive care.

While the McGuinty government is focused on providing top-quality health care for Ontario families, the Conservative Party has another plan for our health

system. John Tory has already given us a preview of that plan: He swore to cut $2.5 billion from Ontario's health care budget. That can't be done and maintain high-quality health care. We are

building circles of care with patients at the centre.

MUNICIPAL FINANCES

Mr. Lou Rinaldi (Northumberland): On June 9, the Eastern Ontario Wardens' Caucus held their semi-annual joint session in the town of Blue

Mountains. Wardens met to discuss questions of mutual concern. I understand that the Leader of the Opposition, John Tory, attended part of the meeting and spoke to the group.

Among the topics discussed was equalization. Here is what Renfrew county warden and Eastern Ontario Wardens' Caucus chair Bob Sweet had to say about this

government's leadership on the issue: "The Premier's drive to get a fair and reasonable deal on equalization, one that will address the fiscal imbalance, has our wholehearted support."

Mr. Sweet and his fellow wardens realize that fixing the fiscal imbalance between Ottawa and Queen's Park will certainly have a positive impact on

municipalities in our province.

This government values and respects our municipal partners. We are unwavering in our position on equalization because we know that added resources are needed

to address many pressing concerns in communities throughout the province.

I am pleased that wardens in my region recognize this reality and have expressed their support for the Premier's continued efforts to get a fair deal for

Ontario.

I meet with these wardens on a regular basis, and I fully support what they are trying to do. We are trying to achieve that balance, with ambulance funding and

with public health uploading -- something they never got in the past.

VISITOR

Mr. Brad Duguid (Scarborough Centre): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I would like members to welcome to the government gallery a friend of

mine, and one of Canada's leading recording artists and actors. Maestro Fresh Wes Williams is here to watch what we are doing today.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

MUNICIPAL STATUTE LAW

AMENDMENT ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 MODIFIANT DES LOIS

CONCERNANT LES MUNICIPALITÉS

Mr. Gerretsen moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 130,

An Act to amend various Acts in relation to municipalities / Projet de loi 130, Loi modifiant diverses lois en ce qui concerne les

municipalités.

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

The minister may wish to make a brief statement.

Hon. John Gerretsen (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): I will make the statement during ministerial statements, Speaker. Thank

you.

MASTER'S COLLEGE AND

SEMINARY ACT, 2006

Mr. Delaney moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill Pr28,

An Act respecting Master's College and Seminary.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Shall the motion carry? Carried.

The bill is therefore referred to the standing committee on regulations and private bills.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT LEGISLATION

Hon. John Gerretsen (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): Today I'm pleased to introduce the proposed Municipal Statute Law Amendment

Act, 2006. This is the McGuinty government's latest initiative to support the fine and excellent work of local governments across Ontario. Our goal is to give municipal governments the respect they

deserve and the tools and instruments they need to meet the challenges of today's competitive economy.

We want to enable municipal governments to become more accountable, responsible partners with the provincial and federal governments for years to come. The

proposed Municipal Statute Law Amendment Act, 2006, contains our government's proposed amendments to the Municipal Act.

We worked with our municipal partners to identify the legislative reforms that could provide local governments with more tools and greater flexibility to

creatively serve their residents. During the review of the Municipal Act, the Association of Municipalities of Ontario told us, and we agree, that "if the municipal role is to evolve in the years

ahead ... that if Ontario municipalities are going to deliver on behalf their communities ... then they need greater responsibility, greater authority and greater accountability."

Our government has been taking progressive steps, including the Stronger City of Toronto for a Stronger Ontario Act, 2006, to provide municipalities with the

tools and flexibility they need to more effectively serve their residents. Rather than being prescriptive, as some of the present act still is, we are proposing that the act give broad, permissive

powers that would let local councils have more control over their destiny and the destiny of their residents.

Let me give you some examples of the possibilities of these broad powers. If our proposed legislation were passed, a municipality would have the flexibility to

pass bylaws regarding matters ranging from public safety to the municipality's economic, social and environmental well-being. A council would have more flexibility to pass bylaws to deal with the

financial management of the municipality, its accountability and the transparency of its operations. A municipality could better protect its affordable housing stock by passing bylaws to control

the demolition of rental housing or its conversion to condominiums. A municipality would have broader authority to undertake economic development so as to become more competitive and its citizens

more prosperous.

We want all Ontarians -- in our north, in our rural communities and in our urban centres -- to live in and enjoy thriving communities where they can look

forward to a promising future. One of the steps in our government's plan to attain that go