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

November 3, 2004

38th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2004-Nov-03 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Wednesday 3 November 2004 Mercredi 3 novembre 2004

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

ROBYN WAITE

PARKS IN MARKHAM

GREENBELT

FLOYD HONEY

VETERANS

HOSPITAL FUNDING

TAKE OUR KIDS TO WORK DAY

CONTAMINATED PROPERTIES

GREENBELT

VISITORS

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

EDUCATION STATUTE LAW

AMENDMENT ACT (TEACHERS' ASSISTANTS), 2004 /

LOI DE 2004 MODIFIANT DES LOIS

EN CE QUI A TRAIT À L'ÉDUCATION

(AIDES-ENSEIGNANTS)

LABOUR RELATIONS STATUTE LAW

AMENDMENT ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004 MODIFIANT DES LOIS

CONCERNANT LES RELATIONS

DE TRAVAIL

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION

AND HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT

AMENDMENT ACT (HASTINGS

AND PRINCE EDWARD REGIMENT

MEMORIAL HIGHWAY), 2004 /

LOI DE 2004 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR L'AMÉNAGEMENT DES VOIES

PUBLIQUES ET DES TRANSPORTS EN

COMMUN (ROUTE COMMÉMORATIVE

HASTINGS AND PRINCE EDWARD

REGIMENT)

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

LONG-TERM CARE

LABOUR RELATIONS /

RELATIONS DE TRAVAIL

LONG-TERM CARE

LABOUR RELATIONS

PEACEKEEPERS' DAY /

JOUR DES GARDIENS DE LA PAIX

ORAL QUESTIONS

HOSPITAL FUNDING

FUNDRAISING

YORK CENTRAL HOSPITAL

AUTISM SERVICES

HOSPITAL FUNDING

CANCER TREATMENT

PENSION PLANS

CHILD CARE

HOSPITAL FUNDING

TENANT PROTECTION

LABOUR RELATIONS

PETITIONS

HEART MEDICATION

GO TRANSIT SERVICE

CHIROPRACTIC SERVICES

STUDENT SAFETY

CHIROPRACTIC SERVICES

GASOLINE PRICES

OPTOMETRISTS

LESLIE M. FROST CENTRE

VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS

LESLIE M. FROST CENTRE

HEALTH CARE SERVICES

HEALTH CARE

CHIROPRACTIC SERVICES

OPPOSITION DAY

HOSPITAL FUNDING

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

ROBYN WAITE

Mr John Yakabuski (Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke): The outlook wasn't brilliant for the Raiders team that day. They were down by 19 points with

just one half left to play. No, Mighty Casey did not save the day, but Robyn Waite did.

On October 15, the Renfrew Collegiate Institute junior football team trailed the Smiths Falls Redmen by a score of 20 to 1 at halftime. In the second half, Robyn

Waite got the call from Coach Ed Oegema. With the composure to stand in the pocket, and the vision and experience to evaluate what the defence was doing, Robyn was able to rally the Raiders by

compiling 300 yards of offence and secure a 20-20 tie.

Perhaps this comeback does not seem that remarkable; however, it is remarkable, since 15-year-old Robyn is 5 feet, 4 inches tall and weighs only 115 pounds. Oh,

and did I mention that Robyn is a girl? Yes, Robyn, who honed her skills while quarterbacking in touch and flag football, is one of the first, if not the first, females to play quarterback in high

school tackle football in Canada.

Congratulations to Coach Oegema, offensive coordinator Bill Currie and the entire Raiders team. Congratulations to Robyn, who plays for the love of the game.

With her determination and commitment, I am sure Robyn will be successful at whatever she chooses to do.

PARKS IN MARKHAM

Mr Tony C. Wong (Markham): I am pleased to recognize a new addition to the many wonderful green spaces that Markham provides, with the opening

of White's Hill Park on October 31. The new park will provide children and adults alike with a space for recreation -- a place to kick the soccer ball around, jump rope or perhaps take a brisk walk

while enjoying the colours of the fall leaves.

Parks play a necessary role in our neighbourhoods. They provide a meeting place and space for recreation, and encourage a sense of community. It is vital,

particularly in urban areas, that we ensure the continuance of green space, not only to improve our air quality but our heart rates as well.

I'm pleased to say that the town of Markham provides a number of parks filled with pathways, playgrounds, tennis courts and hills for tobogganing. With over 600

acres of green space, the town of Markham provides an opportunity to build strong, healthy communities by promoting and encouraging recreational activities.

By engaging in physical activity, Ontarians will not only become more fit and healthy but will improve their quality of life. The McGuinty government is

assisting communities in becoming more physically active by investing $5 million in Active 2010, a program to promote and encourage the benefits of physical activity. I encourage people of all ages

to take advantage of Markham's new White's Hill Park and get active today

GREENBELT

Mr Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln): I'm pleased to welcome Lincoln Mayor Bill Hodgson, Grape Growers of Ontario executive director Debbie Zimmerman,

chair Ray Duc, and Len Troup, among others, in the media studio today bringing forward their plans for a more responsible greenbelt strategy that will actually support farmers, residents and

municipalities in the Niagara Peninsula and hopefully in other parts of Ontario as well.

They make a great point: They're very concerned that if the greenbelt is implemented improperly, it will create new pressures on farmers and force small towns to

reduce services and/or dramatically increase property tax rates.

These findings should really come as no surprise to my colleague the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Farmers, mayors and taxpayers, through the public

hearings, all told him that while preserving green space is a good idea, to be successful it must be accompanied by a plan to support those impacted by it.

Last June, I released a responsible greenbelt strategy as advice to the minister, a strategy that supports municipalities whose future growth is frozen by the

current plan. It recognized that if you want to save the farmland, you need to save the farmer and support our farmers across Ontario, and incorporated an important transportation plan for Niagara,

the mid-peninsula corridor, to move some of that pressure from the tender fruit lands to south and southwest Niagara.

Unfortunately, in the estimates committee when I asked the Minister of Municipal Affairs if he had a plan to support our municipalities and where the money was,

he said, "No, we do not." We had the same sad answer for agriculture.

They need to act for a responsible greenbelt plan.

FLOYD HONEY

Mr Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): I rise today to salute the life of Floyd Honey. Floyd Honey was known to us in East York, in Crescent Town

and in Toronto. He was a remarkable man who began his career in China, helping the peasants of that country to rebuild their lives. He was forced to leave in 1951, when the Maoists took over and

foreigners were not as welcome as they were before.

He came to Canada and worked for both the Canadian and World Councils of Churches until his retirement, but the reality is that he never, ever retired. He spent

the remaining time of his life fighting for causes like ending homelessness in Ontario and in Canada, and advocating and working for decent housing for all.

In July 2002, on his way home from a homeless vigil at the age of 86, he walked most of the way, got a little tired and decided to take the subway.

Unfortunately, the subway train came and blew his hat off. He reached down to get it and was fatally injured by the subway train.

People in East York were shocked. They could not believe that one of our icons, one of our heroes, had died so suddenly, and they committed themselves to do

something about it. His daughter started a walk, called the Floyd Honey Walking Home. A couple of weeks ago, on October 24, 300 people showed up. They raised over $50,000 for homelessness in

Toronto, and that money is going to the Touchstone Youth Centre in East York.

People in East York remember him. We remember him not only in his death, but his memory lives on in the great works he did.

VETERANS

Mr Michael A. Brown (Algoma-Manitoulin): On November 1, I was in attendance at two important and significant ceremonies. On Monday morning, I

joined the Lieutenant Governor, the Honourable James Bartleman; Chief Nicole Peletier-Southwind; Deputy Grand Chief Nelson Toulouse; legion members from Blind River and Elliott Lake; MP Brent St

Denis; members of the Serpent River First Nation, and members of the broader community in remembering the aboriginal veterans who distinguished themselves in the service of Canada.

The master of ceremonies for the ceremonies for the event was Carol Shawana of the Ontario Provincial Police. The Genaabahjing Youth Drum under the leadership of

Rob Essex and the OPP Aboriginal Drum provided a fitting context for the ceremony.

The Lieutenant Governor and the assembly honoured surviving veterans Art Meawasige, Scott Johnston and Albert Owl for their services to Canada and freedom.

Later that day I joined Chief Franklin Paibomsai of the Whitefish River First Nation, the community, legion members from Manitoulin and Espanola, and veterans

including Art McGregor, Ontario Regional Chief Charles Fox and Brent St Denis in dedicating a new monument to veterans.

The monument is situated to face west and is engraved with the names of veterans who served Canada in the great wars. The monument utilizes a striking natural

setting to inspire both awe and reverence for all those who have saved freedom in our nation.

Chi Meegwetch.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Mr John R. Baird (Nepean-Carleton): At the outset of my remarks, I'd like to recognize the presence in the gallery of two residents of Ottawa

who are visiting Queen's Park today: Graham Bird and his daughter Alana Bird. I'd like to wish them a special welcome.

Later today we will debate an important resolution. This is an opportunity for all of us as MPPs to stand up and vote. The resolution before us today says that

we "call upon the government,

"To guarantee that no nurses will be laid off and no hospital beds will be closed over the course of the mandate of the McGuinty government."

This is an opportunity for the band of Liberal MPPs opposite to stand one by one and be counted.

Hospitals right across Ontario are putting in proposals to this minister to fire nurses and to close hospital beds. Our campaign here in the official opposition,

under the leadership of John Tory, is to save the nurses' jobs, to keep waiting times down and to not see beds close.

We have had a sorry record in this House on the government side since the last election. We brought forward a resolution on the opposition side to stand up and

defend the Ottawa Hospital, and not one Ottawa-area MPP dared to stand up and speak on behalf of the Ottawa Hospital asking for a raise, an increase less than the rate of inflation.

Now we have London, where every London and southwestern Ontario government member has been missing in action. We have not seen them standing up and defending the

London Health Sciences Centre. Today they have an opportunity once again to do that.

TAKE OUR KIDS TO WORK DAY

Mr Tim Peterson (Mississauga South): It's a pleasure to rise to a subdued House. Today is Take Our Kids to Work Day. This great program, which

is celebrating its 10th anniversary --

Applause.

Mr Peterson: Thank you. Today this great program is celebrating its 10th anniversary. As the name suggests, this program allows grade 9 students

to come into the workplace and experience first-hand what it's like to be in the working world. It allows our children to experience the importance of applying the education and skills training

they are learning in school. It further opens their minds to the working world and the options and opportunities that await them.

It is expected that hundreds of thousands of grade 9 students will go to more than 75,000 workplaces across our great country and province. In every province and

territory, they will experience a huge variety of career options.

So, on behalf of this House, we would like to thank all the workplaces across Ontario that are participating in this great program for their efforts to open

their doors to the minds of our students. And on behalf of this House, I'd like to send kudos across the province to all the students who are participating in this great program.

CONTAMINATED PROPERTIES

Mr Dave Levac (Brant): I understand that an interministerial committee has been struck to deal with the serious issue of properties escheated to

the crown, some of which are contaminated and dangerous. Although it is a positive step in dealing with this important issue, it is not at all helpful for the awful situation in the riding of

Brant.

Just this week, a devastating fire broke out at the former Crown Electric property in Brantford. This is the third such fire this year. Thankfully, no one was

hurt in the blaze, but residents of the area, indeed of all of Brant, are demanding action from the province. I am too.

The city of Brantford seized the property yesterday to protect the nearby school, church and hospital and to shield the dozens of homes in the area from

potential disaster. The city has spent a great deal of money to clean up after disasters like this one, but still more must be done.

The Brantford site and others like it can pose a serious danger to people not just in my riding but across the province. Many of these sites remain vacant

because they can't be sold, which simply increases the danger to the surrounding community. I know the public guardian and trustee does not manage the lands escheated to the crown and is not able

to take responsibility for them, but clearly, the province must be a partner.

I welcome the news that our government is taking some action to deal with the serious issue that sites like Brantford present. I challenge all of us to resolve

these concerns before somebody gets seriously hurt.

GREENBELT

Mr Kim Craitor (Niagara Falls): I'd like to talk about two things that Ontarians are proud of: Ontario's natural heritage and its fine wines.

Through our government's vision of the greenbelt, we are preserving and protecting both. Our greenbelt protection plan will help protect forever a total of 1.8 million acres, an area the size of

Algonquin Park.

The greenbelt will help stop urban sprawl on our most precious specialty croplands that grow the foods we eat, like the Niagara tender fruit and grape lands.

The Niagara Peninsula is the home of 66 wineries. Niagara makes up Canada's most celebrated grape- and wine-producing region. Niagara wines are making a splash

on the national and international stage. By creating a greenbelt, we are ensuring the continued success of Niagara's grape lands.

Don't just take it from me; take it from Ray Duc, grape grower and owner of Forrer Farms: "The fact that the urbanization of our unique agricultural lands will

be prevented is great news and it will help produce more VQA wines."

As Debbie Zimmerman, CEO of the grape and tender fruit growers, said, "This is a crucial issue, not only for the wine growers but for the future of tourism,

agriculture, transportation and economic growth in the Niagara region generally."

VISITORS

Mr Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I just wanted members to recognize a few guests here today: Rachel Kelly from

beautiful, bucolic Dunnville; Brittany Richards and Jordan Fairclough, niece and nephew of Sonia Richards, one of my favourite people from the good old days at the Ministry of Culture, Tourism and

Recreation and the Ministry of Consumer and Business Services as part of grade 9 Take Our Kids to Work Day.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): That wasn't a point of order, but let's listen to this point of order.

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I'm very pleased to bring to the attention of the House, in the centre of the

Speaker's gallery, a young woman by the name of Kendra Wharton, part of Take Our Kids to Work Day, a very important person in the riding of Toronto Centre-Rosedale. She is accompanied by a visitor

to Toronto Centre-Rosedale, a former member of the Legislature, John Snobelen.

The Speaker: Another point of order? Let me hear this one.

Ms Laurie Scott (Haliburton-Victoria-Brock): I'd like you to recognize in the gallery Marilyn Mercer, a local watercolour artist from my riding,

and her husband Joe. One of her watercolour pictures is hanging in the Hansard office.

The Speaker: Let me just get this organized a bit. How many points of order are left to be done?

Mr Jim Wilson (Simcoe-Grey): I know members would want to welcome to this Legislature a group from the Angus legion, who are here to celebrate,

in a non-partisan way, the proclamation of Veterans' Day, which will be celebrated on August 9 in this province from here on. They are Irwin Collier, Thomas Knight, Iola Knight, Nancy Willoughby

and Doug Burden. Welcome.

Ms Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): I'm pleased to ask the House to recognize my niece Kate-Lynn Benvenuti, who's here from Hamilton on Take Our

Kids to Work Day.

Mr Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): On another point of order, Mr Speaker: I'd like to welcome peacekeeper Bruce McPhail and Ruth Ann McPhail

here from Bracebridge, as well as retired Major-General Lewis MacKenzie.

Mrs Carol Mitchell (Huron-Bruce): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I'd like to welcome Catherine Simpson. She is also here from the riding of

Huron-Bruce for take a teenager to work today. She's my adopted daughter for the day, so I'd like to welcome her.

Mr Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I would like to welcome Marisa here today. She is the niece of one of my

constituency assistants and she's here to discover the wonders of Queen's Park.

The Speaker: The government House leader has the last point of order.

Hon Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): On the same point of order, I'd like to welcome my son, Sean Duncan, who's

accompanying his dad to work today, in the gallery.

Mr Ted Chudleigh (Halton): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I'd just like to welcome everyone in the gallery who hasn't been introduced today.

Welcome to Queen's Park.

The Speaker: Well, my generosity ends there.

We have with us today, in the Speaker's gallery, a delegation from the Russian Federal Assembly: the Federal Assembly Committee on Local Governance. So now

will you all please join me in welcoming the members from the Russian delegation?

Applause.

Mr Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): On a point of order, Mr Speaker?

The Speaker: If it is not the same point of order, please.

Mr Ruprecht: I'm sure that all members wish to extend a special welcome to the Consul General of the Russian Federation, Mr Smirnov, who is

sitting next to Mr Roketsky.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

EDUCATION STATUTE LAW

AMENDMENT ACT (TEACHERS' ASSISTANTS), 2004 /

LOI DE 2004 MODIFIANT DES LOIS

EN CE QUI A TRAIT À L'ÉDUCATION

(AIDES-ENSEIGNANTS)

Mr Flaherty moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 143,

An Act to Amend the Child and Family Services Act and the Education Act with respect to teachers' assistants / Projet de loi 143, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les services à l'enfance et à la famille et la

Loi sur l'éducation en ce qui a trait aux aides-enseignants.

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

Mr Jim Flaherty (Whitby-Ajax): I've introduced this bill to ensure that there are province-wide measures in place to keep students safe. This

bill will give school boards across the province the power and the obligation to ensure that there is a mandatory screening system in place for school volunteers. It will require school boards to

conduct a criminal record check for volunteers; if applicable, to obtain the disciplinary record maintained by the Ontario College of Teachers; if applicable, to obtain the disciplinary record of

another board with respect to the time during which the person was an employee of the other board; and a school board would also be authorized and required to inspect the child abuse register,

maintained under

section 75 of the Child and Family Services Act.

Mr McGuinty promised -- this is promise number 13 -- that he would make our schools safe so that students can concentrate on learning. That promise has not

been kept. The Minister of Education was asked twice by me in this House on this issue: June 21 and October 21. He promised to bring in legislation. It has not come to this House. So we've done the

work, and I'm sure the members opposite will support this bill given their commitment to make our schools safer for children.

LABOUR RELATIONS STATUTE LAW

AMENDMENT ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004 MODIFIANT DES LOIS

CONCERNANT LES RELATIONS

DE TRAVAIL

Mr Bentley moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 144,

An Act to amend certain statutes relating to labour relations / Projet de loi 144, Loi modifiant des lois concernant les relations de travail.

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

Mr Bentley?

Hon Christopher Bentley (Minister of Labour): I defer it to ministerial statements.

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION

AND HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT

AMENDMENT ACT (HASTINGS

AND PRINCE EDWARD REGIMENT

MEMORIAL HIGHWAY), 2004 /

LOI DE 2004 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR L'AMÉNAGEMENT DES VOIES

PUBLIQUES ET DES TRANSPORTS EN

COMMUN (ROUTE COMMÉMORATIVE

HASTINGS AND PRINCE EDWARD

REGIMENT)

Mr Parsons moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 145,

An Act to Amend the Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act to name a portion of Highway 62 and Highway 33 the Hastings and Prince Edward

Regiment Memorial Highway / Projet de loi 145, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur l'aménagement des voies publiques et des transports en commun pour nommer une

section des routes 62 et 33 route

commémorative Hastings and Prince Edward Regiment.

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

Mr Ernie Parsons (Prince Edward-Hastings): The United Empire Loyalists who settled in the counties of Hastings and Prince Edward organized the

first local militia unit for self-defence, with the 1st Regiment of Prince Edward Militia being formed in 1800 and the 1st Regiment of Hastings Militia in 1804. These regiments provided units that

served in the War of 1812 and the Mackenzie rebellion of 1837-38.

The Hastings and Prince Edward Regiment is the modern descendant of these militia units and has seen service in World War I at Somme, Arras, Hill 70, Ypres and

numerous other locations. The regiment mobilized on September 2, 1939, and fought in Greece, Sicily and Italy, and took an active

part in the liberation of Holland. It earned 31 battle honours, at

a fearful cost.

I believe this is an opportunity to recognize, on a daily basis, the incredible contribution made by the Hastings and Prince Edward Regiment in ensuring that

we enjoy the benefits of democracy in our country.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

LONG-TERM CARE

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I rise today to inform the House about our government's progress in improving

long-term care in the province of Ontario. Some of my colleagues might remember that last December I promised a revolution in long-term care. That was in response to a situation that we inherited,

one that I am being kind in characterizing as completely unacceptable. Members of this House will no doubt remember the stories that surfaced last year -- stories of long-term-care residents

suffering from poor care, neglect and sometimes outright abuse in the only home they have, and at the hands of those who are responsible for their care.

I said then, and will repeat now, that we need to change the culture of long-term care in this province. I said that we need to change long-term-care

facilities into long-term-care homes. I said that the seniors of this province deserve better. Well, under this government, they have been getting better, and they are going to continue to do

so.

Within months of our forming the government, I appointed my parliamentary assistant, Monique Smith, to conduct a comprehensive review of long-term care in

Ontario. In May, Monique released her report. It was very much a platform for action, and we have taken action. We invested additional funding of $191 million this year, to hire 2,000 new

long-term-care staff, including 600 nurses. This funding will allow our long-term-care homes to meet a consistently high standard of care. We have reinstated the requirement, removed by the

previous government, that a registered nurse be on site 24 hours a day and passed regulations ensuring that residents receive at least two baths a week. We're increasing funding to establish

residents' councils and family councils in all homes to ensure a better voice for residents. We've increased the comfort allowance for long-term-care residents for the first time in 19 years and

frozen the accommodation fees they are required to pay for the first time in 11 years. We've adopted a policy of unannounced visits and inspections to better monitor the situation in these homes

and ensure that seniors are being treated with the respect and care that they deserve.

All of this is what I would describe as a very good start, but the job isn't done, and neither are we. Next spring, we plan on presenting to this House our

government's new long-term-care homes act. The proposed act will be designed to bring together the three different pieces of legislation that presently deal with the operation of these homes: the

Nursing Homes Act, the Homes for the Aged and Rest Homes Act, and the Charitable Institutions Act. It should be obvious that something as important as the long-term care of our seniors should not

be subject to the confusion and inconsistency inherent in three different pieces of legislation.

Our proposed long-term-care homes act will ensure standards and accountability that are uniform and modern, but it will do a great deal more than that. It will

be centred around the needs and desires of the residents of these homes. The transformation of long-term care in Ontario is a major component of our overall plan for the transformation of health

care. That plan is based on making patients and residents the focus. It depends on putting patients and residents first. Our long-term-care homes act will put them first. To that end, we're going

out directly from the residents themselves to find out how they think we can best do that.

We have released a discussion paper dealing with our plan for improving long-term care. It's available on the Web, and hard copies are being distributed in

long-term-care homes, senior centres, community care access centres and libraries across our province. We want to engage seniors, their families, long-term-care providers and other concerned

Ontarians in a dialogue about the future of long-term care.

The discussion paper provides an outline of where we want to go in long-term care in Ontario. It then asks specific questions and requests specific

answers.

The paper focuses on five key areas:

-- Quality of life and care for residents: We've already accomplished a great deal in this regard and we're determined to do more. We want to ensure that our

seniors enjoy the very best living standards possible.

-- Residents' rights, and combating abuse and neglect: Residents of long-term-care homes absolutely must be protected from financial, sexual, emotional and

physical abuse and neglect. We're going to put procedures in place to encourage people to report instances of abuse and we are going to protect them when they do so. Strong whistle-blower

protection will be a major component of the proposed legislation. Residents and their families will also have their voices strengthened through the mandating of family and resident councils.

-- Compliance, inspection and enforcement: Our proposed legislation will contain stronger inspection and enforcement measures designed to make long-term-care

operators fully accountable for what goes on in these homes. One way or the other, if seniors are not receiving the care they deserve, if they are not being treated with the respect and dignity to

which they are entitled, we will find out about it and we will act.

-- Licensing: We are proposing to link licensing of long-term-care homes to factors such as bed needs, capital planning and enforcement issues.

-- Planning and maintenance of homes: You can build the best structure in the world, but it's not going to last long if it's not properly maintained. Our

proposed legislation will promote the physical maintenance and renewal of our long-term-care homes.

We want to hear from Ontarians on all these subjects. In addition to our discussion paper, we will be conducting public meetings and holding discussions with

stakeholder groups. The responses we receive will inform our thinking as we draft this legislation, as we continue to put patients and residents first in our transformation of health care, as we

move forward to ensure that our seniors live in homes, not facilities, and as we move forward in a revolution in long-term care that will be a model for, and the envy of, all of Canada.

LABOUR RELATIONS /

RELATIONS DE TRAVAIL

Hon Christopher Bentley (Minister of Labour): I rise to present the House with details about the proposed Labour Relations Statute Law

Amendment Act, 2004, which I had the honour of introducing a few minutes ago.

Ontario's prosperity has historically relied on a fair and balanced approach to labour relations. Fairness and balance promote confidence in the law, which

encourages productive relationships. This approach helped ensure a prosperous Ontario for decades. It was an approach to labour legislation recognized and supported by those of all political

stripes.

Unfortunately, recent years have seen a departure from those principles. Long-term stability was sacrificed for short-term advantage. This was not in the best

interests of the province. It is time to restore the fairness and balance that have long characterized Ontario's labour laws.

Il faut rejeter l'approche unilatérale et provocatrice des relations de travail. Un manque d'équité ou la perception d'un manque

d'équité mine la confiance dans le système. Cette approche nuit aussi à la productivité et a un impact négatif sur l'économie de l'Ontario.

Let me elaborate on some of the specific parts of the legislation.

First, we would repeal the requirement for unionized businesses to post and provide information outlining the procedures for decertifying the union. Businesses

must pay to post this information, whether they want to post it or not. Interestingly, there is no corresponding requirement for non-unionized businesses to post certification information. It is

not clear what purpose this requirement serves, other than the obvious one. The existing law is provocative and one-sided and could only serve to undermine and destabilize the labour relations

environment. It must go. Employees will continue to have reasonable access to union certification or decertification information. Individuals can already obtain this information from the Ontario

Labour Relations Board either by Web site or by phone.

Second, the bill would repeal the requirement for labour organizations to disclose the name and remuneration of each director, officer or employee earning

$100,000 or more in salary and taxable benefits. Again, the existing provision is provocative and one-sided. It does not contain an equivalent requirement for companies to disclose similar

information about management personnel. The Labour Relations Act, 1995, already requires unions to provide a copy of an audited financial statement for the previous fiscal year to any member

requesting it. It also requires that unions that administer vacation pay, health or pension funds for union members must file an annual financial statement with the Minister of Labour that

discloses salaries, fees and remuneration charged to the fund. A member may request a copy of the statement from the administrator of the fund. Finally, many union constitutions already provide for

the disclosure of executive salaries to members. These sources of information render the salary disclosure provision unnecessary. It requires resources to be expended obtaining information when

they could be better used elsewhere.

Third, this legislation would restore the OLRB's long-standing historical powers to address the worst labour relations violations with effective remedies. It

would restore to the board the power to certify a union where an employer has breached the province's labour relations laws during a union organizing campaign. However, this remedy would be

reserved for the worst breaches and the worst situations, where no other remedy would be sufficient. The proposed legislation would be balanced. It would also give the board the power to dismiss an

application for certification where a union violates the act during an organizing campaign in circumstances where no other remedy is sufficient.

Some of these powers have been part of our legal fabric for years, with the remedial certification power present in various forms since 1950. When the previous

government removed them, it removed the only effective remedy for the worst breaches and the worst cases. Not only did it leave such cases without a potential, meaningful remedy, but it sent a

clear signal to the labour relations community that certain conduct was not viewed to be as serious as it should be. That signal does not foster productive and harmonious labour relations and does

not contribute to the overall prosperity of Ontario's economy. These powers would only be exercised as a last resort, where other remedies available to the board could not effectively address the

unlawful conduct by either employer or the union and the true wishes of employees about union representation could not be reflected in a vote. Restoration of these powers would assure balance and

fairness in labour relations while restoring confidence in the labour relations system.

Fourth, the proposed legislation would, subject to certain statutory conditions, restore the board's power to reinstate workers on an interim basis who are

fired or disciplined during a union organizing campaign because they were exercising their rights under the act. Dismissal during an organizing campaign can have an immediate, negative effect on

workers trying to make a decision about whether to seek representation. Restoring the power to order interim reinstatement would enable the board to respond to any potential harm caused by a

dismissal in a timely way, pending a final review of the matter.

The government's role during a certification or de-certification campaign is not to favour one side or the other but to ensure that the choice made is an

effective, informed choice and, to the extent possible, free of undue pressure. Employees must be free to choose without fear of reprisals. They must be free to choose whether or not they want to

be represented by a union. Any interim reinstatement ordered would apply until the board holds a hearing to determine whether the dismissal was an unfair labour practice. This power cannot be

exercised if it appears to the board that the action was a legitimate exercise of management rights and not related to exercising a right under the act.

Finally, this bill recognizes the distinct nature of construction in this province in two ways. In fact, the construction sector is long recognized as being

distinct -- it's a separate part of the act. First, the proposed legislation would make permanent the existing special bargaining and dispute resolution regime for the residential construction

sector in the city of Toronto and in the regions of Halton, Peel, York, Durham and Simcoe county. The regime has been in place since 2001. It has worked. It should become a permanent part of the

labour relations landscape.

Second, the bill would add an additional means by which a union could be certified in the construction sector. In addition to a vote-based system, this bill

would add a card-based system. There would, therefore, be two possible means of certification..

From 1950 until 1995, a union certification system based on membership cards was the norm. Automatic certification could take place if a union signed up more

than 55% of the bargaining unit. We are not proposing a return to that system for all sectors. Construction, however, is unique.

The construction sector is characterized by workplaces that change constantly and a workforce that's both very mobile and can change size constantly.

Attempting to accurately ascertain the wishes of the employees in such circumstances can be difficult. For this reason, the bill would add an additional means of certification. It recognizes what

the law has long recognized: the unique nature of construction.

These are the key parts of the legislation this government has introduced today. These proposals would restore fairness and balance to the labour relations

system. Fairness and balance have been the historical guarantors of prosperity in this province, the foundation on which the province's prosperity has been built. Their existence promotes

confidence in the labour relations system, and confidence is essential to its stability and success.

I urge all members to support these fair and balanced proposals. They are good for working people, good for business and good for the people of Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Response?

Mrs Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener-Waterloo): I am absolutely shocked that this minister today is stripping workers of their democratic rights,

rights that workers fought for and asked for. You are today attacking the rights of the individual workers. You are paying back the unions, particularly the construction unions. You are going back

to the Bob Rae days. If you don't remember the days of Bob Rae, from 1990 to 1995, let me tell you: Investment in this province was absolutely dead. We lost 10,000 jobs because there was no balance

in labour relations. I can tell you that the same thing is going to happen.

I've already heard from businesses today that are going to reconsider their decision to invest or expand in Ontario. This is going to have negative

implications for workers. There will not be jobs. There will not be --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Stop the clock, please.

The minister had a very extensive statement and I would like to get the response from the opposition. I also would like for us to give the member an

opportunity to make the proper response in her time.

You can start the clock now.

Mrs Witmer: The signal that this legislation today gives to people in this province and to investors outside of the province is that this

province will once again be closed to business. This is not good for employees. Not only are they losing their democratic right to a free vote when it comes to certification, there will not be jobs

for our children and our grandchildren.

I would say to this minister, you have been advised not to do this. In any consultations you've had, you have been advised that you should not take away worker

rights. You have been warned about the negative impact on the economy. You've also certainly heard about what happens when you reinstate automatic decertification.

This is going to motivate unions to file unfair labour practice complaints in any certification drive where they don't think they have support. The integrity

of secret ballot votes within five days will be diminished. I guess, most importantly, Minister: Has your government not learned the lesson that between 1990 and 1995 investors did not invest in

this province because of the labour legislation we had? I would advise you to withdraw this today. You are going to kill jobs in the province of Ontario.

LONG-TERM CARE

Mr Cameron Jackson (Burlington): I'm pleased to respond to the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care's announcement today. One would think,

after one full year in office, having just charged your parliamentary assistant to travel the province to talk to people about long-term-care needs, that we would have the legislation. However, I'm

sure the minister today will admit that there's nothing impeding him, his government or his cabinet from making regulatory changes, with the existence of three pieces of legislation.

It didn't prevent the previous government from building 20,000 new long-term-care beds, the largest increase in long-term-care beds in North American history.

The lack of unified, updated legislation didn't prevent us from taking 16,000 D facility long-term-care beds in our province and spending close to $1 billion to have them upgraded and modernized to

the highest standards for nursing homes anywhere in North America. The lack of legislation didn't prevent us from bringing in the first and most comprehensive Alzheimer's strategy in our

country.

What we have from you today, Minister, is a formula for taking a further year to bring in some of the changes that are needed in our nursing home system. You

made a promise -- you were the health critic at the time -- that you would roll back any increases that seniors had while living in long-term-care facilities, a $300-million election promise that

you have broken. In your own statement you indicate that you merely froze the rate and you're not rolling it back. Last year, when you had the opportunity as minister, you still passed on to

seniors in this province a $1.16 increase in their copay for inflationary purposes. You did that willingly and knowingly last year. Yet today, for the first time in Ontario's history, senior

citizens in nursing homes in this province are paying a health premium tax. And you broke the promise that you would roll that back.

Minister, I want to remind you that you have indicated in your statement today that you support renewal and maintenance programs. I warn you and caution you:

Do not, under any circumstances, even consider welshing on the promise we made to seniors and nursing homes that we would rebuild their D facilities in this province -- but that's what I think

you're about to do.

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I want to make a short response to the statement by the Minister of Health. I thought the Minister of Health

would be here today as well, introducing legislation regarding changes in the long-term-care sector, not be here discussing yet another discussion paper about the same matter. I say that because

the minister promised that we would be here this fall dealing with legislation for changes in the long-term-care sector. That promise, that commitment, was made on the heels of the work that was

done by Monique Smith with the release of her report in May.

You'll recall, Speaker, that last December, in light of more horror stories in the media about the situation in long-term-care facilities, the minister

promised a revolution and had his parliamentary assistant get right on that. From January to March, she supposedly did an in-depth study -- talked to everyone and anybody about what needed to be

done. When she reported, the government said that her report was the blueprint for change. We expected that we would be seeing legislation as a result of that blueprint, not a promise of more

discussion, not a promise of legislation perhaps in the spring.

The minister says today that he's concerned about abuse and neglect of seniors. Let me tell you what he could do today because he doesn't have legislation

before us. Today his government could pass private member's Bill 47, which stands in the name of our leader, Howard Hampton, which would place a positive duty on anyone who works in a

long-term-care facility to report any abuse of a senior, in the same way that teachers and child care workers do right now when they see child abuse.

I say to the minister: Because you don't have legislation today, if you really wanted to do something to protect seniors against neglect and abuse, pass Bill

47 -- second and third readings today -- and then we'll really be doing something with respect to a revolution and protecting seniors in the province.

LABOUR RELATIONS

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): The Minister of Labour's announcement today is uninspired -- certainly lukewarm, if anything; thin gruel --

and falls far short of the Liberal promise to address the injury done to working women and men over the course of eight years of Tory government here in the province of Ontario. Please, Minister,

come on. You're no longer going to require that decertification notices be posted. You know darn well that those postings didn't last more than 30 seconds once they were put up, and if they lasted

longer than 30 seconds in any unionized workplace, they became nothing more than a billboard for those workers' opinions of their bad bosses.

You know darn well as well, and you've acknowledged, that telling unionists that they no longer have to report salaries in excess of $100,000 a year is

irrelevant because that is public information and available from any union member, available at any union convention, in any event. And I tell you, your failure to acknowledge the need for

anti-scab legislation --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Order. Minister, would you come to order, please. Member from Niagara Centre, could you address your comments

to the Chair.

Mr Kormos: Thank you kindly, Speaker.

Your failure to acknowledge the need for anti-scab legislation in this province, to restore real, fair bargaining and negotiation at the bargaining table

rather than forcing workers like the locked-out Airport Hilton workers on to picket lines where they're at risk from drivers and angry bosses, is an injustice to the workers and another breach of

your promise to workers to address and redress the injury done to them by Tories.

Your failure to keep your promise to restore successor rights for public sector workers is yet another example of this government's disdain and disregard for

working women and men in this province. Your failure to acknowledge the right of agricultural workers to organize themselves into trade unions and to collectively bargain health and safety, amongst

other things, at the bargaining table is an insult and a condemnation of those workers to more years of high-risk workplaces at the lowest possible wages imaginable. And I say to you, for you to

suggest that somehow one smaller class of workers should have the right to card certification while most workers in this province don't have the right to card certification is discriminatory and

reveals once again the fact that this is nothing more than window dressing and is a weak, weak response to your promise to address the wrong and the injuries done to workers over eight years of

Tory government here in the province of Ontario.

Your announcement today was done without consultation with the workers whom you've impacted. I'm telling you, the Ontario federations, trade unions, their

leaders, their membership are going to have a lot to say to you. In fact, they're going to be here at the end of this month in front of Queen's Park, telling you and your government to start

keeping, in the most modest of ways, some of the big, huge promises you made to working women and men. They're here to tell you that your pathetic response to minimum-wage workers in this province,

condemning them to yet more years of poverty while they are in the workplace, your abandonment of their sisters and brothers with disabilities, is yet further example of your disdain and disregard

for these same workers.

New Democrats are here to expose your failure to meet the needs of workers in this province, your failure to act as a Minister of Labour but more as a minister

of bosses.

PEACEKEEPERS' DAY /

JOUR DES GARDIENS DE LA PAIX

Hon Michael Bryant (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs, minister responsible for democratic renewal): On a point of

order, Mr Speaker: I believe we have consent from all three parties. I seek unanimous consent to make a statement on Peacekeepers' Day, to be followed by a statement from each of the opposition

parties for up to two minutes.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Do we have unanimous consent? Agreed.

Hon Mr Bryant: I am pleased and honoured to rise today to announce that August 9 will be annually recognized as Peacekeepers' Day in the

province of Ontario.

Peacekeeping is a long-standing and honourable tradition in Canada. More than 100,000 members of the Canadian forces have participated in peace support

missions since the United Nations began working to maintain international peace and security. This contribution is a natural extension of Canada's commitment to the principles of peace and freedom.

But it is not without risk and it is not without heroism. One of those risk-takers, one of those heroes, is in the Speaker's gallery today: Major-General Lewis MacKenzie. If you ask him, he will

tell you that peacekeeping, by its very nature, places those who do it on our behalf continually in harm's way. He will tell you that keeping the peace often means being willing to sit in a bunker

with bullets flying over your head. It is a sad truth that more than 100 Canadian peacekeepers have died in separate missions over the years, and hundreds more have been wounded.

August 9 is the anniversary of a particularly horrible day. In 1974, nine Canadians lost their lives when their plane was shot down over Lebanon. They were

flying in a Canadian Forces Buffalo aircraft clearly painted in UN colours, all white and blue, with the UN flag on the wings and fuselage and tail. The plane's crash represented the single largest

loss of life in Canadian peacekeeping history.

I'd like to acknowledge Jack Simpson, who is here in the Legislature today. Mr Simpson's brother, Corporal Michael William Simpson, was among those nine

Canadian peacekeepers, those nine Canadian heroes. Mr Simpson -- a former soldier himself: We're very grateful and honoured that you are here today.

Next week, on Remembrance Day, Ontarians will remember the brave men and women who lost their lives in time of war. Peacekeepers' Day will ask us to remember

those who, like Corporal Simpson, gave the ultimate sacrifice in the ongoing defence of peace.

I mentioned Major-General Lewis MacKenzie. He has been a driving force behind Peacekeepers' Day. He and others followed in the footsteps of that great Ontarian

and 14th Prime Minister of Canada, Lester B. Pearson, who is considered the originator of the modern concept of peacekeeping. Mr Pearson helped defuse the 1956 Suez crisis by proposing that a

multinational UN peacekeeping force be sent to Egypt to restore peace. For his visionary idea, he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

In the decades since, Ontarians and Canadians like Major-General MacKenzie have continued to make exceptional contributions as peacekeepers throughout the

world. They have supervised cease-fires and the withdrawal of opposing forces. They have protected displaced persons and refugees. They have removed land mines and delivered humanitarian aid. They

have maintained law and order with patience, discipline and skill.

Ils ont gagné la reconnaissance des nations en bloquant la voie conduisant à la guerre, en sauvant des vies qui auraient été perdues, et en

aidant la vie à reprendre son cours dans les communautés ravagées par les conflits.

I also want to recognize that so many Canadian peacekeepers around the world, in addition to being members of the Canadian Armed Forces, are members of our

police services, RCMP, Ontario Provincial Police and municipal services such as the Toronto Police Service. It's a tribute to the professionalism of our police officers that their services are in

such high demand on these missions and are so valued.

Our government is proud to designate August 9 as an annual day of recognition for Canadian peacekeepers. Peacekeepers' Day will see Ontarians pay tribute to

the sacrifices made by those soldiers and police officers who lost their lives in the service of peace and mourn the loss with their family and friends. We will honour those who have returned

safely from peacekeeping duties in the danger zones around the world.

Let me close by saluting the brave men and women in the Speaker's gallery, and the members' galleries as well. You have honoured us by your presence in the

Legislature. We salute you and applaud you. Thank you.

Mr Joseph N. Tascona (Barrie-Simcoe-Bradford): I'd like to express my appreciation and the appreciation of our party to the brave and

resourceful men and women who represent our country so well. The Canadian Armed Forces, whether they be peacekeepers or soldiers, are the greatest men and women that this country has produced. We

are proud of you and we thank you for your contributions.

There are times when peace is something to be kept; there are times when peace is something to be won. Canada has fought and won the peace. We have led in

times of strife. We have been there to answer the call of history. At Vimy Ridge and Juno Beach, in Korea and during the Cold War, our men and women in uniform have done us proud.

While they are brave and resourceful, over the past number of years they have been forced to scramble, to become more resourceful as their resources have

dwindled.

As Major-General Lewis MacKenzie said at today's reception, "What Canada needs in today's world environment is a robust force to stamp out factions and win the

peace, as opposed to a philosophy that the peace can be kept by social workers with guns. Only when the peace is won can we then go about peacekeeping."

Military spending has dropped to 1% of GDP -- that's one sixth of what it was in 1956 -- down to about 125th in the world. Our forces have been reduced by

half. The equipment of our soldiers is deteriorating. For instance, the Sea King helicopters were bought in 1963. To put that in perspective, that makes our helicopters three years older than the

honourable member across the way, the Attorney General, Michael Bryant.

I don't have to remind this House of the recent tragic event that occurred on the maiden voyage of HMCS Chicoutimi. A fire broke out, a brave lieutenant died,

and to rescue the remaining crew we had to rely on other countries because we were not equipped to do it on our own. Now, for the first time since 1961, the Canadian navy has no submarines

deployed.

Through all of this underfunding and lack of support by the federal Liberal government, our men and women in uniform, be they soldiers or peacekeepers, have

found a way to make us proud time and time again. We are proud of our peacekeepers, and we thank them and their families for their contributions.

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): New Democrats, with great pride in our servicemen and servicewomen and the role they've played

internationally, are pleased to participate in this declaration of August 9 as Peacekeepers' Day. We look forward to acknowledging it in years to come.

We salute these women and men, young when they did their service, so many now over the course of years greyed and a little stooped and a little slower in their

gait. We salute them not only for their service to their country but, in the course of that service to their country, their service to humankind under some of the most difficult and dangerous of

conditions, where there is an incredible risk to themselves. Whether the motive be heroism, gallantry or simply an understanding that the job has to be done, there prevails a selflessness that

makes these people all-giving, and they take none.

We salute their leadership: the Lewis MacKenzies, the great Roméo Dallaires -- Roméo Dallaire, who continues to challenge our conscience around the

role that we as Canadians have to continue to take and the extra steps that we have to continue to make to truly maintain this great tradition of peacekeeping.

As we pay tribute to these women and men, as we salute them, as we acknowledge their great courage, let's, as members of this Canadian community, and let's, as

taxpayers, commit ourselves to ensuring that these same young women and men have the tools and the resources to do the difficult and dangerous job that they are called upon to do, because without

that commitment, we do these women and men a disservice.

Let's have a commitment to ensure their families don't live in poverty. Let's have a commitment to ensure that, upon their return to their country, they are

treated not just with token regard but with genuine regard and the supports that are necessary from time to time -- in fact, more often than one would wish.

ORAL QUESTIONS

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Mr Robert W. Runciman (Leader of the Opposition): I have a question for the Premier. Yesterday your Premier-for-a-day couldn't answer our

questions, so I'm revisiting the hospital funding crisis your government is creating in communities across Ontario.

Premier, I would like to ask you about the situation in London, where we are told the city's hospitals will have to eliminate 1,000 jobs, close 384 beds and

cancel 4,000 day surgeries if they follow the dictates of your ham-fisted Minister of Health.

From your government's performance to date, it's clear that you have trouble keeping track of your promises, let alone keeping them. The London situation is a

stark case in point. Premier, how do the closure of hospital beds, the loss of nursing jobs and thousands of cancelled surgeries meet your health care promises?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): How soon the opposition would have us forget their record. There are

only two parties which, when in government, actually made cuts to hospitals in the province of Ontario -- the Tories and the NDP -- just so the people of Ontario know where we're coming from.

Just to revisit the record, because I'm sure that the member opposite, honourable as he is, would be interested in being reminded of these facts: When the

Tories were in power, they cut hospitals by $557 million. They closed 28 hospitals. They closed 5,000 beds. They spent $400 million to fire thousands of nurses and then spent hundreds of millions

of dollars in a vain attempt to hire them back. That is the record of this Leader of the Opposition and this opposition party that is without credibility when it comes to the fact that we're

putting 700 million more dollars into hospitals this year than they would have, had they been in government.

Mr Runciman: This is the Premier's second year in office, and he's still playing this juvenile blame game. This is a serious issue that

deserves a serious response from the Premier of Ontario. The problem is, Premier, that you don't have any credibility. No one believes you any more.

You said, before the election, that you would put hospitals on a sound, long-term financial footing. You said, before the election, that you would open 1,600

hospital beds and hire more nurses. And now, after the election, an infusion of over $800 million from the federal government and your $2-billion health tax, your policies are resulting --

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Just a moment, Leader. Could I ask the member from Nepean-Carleton to come to order.

Could you continue, Leader.

Mr Runciman: Yes, heckle them, not me.

After the election, an infusion of over $800 million from the federal government and a $2-billion Liberal health tax grab, your policies are resulting in lost

jobs, closed beds and cancelled surgeries. Premier, why are hard-working Ontario families being forced by your Liberal government to pay more while getting less health care services?

Hon Mr McGuinty: Not a single element of that statement holds any truth. The fact of the matter is that we are working together with all of

our hospitals, on an individual basis, over an extended period of time during which they have to balance their budgets. I'm pleased to report that more than 50 hospitals have already balanced their

budgets. We now intend to work with all the remaining hospitals.

I know that it's in my colleague's political interest to fan the flames and pander to fear, but we think we've got a responsibility to continue to work with

our hospitals to ensure that we can find efficiencies without, in any way, compromising the quality of care. We've started that, we're on that route, and we're going to achieve our objective.

Mr Runciman: Premier McPromise -- he serves up billions and, just like McDonalds, he doesn't deliver. That's a fact.

Premier, the time is long overdue for you to show leadership. Outstanding hospitals, large and small, are facing decisions forced on them by your policies and

the late-breaker approach of your Minister of Health. Liberal MPPs and ministers who were very vocal in opposition are now either silent or relegated to reading from the Liberal Party cue card

labelled "Hospitals: How to Defend the Indefensible."

You can stop this looming hospital crisis. Put a muzzle on your bully Minister of Health, keep your promises and guarantee that not one hospital bed will be

closed in London or any other hospital in the province of Ontario.

Hon Mr McGuinty: Again, I don't know how he can say this with a straight face after closing 5,000 hospital beds. When I talk to the people in

London, they are still very sore about the loss of their children's cardiac surgery program, which happened on their watch. This is an opposition party that is without credibility on this

particular issue.

Here's what somebody said recently, when John Tory was travelling through the city of Ottawa and making his outlandish claims in that particular venue: "Doug

Angus, a health economist at the University of Ottawa, said the numbers `are really high. I suspect they're playing with the numbers. This is an outlandishly high figure. That's virtually

impossible to see. They are so far off base on that one. There is no way. It's impossible.'" Nobody could have said it better than this independent, objective, third-party economist.

The Speaker: New question.

Mr John R. Baird (Nepean-Carleton): My question is to the Minister of Labour. Across London and throughout southwestern Ontario, patients and

health care workers are distressed, upset and full of fear. They're also angry, because not a single Liberal MPP from the region has raised one objection to the job losses or supported our call for

adequate hospital funding. Under the Ontario Labour Relations Act --

Hon Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: This question is not in order. It shouldn't

be directed to the Minister of Labour.

The Speaker: He hasn't completed his question. Let me hear the question.

Mr Baird: Under the Ontario Labour Relations Act, it's your job to stand up for workers and be notified of layoffs. It's a legislated

requirement. Minister, will you stand in your place now and do the right thing: stop the firing of 1,020 nurses and health care workers who are actively facing layoffs? Will you answer the

question? Will you stand in your place and defend London Health Sciences Centre and St Joe's, or are you going to pass the buck?

The Speaker: The Minister of Health.

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I appreciate the opportunity to respond to the question from my honourable

friend. I think it's important to remind everybody of the circumstances that are in place, not the fear and rhetoric that are being provoked by the other side, but the reality, which is this: No

cuts have occurred in London; no layoffs have occurred in London. We continue to work -- with very strong interaction from all the members in that area -- with the London community, the London

hospital and its volunteer board of directors, who are committed, in the very same way we all are, to good-quality patient care in Ontario.

The Premier has well identified that we have an 18-month window of opportunity to get every hospital in Ontario in balance. We're going to work through those

on a case-by-case basis, as has been well established. As required, the best people in the health care system will get in and be of assistance in these situations. I look forward to continuing to

work through these, as we are, on a case-by-case basis.

Mr Baird: My supplementary question is again addressed to the Minister of Labour. It concerns his responsibilities under the Ontario Labour

Relations Act and the legislated requirement that he be notified of layoffs and cutbacks. London and southwestern Ontario taxpayers, nurses and patients want to know if any Liberal MPP in

southwestern Ontario is prepared to stand up and fight for them. They haven't heard from you, from Steve Peters, from Deb Matthews or from John Wilkinson. The London Health Sciences Centre is

facing cutbacks of 580 nurses -- health care workers. St Joe's health centre is facing the layoff of 420 staff. Will you stand in your place as Minister of Labour and say, not on your watch, that

you will do everything to ensure that not a single --

The Speaker: Thank you. The Minister of Health.

Hon Mr Smitherman: Sensitive as the opposition party is about their legacy on this, which will be remembered by all Ontarians -- their

inspirational leader, Mike Harris, compared nurses to Hula Hoops -- it's a bit rich to hear the honourable member now. The fact of the matter is that last Friday, members from London met with

representatives of the London hospital, a demonstration of the fact that they're engaged, as is appropriate, on behalf of their constituents. The fact of the matter is that no layoffs have occurred

in London and no program cuts have occurred in London.

We're at the earliest stages of an 18-month process, and we're going to work through these in the fashion that has been established between the Ministry of

Health and the Ontario Hospital Association. There are seven steps to the process, and we're at the earliest stages of them. Rather than contribute to fear by advancing this line of rhetoric, I

suggest to the honourable member that he stand by instead and watch the progress we're going to make, hand in hand with those who are dedicated to providing good-quality patient care in our

province.

Mr Baird: I have never seen a regional group of MPPs who have so abandoned their constituents and failed to stand up for them in this

House.

Minister, the bottom line is, it doesn't have to be this way. You don't have to force and bully hospitals to lay off nurses and increase waiting lists and

close --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Will the minister come to order, please. I'm trying to hear the member from Nepean-Carleton. The member from Erie-Lincoln,

who is echoing all the while -- I'm confused. Who is asking the question? The fact is that now the member from Nepean-Carleton has his final supplementary.

Mr Baird: Minister, you don't have to force and bully hospitals to lay off nurses, to cut beds and to increase waiting lists that are already

too long. You see, there is another way. Right across the street, at the Ministry of Finance, there is $825 million of new cash for health care sitting in a vault. None of that money has been

allocated.

Minister, will you join our call and stand in your place and commit to our nurses and our hospitals, that you will put in at least half of that money to stop

these devastating layoffs that you are forcing these hospitals to undertake?

Hon Mr Smitherman: "Will we join their call?" he asks. Their call, as presented in their budget at Magna, called for $700 million less for

Ontario hospitals this year. That is their call. That is their record. Oh no, that's only part of their record. The member calls for regional solidarity. He wants to put his own record on the line

for the great work he did in the Ottawa community while part of a government. What is the legacy of his involvement as a strong regional player? Riverside Hospital -- closed. Grace hospital --

closed. And Montfort -- Montfort had to fight for its life in court against the cuts that his party proposed. What is the legacy of that party while in government in the London community?

Children's paediatric services were gored at the hands of that government.

No cuts have occurred in London. London members are working aggressively for their community, and we are dedicated to the strongest possible patient care.

The Speaker: New question.

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Premier. A year ago, on September 3, you promised, "We will bring stability to

our hospitals by providing adequate multi-year funding" -- Dalton McGuinty. We have seen how you've broken your promise to London hospitals. They are being forced to

schedule the layoffs of 1,000

hospital workers and close 348 beds because of a $90-million shortfall in funding. But they are not alone. When we look at northern Ontario and 40 community hospitals, 32 of the 40 are facing

budget shortfalls totalling $51 million as a result of your short funding. They are now being forced to make the same difficult decisions, except in their cases they don't start with regional

health centres; they start with basic, core services.

Premier, what happened to your promise of adequate multi-year funding for hospitals? Why are you forcing northern Ontario hospitals to cut basic, core

services?

Hon Mr McGuinty: Again, here is another leader of another party of the opposition who has conveniently forgotten his own particular record

when it comes to health care. Just for purposes of contrast, we are increasing funding for hospitals by 4.3%. When the NDP were in power in 1994, they cut hospital funding by 3.6%, for a total of

$277 million.

The leader of the NDP may not like to hear this, but the fact of the matter is, we are working with hospitals. We understand the nature of their challenges. We

also understand that the status quo is just not tenable. So we've increased funding substantially, by 4.3%. We now have more than 50 hospitals that succeeded in presenting plans that balance their

budgets in a way that does not compromise services. Now our plan is to work with each and every single remaining hospital to make sure that we get it right.

They may not like to hear about this kind of approach -- it's called working together -- but we believe it's the right thing to do.

Mr Hampton: Premier, this is your promise; this is a promise you made. And you talk about working together. Why are those very hospitals

writing to us and to the Minister of Health, saying, "This won't work. This is going to force us to cut core services"?

I want to quote to you from the northern hospitals. They are very blunt. They're saying, "Look, we're already severely underserviced. We don't have enough

physicians, and in many cases we have inadequate community-based services." In order to meet what you are doing to them, they're saying, "We will have to reduce or eliminate basic core services

that are taken for granted in most southern Ontario hospitals."

That doesn't sound to me like working together; that sounds to me like you're taking the axe to hospitals that have already been downsized, that have already

been forced to find efficiencies. What happened to your promise, Premier? Why are you forcing northern Ontario hospitals to cut basic core health services?

Hon Mr McGuinty: The short answer is, we're not. We're working with our hospitals over an extended period of time. They've got two years

within which they could balance their budgets. We have increased funding for every hospital in the province of Ontario. What we're doing now is working with hospitals to make sure that we get it

right.

The member opposite made reference to the fact that they are concerned in the north about a shortage of physicians. One of the reasons we are grappling with a

shortage of physicians in Ontario today is that they cut the number of spaces in medical schools on their watch.

The other thing I want to remind my distinguished friend about is that in addition to making cuts to hospitals on their watch, they cut funding for OHIP by

$218 million, they cut the Ontario drug benefit plan by close to $30 million, they cut mental health services by $42 million and they cut community and public health by $163.7 million. That is

their record when it comes to health care.

Mr Hampton: The Premier wants to talk about everything other than his promise. So I want to remind the Premier of a little history he should

remember. It was a federal Liberal government that said to provinces across this country, "Cut the number of medical school admissions." It was someone named Paul Martin who made the biggest cuts

to medicare in the history of Ontario and forced every province to make those cuts.

I want to bring you back to the present, to your promise. This is just one hospital, and this is what they say: "Northern hospitals are underfunded already. We

can't make these cuts. Northern hospitals tend to be smaller in size and more isolated. We have difficulty in terms of achieving critical efficiencies because we are so small. Northern hospitals

fulfill a different function. In many towns, they are the only game in town."

Premier, you're sitting on $825 million of new federal health care money. You've got a $2-billion contingency fund in your budget. Why don't you use some of

that money to work with hospitals instead of forcing them to cut core services?

Hon Mr McGuinty: I don't want to underestimate the challenges that are faced by our hospitals today, with the growing utilization rates and

pressing demands. We understand that. But the fact of the matter is that we are increasing funding for our hospitals by 4.3%. We're going ahead with change. I know that my friend opposite is a

staunch defender of the status quo. He thinks that health care in Ontario should perhaps occupy 60%, then later 70%, then 80% and then possibly 90% of our budget. We're not going there. We're going

to work with our hospitals.

The minister has said before that he understands there are some special issues connected with some of our smaller hospitals. We are looking for ways to extend

special support to our smaller hospitals.

Let me just say this about our Plan for Change. This is what Roy Romanow had to say about our minister and what he is doing. He said, "When I talk about

sustainability ... with Health Minister Smitherman in this province, I hear a strong commitment to the future of publicly supported medicare, and a resolve to spending resources designed to

leverage the changes necessary, rather than spending on the status quo.... It seems to me that Ontario wants to do the `real work' required to ensure medicare's sustainability."

I agree with Roy Romanow.

FUNDRAISING

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): I have a question for the Premier. Premier, I want to ask you again about your broken promise to stop

"pay your way to the front of the line" politics. Tonight, in Ottawa, you'll be wining and dining with some of your biggest donors. They'll be shelling out $4,000 a table.

We believe Ontarians have the right to know who's buying access to your government. You said during the election that you believed that too, and you pledged to

disclose political donations in real time. Tell us, Premier, will you keep your promise, or will we have to guess who's coming to dinner?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Apparently, the NDP doesn't fundraise. They've never had to resort to

that. But here's what the Windsor Star said on October 6, 1994: "But in the end the party got what it wanted: Selling 700 tickets to raise $130,000, making it the largest-ever fundraiser for the

NDP. Some tables sold for $4,000."

I'm disappointed to learn we're only charging $4,000. Whatever happened to inflation? Anyway, I look forward to the supplementary.

Ms Churley: We're talking about your promise, Premier. This morning -- now get this -- the Attorney General said that you can't keep your

promise at this time because real-time disclosure is a terribly complex matter.

Premier, you don't need space-age technology to disclose donations in real time. All you need is this: I call it the "real-time machine." Yes, it's a simple

fax machine. Here you go.

Everybody going to tonight's dinner filled out this form. All you have to do, Premier, is fax all these forms to Ontario's chief electoral officer by

dinnertime tonight.

Again, will you keep your promise and disclose your donors, or will this continue to be another broken Liberal promise?

Hon Mr McGuinty: I can understand the member's enthusiasm. She obviously is very much looking forward to our package of reforms to be

introduced by the Attorney General. I look forward to introducing that as well and giving an opportunity for all the members here to debate them. Hopefully, we will receive the warm-hearted support

of members opposite.

Let me say this, and repeat the offer I made in this House earlier: If the members of the NDP and the members of the Tory party want to go ahead and pre-empt

the bill that's about to be introduced so that we all agree that we will all record our receipts, our contributions, on a just-in-time basis, then we're more than prepared to do that. But I've yet

to hear from any of them in that regard.

Ms Churley: This is a real turn and a twist in Liberal broken promises. Premier, the NDP supports real-time disclosure. No problem. But we're

talking about your words, your commitment and your promise. New Democrats want openness and transparency. You're continuing with secrecy and side deals.

In August, two days before accepting bids on power projects, Dwight Duncan charged energy companies up to $5,000 to golf with him. Two weeks ago, you charged

high rollers big bucks to golf with you. In September, people paid top dollar for a boat cruise with George Smitherman. In all three cases, you were asked to disclose the donors, and in all three

cases you said no.

I'm asking you again: Will you disclose the donors attending your Ottawa dinner by dinnertime tonight, or will this continue to be another broken Liberal

promise?

Hon Mr McGuinty: We have all kinds of good things that we want to bring to the good people of Ontario by way of new legislation, including a

package of reforms that has to do with political financing. We're more than prepared to introduce that at the earliest possible opportunity.

Now, if the members opposite -- again, I repeat my offer -- want to pre-empt that so that we can do something together on a voluntary basis, I would be

delighted to do that. But having said that, we could move that bill more quickly into this Legislature, together with so many other bills, if this party would resist its childish antics and begin

to allow us to move legislation through in a thoughtful and responsible manner.

YORK CENTRAL HOSPITAL

Mr Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): My question is to the Minister of Health. On October 14, I asked you a very specific question regarding the

status of the York Central Hospital redevelopment project. All I got was a political dance from you. I pointed out that the Minister of Finance, who is also the member for Vaughan-King-Aurora and

whose constituents are served by this hospital, although he had approved some $4 billion of new spending, had done nothing to ensure that this important project was funded.

Now we're hearing that the same Minister of Finance has given the nod to search for property for a new hospital in Vaughan. Is it true, Minister of Finance,

that the reason the funding for York Central Hospital is being delayed is because the real plan is to ensure that the minister's new hospital in Vaughan will be funded? Will you confirm or deny

that?

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): The honourable member started out as someone who liked to drive around in

snowstorms, and now he likes to go on fishing expeditions. Here's what I can tell the honourable member.

In point of fact, if he looks back to the answer that I gave him that day, what he'll see is that I sent a very strong message to the people of that area, one

of the high-growth areas of our province, that we recognize their need for additional capital investments.

I also made another point which is important in the piece. When these guys weren't closing hospitals, they ran around promising new ones. The fact of the

matter is that the quality of the rhetoric and their great, big plastic cheques weren't backed up when anybody took these cheques to the bank. The fact of the matter continues to be that we're

working on about $4 billion or $5 billion worth of capital projects that are in one phase or another of creating expectation in local communities, and we're working very, very hard.

My ministry is working with the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal to make sure that Ontario moves forward with a program of capital infrastructure that

is capable of being funded in our province.

Mr Klees: The truth is that we built more hospitals under our time in government than any other government in this province. That's a reality.

What this minister now is doing is making political light of the fact that York Central Hospital is in a situation where 50% of the ambulances are turned away every month of this year. Over 1,000

patients in the last year have walked away from the emergency ward of this hospital because they couldn't be served. The reality is that the average wait time to get someone into a bed in that

hospital is now some 10 hours. That's the average, Minister.

The fact is that nurses and doctors and patients alike are frustrated, and you continue to play political football with this issue. Will you or will you not

consider this a priority and give us a commitment that you will fund this project and that you're not playing politics with the Minister of Finance on a new hospital in Vaughan?

Hon Mr Smitherman: It seems to me that if we want to know who's playing politics, we simply have to look to the person asking the question.

Perhaps in response we should say, how is it, sir, that after eight and a half years in government, you did not get that done? How is that the case? Because while the honourable member wants to say

that they opened more hospitals, the fact of the matter is that the member seems to have created the expectation in his own head that having an announcement and presenting a big plastic cheque was

about the opening of a hospital.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Order.

Mr Klees: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: The minister knows full well that that's an asinine remark to make.

Hon Mr Smitherman: What I know full well is that in the final days of the life of that party while in government they ran around from hither

to yon in the province of Ontario and presented big plastic cheques. When they were taken to the bank they were returned NSF. This is on top of their $5.5-billion operating deficit that they left

behind, and this --

The Speaker: Thank you.

Interjections.

The Speaker: The member from Oak Ridges. Will the members come to order, please. I'm going to start maybe naming members because we're not

progressing in any way. Now a new question, the member from Nickel Belt.

AUTISM SERVICES

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I have a question to the Premier. Premier, your government is at it again this week, fighting against

families with autistic children. This time your government is intervening at the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal against 200 families that claim your government is discriminating against their

autistic children on the basis of their disability.

You have four lawyers at this proceeding, and on Monday and Tuesday, on your behalf, they argued that the commission has no jurisdiction to hear the cases,

that the cases should be stayed. They further argued that it's not in the public interest to have this process proceed. I remind you, Premier, that these families are fighting to get medically

necessary IBI treatment for their children. Can you tell me how much your government is spending to try and block these families from doing that?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): To the Minister of Children and Youth Services.

Hon Marie Bountrogianni (Minister of Children and Youth Services, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration): I can't comment on anything in

front of the tribunal, but I can tell you how much we are spending to help children with autism --

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): I'll warn the member one more time. Minister.

Hon Mrs Bountrogianni: I guess I was fortunate I didn't hear what the member said. I can tell the member what we are spending to help children

with autism across this province, right from the time of their diagnosis, right through to the end of high school. We have doubled the amount of spending on children with autism in this province.

We have increased the preschool screening and assessment by $10 million. We are reaching 20% more children. Our waiting lists are decreasing. As well, we have put $30 million for more resources in

the school system, because children with autism, as all children with special needs, need to be at school with children of all abilities and disabilities. I'm very proud of our strategy.

Ms Martel: Premier, the question was, how much money is your government spending to fight these families from getting the IBI for their

children? You see, during the election, you told voters to choose change. The fact of the matter is, your government is discriminating against these children just as badly as that group ever did.

Your government is attacking these families just as aggressively as the former government ever did. Your lawyers, on your behalf, spent months trying to undermine families at the Deskin and Wynberg

trial. Your government has sent in lawyers against every family that has tried to get an interim order for their IBI to continue after the child turns six. Now your government has got four lawyers

at the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal, trying to stop those proceedings so their parents will never have their say.

I ask you again, how much money has your government spent in all of these proceedings, trying to stop parents from getting medically necessary IBI for their

autistic children?

Hon Mrs Bountrogianni: I will refer this question to the Attorney General.

Hon Michael Bryant (Attorney General, Minister responsible for native affairs, Minister responsible for democratic renewal): To answer the

member's question, we have counsel before the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal on that matter. We have counsel before the courts, as well, on this matter. We are defendants in the matter I'm speaking

of. Some cases see some plaintiffs and some applicants who wish to get some funding earlier. Some are seeking to get funding a little later.

We want to let the government and the Legislature decide. We want the government and this Legislature to determine how we are going to be dealing with and

treating autistic kids. We think this is the place to do it, not before a tribunal and not before the courts. That has been our position all along. We'll continue to fight for the democratic right

to provide autistic --

The Speaker: Thank you. New question.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Ms Deborah Matthews (London North Centre): My question is for the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. People in my community of London have

recently been reading media reports about possible hospital cuts. I have been reassuring my constituents that no such cuts have been made and that this is just the first step in a process to work

with hospitals to balance their budgets. Can you confirm that no cuts have been made and tell us what the process is for moving forward?

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I appreciate the question from the honourable member from London. As I had the

opportunity to say earlier in question period, she and all members from London continue to serve their constituents with good focus and distinction -- focus on the quality of patient care; frankly,

the same as we all have. The reality of the circumstance is that no cuts have been made in London; no layoffs have occurred in London. In fact, as has been outlined by the Premier and others today,

we are at the earliest stages of a process that is designed to get all of Ontario's hospitals in balance and to eliminate the cycle we were dealing with, which we inherited from the previous

government, of bailing them out at the end of the year. I remind the honourable member that in some cases we fully expect it might take us up to 18 months to do this. That's the time frame the

Ontario Hospital Association requested and that we granted. I give the assurance to the honourable member from London, and to all honourable members, that we're going to continue to work through

these on a dedicated basis, with a view to enhancing the quality of patient services and making sure we are operating within what is available financially.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Supplementary?

Mr Khalil Ramal (London-Fanshawe): Minister, for eight years --

Interjection.

Mr Ramal: You have to listen for the question, my friend.

Minister, for eight years London suffered health care cuts by the previous Tory government. Can you tell us what investment our government is making to enhance

health care services in London and take pressure off our local hospitals?

Hon Mr Smitherman: I think the honourable member asks an excellent question, especially because it gives me an opportunity to remind all that

we made significant investments in health care, particularly in the London area: more than $43 million to hospitals, long-term-care facilities, home care and mental health. These included the first

investments in a long time in community-based mental health, which that party ignored while in government; $4.7 million to enhance the number of clients who can be served through local home care,

through the CCAC; a $2.4-million investment to enhance the quality of long-term care; and $1 million for community support services, which help keep people independent in their homes. All of these

are beneficial to patients, and all of them play an incredibly important role in assisting our hospitals by diverting traffic and making resources more available in communities, because we believe

that the best care is the health care you find as close to home as possible.

I thank the honourable member from London and all members from that community for their hard work, and I commit to continuing to work with them to the benefit

of the people from London.

CANCER TREATMENT

Mr Jim Wilson (Simcoe-Grey): My question is for the Premier, and it involves a commitment that was made some time ago to build two new cancer

centres, one in Barrie at Royal Victoria Hospital and one at Southlake hospital in Newmarket. I just want to emphasize the need that patients have in this area. Central-east region, where these

cancer centres are to be built, has the largest population growth in Ontario. We're growing 80% faster than the provincial average. Our growth rate for residents over age 50 is increasing 50%

faster than the rest of the province. Cancer incidence in this region is increasing 25% faster than the rest of the province, and cancer mortality is going through the roof. In fact, cancer

mortality is 42% higher than the rest of the province, and we don't have cancer centres.

The planning has been going on for years. Governments of all three stripes have participated in it. Will you give me your commitment today that you'll begin

construction immediately? The hospitals have provided all the information required. People are dying faster in this part of the province than anywhere else due to cancer. Would you give us the

commitment to begin construction immediately, Premier?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): To the Minister of Health.

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I appreciate the opportunity to respond.

Interjection.

Hon Mr Smitherman: I'm sure you'll get another question, Frank.

I appreciate the opportunity to respond to the honourable member. This is an area, of course, that we recognize for its high growth. I think that on the issue

of long-term care, as an example, it's sad that Simcoe county was passed over so clearly by your government's allocations.

I would say with respect to the issue of cancer centres that, regrettably, cancer in our community continues to be a growing challenge. We work with Cancer

Care Ontario, which helps to prioritize where those investments should be made. The issue of the two centres that are raised by the honourable member is a matter that Cancer Care Ontario is

assisting on with some advice right now. But all of the forecasts do indicate, regrettably, that advancements by building these additional cancer centres that were referenced by the honourable

member will be important. This is part and parcel of the strategy that we're involved in, in consultation with my colleague the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal.

Mr Wilson: Minister, I'm not sure where you get your facts from. In terms of community care access centres, I set those up as Minister of

Health.

Hon Mr Smitherman: Long-term care.

Mr Wilson: Long-term care: We have hundreds of new beds in Simcoe county. On home care, when I was first Minister of Health, there was $1.9

million spent in Simcoe county. When I left, it was $35 million a year and growing.

The cancer patients in Simcoe-Grey and the ridings of Parry Sound-Muskoka, Barrie-Simcoe-Bradford, York North, Simcoe North and Oak Ridges would all benefit

from these cancer centres. How high does the mortality rate have to go? How hard do we have to hit your conscience before you'll build these centres? People are dying. They're having to go as far

away as Sudbury and down to London and Windsor for treatment. It's appalling. We should work together and get these centres built. These are all Tory-held ridings. So, Minister, are you cancelling

these centres because they're in Tory-held ridings?

You're responsible for governing for all the people of the province. You're playing politics with cancer, and you should be ashamed of yourself.

Hon George Smitherman: That 60-second display was nothing but shameful pandering. It was regrettable. It was designed to drive at the heart,

through people's emotions.

To question in the fashion that he did was a little generous. It takes 33 months for only the capital construction element of a building like a cancer centre.

We have been in government for somewhat more than 12 months. Was there a shovel in the ground? Was there a funded project? No, there wasn't. There continues --

Interjection.

Hon Mr Smitherman: No, that is inaccurate as well.

But the fact remains, if you go back to my earlier answer, I acknowledge the honourable member's concern. My mother lives in the same area. I'm not unaware of

the growth that has occurred in Simcoe county. As I said in my very first answer, both the centres in Newmarket and Barrie continue to be important priorities, and we're making considerable

progress.

PENSION PLANS

Ms Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): My question is to the Minister of Finance. Minister, sitting in the gallery are a dozen or so members of

the Participating Co-operatives of Ontario Trusteed Pension Plan, representing over 2,300 former employees of Ontario's farm and dairy co-operatives. Their pension plan has been fatally damaged by

a risky investment strategy that went terribly wrong, negligence on the part of the province's pension overseer, the FSCO, and a huge hole in the mandate of the province's pension protector.

Eighteen months ago, their very modest pensions of about $700 a month were cut to $350 a month, and their plan is soon going to be wound up.

Minister, you have told these people personally that the province takes no responsibility for this tragedy and there's nothing you can do about their situation

right now. The New Democratic Party believes that you're wrong, that there is something that can be done. Will you take immediate action and meet with the plan members, and come up with an action

plan to restore these hard-earned benefits?

Hon Greg Sorbara (Minister of Finance): I'm glad that my friend from Hamilton East met with these pensioners. Indeed, it was about two years

ago this month, I think, that I met with them for the first time. I was in opposition at the time. I made submissions on their behalf to the then Minister of Finance. Later, after our government

was sworn in, I had an opportunity to meet with these representatives of this plan.

The reality in the province is that there are two types of pension plans: those who pay into something called the pension benefits guarantee fund and, in that

way, have their pensions protected in some measure, should things go wrong with the plan; and there is another group of pension plans in the province that doesn't pay into this plan and therefore

does not have this insurance protection when something goes wrong with their plan.

The terrible, unhappy reality is that the pension plan that these pensioners paid into was not covered by the pension benefit guarantee fund and therefore

their plans are not insured. I wish it were different. I wish that weren't the reality, but it is.

Ms Horwath: Minister, that's just not good enough, and now you do have the power to make some changes for these people. The FSCO, the

government's pension regulator, had ample warning of the problems but did nothing at the time, which you've admitted to. The former government made mistakes, the plan trustee made mistakes, the

investment manager of the fund made mistakes, but the people who are paying the price for the mistakes of all these different players are sitting up there in the gallery, the other 2,300 members of

this pension plan and in fact their spouses, totalling over 4,000 people from every riding in this province. Every one of these members sitting here likely has one of these members in your

riding.

Now your government is joining the long list of people who are throwing up their hands and saying, "There's nothing we can do. We feel really bad but there's

nothing we can do about it." Minister, please do the right thing: Sit down immediately with the Co-operatives pensioners and work out some kind of compensation plan for these people who worked for

decades in their industry, who worked very hard for very modest and meagre pension plans that they no longer can benefit from.

Hon Mr Sorbara: As the Minister of Finance for this province I would love, every time someone, particularly from the NDP, comes and says, "Fix

this horrible problem" -- the fact is that we have a group of pensioners who were being supported by a pension plan not covered by the insurance program that covered others.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Order. Member from Whitby-Ajax, please do not interrupt.

Minister of Finance.

Hon Mr Sorbara: Some of the representatives of this pension plan have actually taken the right steps by commencing a class action against the

trustees who were responsible for the plan. It's a problem that is going to take some time to resolve, but at the same time I want to tell you that we have looked at every single possible method so

that we might help the members of this pension plan. The fact is that they were not covered by the insurance, and it would be inappropriate for me to intervene at this time.

CHILD CARE

Mrs Maria Van Bommel (Lambton-Kent-Middlesex): My question is for the Minister of Children and Youth Services. I know that you've been in

Ottawa this week, working with your counterparts from the federal, provincial and territorial governments on a new national strategy for early learning and child care. You know that families in

Ontario face big challenges in terms of finding child care for their children, and they watch the progress of these meetings with great interest. My constituents are mostly rural, and rural regions

face their own unique challenges in terms of child care. Minister, what were the results of your meetings in Ottawa, and what will that mean for families in Ontario, including our rural

communities?

Hon Marie Bountrogianni (Minister of Children and Youth Services, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration): Indeed, child care took many steps

forward in these talks in Ottawa.

developmental appropriateness of the programs. We also agreed that the programs needed to be, although a system across the country, flexible within each province to address exactly the issues that

you just brought up: the rural and urban differences, and aboriginal communities, for example -- a major step forward, and a lot of it had to do with the collegiality and respect among the

provincial ministers, but also the respect for federal Minister Dryden.

Mrs Van Bommel: Families in Lambton-Kent-Middlesex and families all across this province are concerned that there are simply not enough child

care spaces available. More and more families have two working parents. Our child care is no longer something that is a luxury; it is a necessity for these families.

In rural areas we have added concerns such as distance and transportation, lack of resources and child safety on our farms.

One of the things that is really worrying me is the report we have seen from the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development that shows that

Ontario's child care system is inadequate in its capacities and also inadequate in how it helps children to develop in those very critical early years. Minister, how is Ontario addressing these

gaps, and what are you doing to make things better for Ontario families?

Hon Mrs Bountrogianni: Indeed, the OECD report is an embarrassing report, not just for Ontario but for the country -- but particularly for

Ontario. As I said in the meeting to my provincial counterparts, it was embarrassing to be representing such a wealthy province and yet to be playing catch-up, and that is because the former

government didn't spend one red cent of extra investment in child care. In fact, they put federal monies into other programs.

You will see with the Best Start plan that we will show that we are not only committed to working with the federal government, but we are committed to

Interjections.

Hon Mrs Bountrogianni: I think it's the members opposite who should be careful, because our Best Start plan hasn't been announced yet.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Mr Cameron Jackson (Burlington): My question is for the Premier. Premier, you'd be aware of course, coming from Ottawa, that your Montfort

Hospital received a 15% increase. All the staff at Joseph Brant Memorial Hospital are perplexed because the community of Burlington and Oakville is growing at two and a half times the rate of the

city of Ottawa, and yet they were relegated to a 1.2% increase in funding. Your prescription for starvation funding for Joe Brant has resulted in a $6-million deficit. Sixty bed closures are on the

table. Eighty nurses and cleaning staff are to be terminated. Another operating room is to close this year, with a 20% reduction in operating theatres.

Premier, how can you justify giving a 15% increase to a hospital in your community while the growth factors are such in a community like Burlington, which the

Hospital Services Restructuring Commission has confirmed, that it requires those additional beds and the additional funding in order to provide the needs of a growing community in the GTA like

Burlington-Oakville?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): First of all, let me just say that I think it's entirely inappropriate,

as the member is trying to do, to pit one community against another, one hospital against another. I don't think that is the responsibility of a responsible government. I don't have the details as

to why one hospital got more money than another, but I can tell you that the minister would gladly speak to that if he were here.

I can say this: We are ensuring that every single hospital receives an increase in funding this year. We've tried to do that in as fair, as methodical and as

dispassionate a way as possible. Now we're going to work with every single hospital to find a way to ensure that we can balance the budget and deliver still better-quality services, and we look

forward to working with the member's hospital.

Mr Jackson: Premier, the staff at Joseph Brant Hospital are paying you about $600,000 a year on your new tax. They didn't even get that money

back for their hospital. They're justifiably concerned because we're a growing community.

Premier, when you sat on this side of the House, you talked about program protection in hospitals and you talked a lot about children. I want to ask you a

specific question. Your mental health announcement for additional dollars specifically says it cannot be provided for children in the province of Ontario. The $30 million you've committed is only

for bump funding for staff salaries. No access to additional supports for children's mental health in the province will come from that. Child psychiatric beds in hospitals all across Ontario, in

particular in my own community of Halton, are not protected under your minister's program of restraint going on in all of our hospitals.

Premier, will you undertake or commit in the House today that you will protect children's psychiatric beds to protect children who are suicidal, who have

severe mental challenges? Will you protect those beds in this province and add them to the list, the very small list your minister has created that are protected programs?

Hon Mr McGuinty: First of all, let me just say that I'm proud to lead a government that has provided the first increase in 12 years for

children's mental health services -- very proud.

Also, to add to my initial response, regarding the means by which we determined how much one hospital got as opposed to another, hospital allocations were

based in part on a formula that was developed by the Ontario Hospital Association.

Finally, the Hamilton-Wentworth-Burlington area was the recipient of $40.3 million in additional health dollars this year and has expanded greatly the number

of services in that community. I say again, through this member to his community, that we look forward to working with his hospitals to ensure we can deliver still better-quality care in a way that

is cost-effective.

TENANT PROTECTION

Mr Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): In the absence of the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, my question is to the Premier. Tenants

want to know, which side are you on? Many are forced to choose between paying their rent and feeding their children. During the last election and leading up to the election, you promised in public

debate -- and indeed all Liberals promised in public debate -- that you would return to a regimen of real rent control. But behind closed doors you also promised the landlords and others that you

would institute a plan of regional decontrol when vacancies went above 3%. I'm asking you point-blank today: Which promise are you going to keep? Is it your intent to protect the tenants, or is it

your intent to embark on regional decontrol of rents?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I can tell you that our government will shortly be introducing

legislation to replace the Tenant Protection Act, 1997, with fair and effective tenant protection. We're aiming for a new system of regulating rents that provides real and balanced protection for

tenants. We will also improve fairness in the dispute-resolution process and encourage the proper maintenance and growth of rental housing across the province. We look forward to introducing that

bill in due course.

Mr Prue: That's simply not good enough. The parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing went before the

Federation of Metro Tenants' Associations and point-blank told them that you and your party are committed, that all of the promises, including regional vacancy decontrol, are on the books. Those

people are very upset and they want to know, is this your plan? Because if it is your plan, it is absolutely wrong.

The Daily Bread Food Bank, and perhaps you know about them in Toronto, is telling us that users of their bank are now spending 75% of their income on rent in

Toronto. This is way up from 58% just a decade ago. And 2004 was the highest use of food banks in Toronto's history. Some 130,000 tenants paying market rent are using that food bank.

I ask you again, which promise are you going to keep? Are you going to protect tenants by maintaining controls or are you going to keep your private promise to

institute regional decontrols in Toronto and other major cities?

Hon Mr McGuinty: Just to remind my colleague opposite of the record of his own party, here's a quote from his leader, Howard Hampton. This is

from the text of a speech delivered to the Association of Municipalities of Ontario on August 20, 2002. He said, "We will implement a two-year rent freeze and re-establish rent control, with some

exceptions if the vacancy rate was higher than 3%." It sounds to me like vacancy decontrol.

I can say that we've heard from both tenants and landlords. We've listened to what they had to say. What we will be doing is putting together fair and balanced

legislation, and we look forward to doing that.

LABOUR RELATIONS

Mr Lorenzo Berardinetti (Scarborough Southwest): My question is to the Minister of Labour. In your announcement today, you introduced

amendments to the Labour Relations Act, 1995. I've heard from both employers and employees who are tired of being whipsawed between, first, an NDP government that overly favoured labour, and then a

Tory government that introduced a labour relations system that unduly favours business. Can you tell us what the key changes are and how these amendments will encourage balance, stability and

fairness in Ontario's labour relations community?

Hon Christopher Bentley (Minister of Labour): I would like to thank the member from Scarborough Southwest for the question, and for his

concern for the rights and fairness of workers and for the stability of the system.

We introduced today fair and balanced labour relations changes. Let me outline a few of them. First of all, the provocative one-sided changes made by the

previous government: We're proposing to get rid of those. The decertification poster: There's no equivalent certification poster. That has to go. Union salary disclosure rules which aren't balanced

by requiring companies to disclose similar information: They have to go.

What about the fairness of the process? For the worst labour relations abuses in the worst cases, the previous government got rid of the only effective remedy,

a remedy that existed for almost 50 years: remedial certification. We're restoring that power to the board, and we're restoring as well a remedial power to stop any certification application if the

union abuses. This is a fair and balanced approach to labour relations that has characterized Ontario for decades. That's the one we're pursuing.

PETITIONS

HEART MEDICATION

Mr Ernie Hardeman (Oxford): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Ministry of Health for Ontario, via OHIP, permits discriminating reimbursement policies for at least one specific heart medication, the medication

referred to as Solatol, a medication required to establish regular heartbeat. The 80-milligram version cannot be claimed for reimbursement, while the 160-milligram version can;

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

"To establish equitable rules for reimbursement by OHIP of the above-mentioned medication, and to instruct OHIP not to differentiate claimability for

reimbursement on the basis of differently-sized doses for one and the same medication."

I add my signature to this as I agree with it.

GO TRANSIT SERVICE

Mr Bob Delaney (Mississauga West): I have a petition to the Ontario Legislative Assembly from a group of residents in Toronto who join with us

in our appeal for a new GO train station. It reads:

"Whereas the city of Mississauga has, within a generation, grown from a linked collection of suburban and farming communities into Canada's sixth-largest city,

and tens of thousands of people daily need to commute into and out of Mississauga in order to do business, educate themselves and their families and enjoy culture and recreation; and

"Whereas gridlock on all roads leading into and out of Mississauga makes peak period road commuting impractical, and commuter rail service on the Milton GO

line is restricted to morning and afternoon service into and out of Toronto; and

"Whereas residents of western Mississauga need to commute to commute, driving along traffic-clogged roads to get to overflowing parking lots at the Meadowvale,

Streetsville and Erindale GO train stations;

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

"That the government of Ontario, through the Ministry of Transportation and highways, instruct GO Transit to allocate sufficient resources from its 2004-05

capital budget to proceed immediately with the acquisition of land and construction of a new GO train station, called Lisgar, at Tenth Line and the rail tracks, to alleviate the parking congestion,

and provide better access to GO train service on the Milton line for residents of western Mississauga."

I'm happy to sign this petition.

CHIROPRACTIC SERVICES

Mr Ted Arnott (Waterloo-Wellington): My petition is to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario and it reads as follows:

"Re: support for chiropractic services in Ontario health insurance plan:

"Whereas

"Elimination of OHIP coverage will mean that many of the 1.2 million patients who use chiropractic will no longer be able to access the health care they

need;

"Those with reduced ability to pay -- including seniors, low-income families and the working poor -- will be forced to seek care in already overburdened family

physician offices and emergency departments;

"Elimination of OHIP coverage is expected to save $93 million in expenditures on chiropractic treatment at a cost to government of over $200 million in other

health care costs; and

"There was no consultation with the public on the decision to delist chiropractic services;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to reverse the decision announced in the May 18, 2004, provincial budget and maintain OHIP

coverage for chiropractic services, in the best interests of the public, patients, the health care system, government and the province."

It's signed by many hundreds of my constituents and it has my support as well. I've affixed my signature to it.

Mr Wayne Arthurs (Pickering-Ajax-Uxbridge): To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Re: support for chiropractic services in Ontario health insurance plan:

"Whereas the elimination of OHIP coverage will mean that many of the 1.2 million patients who use chiropractic will no longer be able to access the health care

they need;

"Whereas those with reduced ability to pay -- including seniors, low-income families and the working poor -- will be forced to seek care in already

overburdened family physician offices and emergency departments;

"Whereas the elimination of OHIP coverage is expected to save $93 million in expenditures on chiropractic treatment at a cost to government of over $200

million in other health care costs; and

"Whereas there was no consultation with the public on the decision to delist chiropractic services;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to reverse the decision announced in the May 18, 2004, provincial budget and maintain OHIP

coverage for chiropractic services, in the best interests of the public, patients, the health care system, government and the province."

STUDENT SAFETY

Mr Jim Flaherty (Whitby-Ajax): I have a petition to the Legislature of Ontario.

"To the Legislature of Ontario:

"Whereas the Ministry of Education has failed to ensure that students are protected from individuals whose past behaviours have directly harmed children;

and

"Whereas the Ministry of Education has chosen to ignore the children's aid society's recommendation that certain individuals not work with children; and

"Whereas the introduction of a `volunteer' into the school system must not be solely at the discretion of the principal; and

"Whereas the Liberal government promised to ensure that school boards provide strong local accountability and decision-making;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly to amend the Education Act to place restrictions on the eligibility of persons who act as volunteers in

schools, and to include as a formal requirement that volunteers be subject to the approval of the school board and parent council."

I've affixed my name, and I introduced a bill to this effect today.

CHIROPRACTIC SERVICES

Mrs Maria Van Bommel (Lambton-Kent-Middlesex): I have petitions that I'm going to present on behalf of chiropractic patients in Wallaceburg,

and I read from them:

"I write to urge you to reverse the decision to eliminate OHIP funding for chiropractic services. This decision is short-sighted and ill-advised and puts my

health and that of the entire province at risk.

"I believe the government must provide OHIP funding for chiropractic care because over 1.2 million Ontarians depend on chiropractic care for treatment and

relief of back and neck pain, headaches, and other musculoskeletal disorders.

"This cost-effective and efficient care allows patients to continue to function and lead healthy lives. Without this care, patients will experience increased

pain, increased time off work and greater disability.

"Access to care will be severely affected, as many patients will be unable to absorb the additional out-of-pocket costs resulting from delisting. Without OHIP

funding, many patients will be forced to seek no care or to access more expensive care available through the public health care system. Where there are family physician shortages, they will have to

wait longer for care and visit overcrowded and expensive emergency rooms.

"While government will save $93 million by eliminating chiropractic coverage, the additional direct cost from patients accessing physicians, emergency

departments and drugs will exceed $200 million.

"I want my government to continue to provide OHIP funding for chiropractic care and call on you to change this bad decision."

That is signed by 700 residents of Wallaceburg.

GASOLINE PRICES

Mr Gerry Martiniuk (Cambridge): "To the Parliament of Ontario:

"Whereas gasoline prices have increased at alarming rates during the past year; and

"Whereas the high and different