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

December 12, 2006

38th Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2006-Dec-12 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Tuesday 12 December 2006 Mardi 12 décembre 2006

ESTIMATES

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

GOVERNMENT'S RECORD

ENERGY CONSERVATION

EMPLOYMENT

CITY OF NORTH BAY

FAMILY DOCTORS

GOVERNMENT'S RECORD

TOYS FOR TOTS

HOLIDAY ACTIVITIES

VISITORS

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

GENERAL GOVERNMENT

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

HEALTH SYSTEM

IMPROVEMENTS ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR L'AMÉLIORATION

DU SYSTÈME DE SANTÉ

MUNICIPAL AMENDMENT ACT (DIRECT ELECTION OF DURHAM REGIONAL COUNCIL CHAIR), 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 MODIFIANT LA

LOI SUR LES MUNICIPALITÉS (ÉLECTION AU SCRUTIN GÉNÉRAL DU PRÉSIDENT DU CONSEIL RÉGIONAL DE DURHAM)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

STATUTE LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 MODIFIANT DES LOIS

EN CE QUI CONCERNE

L'ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE

MOTIONS

APPOINTMENT OF ACTING

CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER OF HEALTH

HOUSE SITTINGS

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

HEALTH CARE

MANDATORY RETIREMENT

HEALTH CARE

MANDATORY RETIREMENT

HEALTH CARE

VISITORS

DEFERRED VOTES

EDUCATION AMENDMENT ACT

(LEARNING TO AGE 18), 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 MODIFIANT

LA

LOI SUR L'EDUCATION

(APPRENTISSAGE JUSQU'À L'ÂGE

DE 18 ANS)

SHEELA BASRUR

VISITORS

ORAL QUESTIONS

GOVERNMENT SPENDING

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

PROPERTY TAXATION

APPRENTICESHIP TRAINING

CHILDREN'S AID SOCIETIES

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

HIGH-OCCUPANCY VEHICLE LANES

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

MUNCIPAL GOVERNMENT

WATER QUALITY

ORDERS OF THE DAY

ORDER OF BUSINESS

FAIR ACCESS TO REGULATED

PROFESSIONS ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR L'ACCÈS ÉQUITABLE

AUX PROFESSIONS RÉGLEMENTÉES

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

ESTIMATES

Hon. Greg Sorbara (Minister of Finance, Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I have a message from the administrator of the government of Ontario, signed

by his own hand.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): The administrator of the government of Ontario transmits estimates of certain sums required for the services of the province for the year ending 31 March

2007, and recommends them to the Legislative Assembly.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

GOVERNMENT'S RECORD

Mr. John O'Toole (Durham): I rise in the House today to mention more examples of the reckless and uncontrolled spending revealed in the most recent Auditor General's report. Quite frankly, I

would just like to review the independent comments being made in the media, just to mention the headlines that this is worthy of receiving:

"Province to Check Hydro One Spending: McGuinty Vows Greater Oversight after Utility's CEO Gets $3-million Payout" on his severance. The next headline is, "Grits Vow to Rein in Hydro After Boss Leaves with

$3-million Payout." The next headline: "Grits Kill $1.6-billion Surplus" and go on a spending spree of $640 million in about a three-hour cabinet meeting. Next headline: "Former Hydro One Chief Drove Luxury Cars on Corporate Tab." The next

headline: "Ontario Power Rules Out Gifts for Employees," a little bit too little, too late.

If you want to look at more independent comment, let's look at the Auditor General's report. This report summarizes a number of ministries' misuse of public taxpayers' money. What did they say on health and

long-term care? "However, for the program to cost-effectively fulfill its mandate," action is required. These are the auditor's words. He says, "The ministry had still not assessed the relationship between the volumes of services provided by

individual facilities and the cost of providing such services to determine whether the facility fees paid to independent health facilities were reasonable."

This report is a damning --

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

ENERGY CONSERVATION

Mr. Peter Tabuns (Toronto-Danforth): This past summer the city of Toronto, through the leadership of its utility, Toronto Hydro, demonstrated the impact conservation programs can have. Toronto

Hydro's demand response programs managed to reduce Toronto energy consumption at peak times while, in contrast, energy usage in the rest of the province rose to new heights.

Toronto Hydro was the only Ontario utility to target reduction of peak energy use. What it managed to accomplish in the first year of rolling out demand response programs on a very limited scale can be expanded

upon with the proviso that the government revamp its energy policy so that energy efficiency and demand response are at the centre, not a sidebar.

The success of Toronto Hydro's programs highlights how the Liberal allocation of three quarters of a billion dollars to the Portlands Energy Centre, a mega power plant that will reindustrialize the city's

waterfront, is anachronistic and misguided. Expand demand response, combine that with unharnessed resources and energy efficiency and demand response, and you can make a huge difference to the energy situation in Toronto.

This government needs to invest in and focus on energy efficiency and conservation and abandon its anachronistic approach to electricity.

EMPLOYMENT

Mr. Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North): There is no question that 2006 was an extremely difficult year for my constituents in the Thunder Bay-Superior North riding. As the forestry

sector continued to face enormous challenges on a daily basis, the pressure on all elected officials to find solutions for the industry and the communities we represent became a constant and consuming task.

It is with that in mind that I'm taking the opportunity today to thank our municipal representatives who worked so hard over the past three years to fight against the tide that battered our community. I also

want to welcome the mayors, reeves and councillors who have been elected to join this battle for survival for the next four years and to commit to them that I will use all the resources at my disposal as a member of the government to work with

them to see the economy turn around.

The fact is --

Applause.

Mr. Gravelle: Thank you -- that no community in my riding went unscathed. While we had some triumphs, notably the reopening of the mill in Terrace Bay and the avoidance of a shutdown at Buchanan

Northern Hardwoods in Thunder Bay, there were still several shattering blows to our economy.

So as we move into 2007, I look forward to working closely with our municipal leaders in all the communities in the Thunder Bay-Superior North riding to find ways to reopen mills that are indefinitely shut down,

to keep mills open that have successfully fought against the tide and to seek out opportunities for new investments in northwestern Ontario. It is by working together that we can overcome these challenges, and working together we will to not just

survive, but to thrive in the future.

CITY OF NORTH BAY

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): What do the McGuinty Liberals have against North Bay? Earlier this year, the Premier popped into North Bay long enough to show the media and those in

attendance that he doesn't know the difference between the gateway to the north and Sudbury.

Then last week we had the Premier's right-hand man, the finance minister, Greg Sorbara, going out of his way to say that the skiing in North Bay was not very good, despite the fact that he was not aware they had

a ski hill at all. Needless to say, the people of North Bay are none too pleased.

Myself, John Tory and the entire PC caucus know just how wonderful the city of North Bay is. I'm happy to enlighten the finance minister about the grassroots success that is the Laurentian ski hill. The

Laurentian ski hill is, in fact, not owned by Doug Newell, as the finance minister seems to believe. Mr. Newell is the hard-working general manager. It is the North Bay-Mattawa Conservation Authority that owns the ski hill. It was saved by a

community campaign two years ago, a campaign led by Al McDonald, someone whom I know, and the people in Nipissing know, works very hard every day for the people of North Bay.

As a perfect end to a sad display, the minister, in his remarks, turned down an offer to go to North Bay to actually experience the Laurentian ski hill. All I can say is that it's a shame. Visiting North Bay and

experiencing all that it has to offer is never a hardship, and I can assure the people of North Bay that I will be making another visit on behalf of the Progressive Conservative Party very soon, and I encourage all Ontarians to make the trip to

North Bay.

FAMILY DOCTORS

Mr. Bob Delaney (Mississauga West): I recently attended the opening of the first family medicine teaching unit at Credit Valley Hospital. Four residents from the University of Toronto's

postgraduate program are now training at Credit Valley's family medicine teaching unit to become family physicians. In a few years, 18 residents will be enrolled, and all will be serving Mississauga families.

Ontario has been working to increase access to family doctors in western Mississauga. The best way to ensure that we have the right number and the right type of doctors to serve our community is to train young

doctors right in our community. That medical farm system is exactly what Credit Valley's family medicine teaching unit is doing. After two years of residency at Credit Valley Hospital, many of these residents will have roots in our community and

will set up their permanent practices in western Mississauga.

This is not just an innovative way but the right way to increase capacity in Ontario's health care system. By increasing the number of doctors in the Mississauga community, western Mississauga residents will get

greater access to health care services when and where they need it. The family medicine teaching unit is just one of the ways that Ontario is working with the Credit Valley Hospital to bring more doctors to serve our growing western Mississauga

community -- a commitment made and a commitment kept.

GOVERNMENT'S RECORD

Mr. Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): One of the most offensive and deceptive practices by government departments is ramming through what's left of their budget before year-end to hide the fact that

there's a surplus. Now the Auditor General has revealed that the McGuinty cabinet played that game with $1.6 billion of taxpayers' money at the end of the last fiscal year. "None of these transfers ... had been included in the government's budget

for the 2005-06 fiscal year, and in many cases, normal accountability and control provisions were reduced or eliminated...." That according to the Auditor General.

This smoke-and-mirrors bookkeeping leaves the false impression that the government spent $1.6 billion on public services when in fact none of it was spent. This helter-skelter, thoughtless and offensive shell

game to hide $1.6 billion was going on at the same time as ministers were telling us in this House that there is no money for autistic children, no money for special-needs programs in our schools, for home care for the elderly or for residency

positions for foreign-trained doctors.

Just because cabinet ministers played fast and loose with taxpayers' dollars and the fact that it took place in the cabinet office makes it no less offensive than what took place at Hydro One. Perhaps the

Premier should be held accountable in the same way that Tom Parkinson was held accountable for his offensive behaviour.

TOYS FOR TOTS

Mr. Bill Mauro (Thunder Bay-Atikokan): I would like to take this opportunity to recognize the Toys for Tots campaign that is run in Thunder Bay by the Thunder Bay Professional Fire Fighters

Association. Specifically, I would like to thank its chairman, Bob Vander Ploeg, for his leadership and hard work. Toys for Tots is an initiative to ensure that all children who are less fortunate receive a gift on Christmas Day.

Toys for Tots has been very successful in our community. This initiative is almost 50 years old and is made possible through countless hours of volunteer work that is provided by off-duty firefighters. It

receives considerable support from our generous citizens and from local businesses like Abitibi-Consolidated, its longest-running sponsor. The outstanding donation of 2005 was from MGM Electric. In partnership with their employees, customers and

suppliers, the company raised $8,000, for a remarkable total of over $60,000 since 1997. That support is also mirrored by our school boards, service clubs, labour unions and many other groups who organize unique fundraising projects and contribute

their proceeds to the firefighters' campaign.

In fact, since 1973 Toys for Tots has raised more than $1.6 million. Last year the campaign raised $99,000 and used it to coordinate a city-wide mobilization of volunteers to fill and distribute hampers filled

with food, including a turkey dinner, to less fortunate families in our community.

"Christmas wishes can come true ... Thanks to you" is the motto of Toys for Tots, and that spirit is front and centre in the Toys for Tots 2001 video history, which was produced by firefighter John Doughty, a

17-year veteran of the Thunder Bay local.

HOLIDAY ACTIVITIES

Mr. Lou Rinaldi (Northumberland): I would like to bring to the attention of my colleagues the wonderful service provided by the students of Cobourg District Collegiate Institute West, a school

in my riding that I was proud to attend last Saturday. They held a holiday dinner last weekend for people of low income in our community and served over 130 people, the most they have ever served in their eight-year history of providing this

dinner.

The Northumberland Youth Advisory Council worked in partnership with the high school, providing a donation of food, including the donation of an entire pig, and got the word out about this great event.

I would ask that my colleagues join me in showing our appreciation for the hard work and the amazing effort of this group of volunteers. I would like to thank Mr. Paul Hicks and Taylor's meats for their generous

donation, as well as the Northumberland Youth Advisory Council and staff and students at CDCI West for their continued support of community activities. They have worked very hard for the betterment of our community, and it's initiatives like this

one that make Northumberland and Ontario an even better place to live.

Mr. Phil McNeely (Ottawa-Orléans): I rise in the House today to commend the students of Sir Wilfrid Laurier Secondary School in Orléans for their compassion and generosity this

Christmas season.

For 11 years, the students at this school have reached out to those in our community who are in need, making sure that they have a happy and joyful holiday like everyone else.

One of the caring actions taken by these students is the toy mountain campaign that they have run every Christmas season for more than a decade. They are the only school in the city to run a toy mountain

campaign right inside their school. Last year, these students collected 400 toys to brighten the holidays for impoverished children. This year, their ambitions are higher; they hope to donate 500 toys.

Their generosity doesn't end there. The multicultural club at this school has organized additional efforts to help those who are struggling to make ends meet. This club is having each class in the school put

together one or two Christmas hampers for families in need. These hampers will include a Christmas turkey, other seasonal food items and toys for each of the children in the needy families. Some of the students will even help the Caldwell family

service agency and the Odawa Native Friendship Centre to distribute the hampers.

I commend these students for caring and for their generosity. These students exemplify the holiday spirit. I commend them for giving the best Christmas gift of all.

VISITORS

Mr. Ted McMeekin (Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Aldershot): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I'm sure members of the assembly will want to join me in welcoming a good friend of mine from my alma

mater, Dr. Henry Jacek, and 14 of his students from his fourth-year political science class and the master's program.

Mr. John O'Toole (Durham): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I would encourage members to join me in welcoming the new mayor of the municipality of Clarington, Jim Abernethy, who is in the

Speaker's gallery along with his lovely wife, Cathy, as well as my wife, Peggy, my executive assistant, Sheryl, and my mother-in-law, Elizabeth Woods.

Ms. Cheri DiNovo (Parkdale-High Park): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I would like to introduce to the House a gallery full -- and some sitting up there as well -- of the Toronto Association

of Business Improvement Areas to the House this afternoon.

Mr. Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I would like to welcome Jeff Gillan, executive director of Corso Italia BIA in my riding. He's right over there.

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

GENERAL GOVERNMENT

Mr. Kevin Daniel Flynn (Oakville): I beg leave to present a report from the standing committee on general government and move its adoption.

The Clerk-at-the-Table (Ms. Lisa Freedman): Your committee begs to report the following bill, as amended:

Bill 130,

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

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Shall the report be received and adopted? Agreed.

The bill is therefore ordered for third reading.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

HEALTH SYSTEM

IMPROVEMENTS ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR L'AMÉLIORATION

DU SYSTÈME DE SANTÉ

Mr. Smitherman moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 171,

An Act to improve health systems by amending or repealing various enactments and enacting certain Acts / Projet de loi 171, Loi visant à améliorer les systèmes de santé en

modifiant ou en abrogeant divers textes de loi et en édictant certaines lois.

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

The minister may wish to make a brief statement.

Hon. George Smitherman (Deputy Premier, Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I'll defer to ministerial statements.

MUNICIPAL AMENDMENT ACT (DIRECT ELECTION OF DURHAM REGIONAL COUNCIL CHAIR), 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 MODIFIANT LA

LOI SUR LES MUNICIPALITÉS (ÉLECTION AU SCRUTIN GÉNÉRAL DU PRÉSIDENT DU CONSEIL RÉGIONAL DE DURHAM)

Mr. Ouellette moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 172,

An Act to amend the Municipal Act, 2001 to provide for the direct election of the Durham Regional Council chair / Projet de loi 172, Loi modifiant la Loi de 2001 sur les municipalités pour

prévoir l'élection au scrutin général du président du conseil régional de Durham.

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

The member may wish to make a brief statement.

Mr. Jerry J. Ouellette (Oshawa): The bill adds a

section to the Municipal Act, 2001, that requires the head of council of the regional municipality of Durham to be directly elected. This being

the second time I've introduced this bill, it now has the support of the city of Oshawa as well as the municipalities of Ajax and Pickering, as those communities have held referendums in the last municipal election, having over 86% support in

Oshawa and over 89% support to move forward on the issue in Ajax and Pickering.

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

STATUTE LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 MODIFIANT DES LOIS

EN CE QUI CONCERNE

L'ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE

Mrs. Bountrogianni moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 173,

An Act to amend the Legislative Assembly Act, the MPPs Pension Act, 1996 and the Executive Council Act / Projet de loi 173, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur l'Assemblée législative, la Loi de 1996

sur le régime de retraite des députés et la

Loi sur le Conseil exécutif.

Mr. Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): What about the minimum wage? What about the child benefit clawback? What about the disability pension?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Order. The member for Niagara Centre will come to order. Order.

Interjections.

The Speaker: The member for Niagara Centre will come to order.

Interjections.

The Speaker: I will not warn the member for Niagara Centre again.

Mr. Kormos: It's embarrassing. You throw a quarter to --

The Speaker: I name the member for Niagara Centre, Mr. Kormos.

Mr. Kormos was escorted from the chamber.

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

All in favour will say "aye."

All opposed will say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1354 to 1359.

The Speaker: Would members please take their seats. Order. I can wait.

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

Ayes

Arnott, Ted

Arthurs, Wayne

Balkissoon, Bas

Barrett, Toby

Bartolucci, Rick

Bentley, Christopher

Bountrogianni, Marie

Bradley, James J.

Broten, Laurel C.

Brownell, Jim

Bryant, Michael

Cansfield, Donna H.

Caplan, David

Chambers, Mary Anne V.

Chudleigh, Ted

Colle, Mike

Crozier, Bruce

Delaney, Bob

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duguid, Brad

Duncan, Dwight

Elliott, Christine

Flynn, Kevin Daniel

Fonseca, Peter

Gravelle, Michael

Hardeman, Ernie

Hoy, Pat

Jeffrey, Linda

Klees, Frank

Kular, Kuldip

Kwinter, Monte

Leal, Jeff

Levac, Dave

MacLeod, Lisa

Marsales, Judy

Martiniuk, Gerry

Matthews, Deborah

Mauro, Bill

McMeekin, Ted

McNeely, Phil

Meilleur, Madeleine

Miller, Norm

Milloy, John

Mitchell, Carol

Mossop, Jennifer F.

Munro, Julia

Murdoch, Bill

O'Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Parsons, Ernie

Peters, Steve

Peterson, Tim

Phillips, Gerry

Pupatello, Sandra

Qaadri, Shafiq

Ramal, Khalil

Ramsay, David

Rinaldi, Lou

Runciman, Robert W.

Ruprecht, Tony

Sandals, Liz

Sergio, Mario

Smith, Monique

Smitherman, George

Sorbara, Gregory S.

Sterling, Norman W.

Takhar, Harinder S.

Tascona, Joseph N.

Tory, John

Van Bommel, Maria

Watson, Jim

Wilkinson, John

Wilson, Jim

Witmer, Elizabeth

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Yakabuski, John

Zimmer, David

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

Nays

DiNovo, Cheri

Hampton, Howard

Martel, Shelley

Tabuns, Peter

The Deputy Clerk (Ms. Deborah Deller): The ayes are 78; the nays are 4.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

The minister may wish to make a brief statement.

Hon. Mrs. Bountrogianni: Our province is only as strong as our democracy, and the strength of our democracy depends on the quality of the individuals elected to serve in this chamber.

The Integrity Commissioner cited this principle in his recent report on MPPs' compensation. The Honourable Coulter Osborne concluded that it is in the public interest to ensure that such compensation be fair,

that it reflect the important responsibilities of MPPs, and that it not fall so far behind the compensation paid our federal counterparts as to risk having the provincial Legislature seen as a farm team for the House of Commons.

I am today introducing legislation that will bring MPPs' salaries to within 25% of their federal counterparts' salaries. This legislation will also increase the contribution to an MPP's registered pension plan

from 5% to 10% of salary. That's about 75% less than what taxpayers pay towards an average MP's pension.

MOTIONS

APPOINTMENT OF ACTING

CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER OF HEALTH

Hon. James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism, minister responsible for seniors, Government House Leader): I seek unanimous consent to move a motion without notice respecting the appointment of

the acting chief medical officer of health.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Mr. Bradley is seeking unanimous consent to move a motion without notice respecting the appointment of the acting chief medical officer of health. Agreed?

Agreed.

Hon. Mr. Bradley: I move that an humble address be presented to the Lieutenant Governor in Council as follows:

"To the Lieutenant Governor in Council:

"We, Her Majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects, the Legislative Assembly of the province of Ontario, now assembled, request the appointment of Dr. George Pasut as the acting chief medical officer of health

for the province of Ontario as provided in

section 81(1) of the Health Protection and Promotion Act, RSO 1990,

chapter H.7 and

section 28(

l) of the

Interpretation Act, RSO 1990,

chapter I.11, to hold office for a six-month term, having all the

same powers and duties of the chief medical officer of health under the Health Protection and Promotion Act; and

"That the address be engrossed and presented to the Lieutenant Governor in Council by the Speaker."

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

HOUSE SITTINGS

Hon. James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism, minister responsible for seniors, Government House Leader): I move that, pursuant to standing order 9(c)(i), the House shall meet from 6:45 p.m. to

9:30 p.m. on Tuesday, December 12, 2006, for the purpose of considering government business.

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

All those in favour will say "aye."

All those opposed will say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1407 to 1412.

The Speaker: Mr. Bradley has moved government notice of motion number 261. All those in favour will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

Arnott, Ted

Arthurs, Wayne

Balkissoon, Bas

Barrett, Toby

Bartolucci, Rick

Bentley, Christopher

Bountrogianni, Marie

Bradley, James J.

Broten, Laurel C.

Brownell, Jim

Bryant, Michael

Cansfield, Donna H.

Caplan, David

Chambers, Mary Anne V.

Chudleigh, Ted

Colle, Mike

Crozier, Bruce

Delaney, Bob

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duguid, Brad

Duncan, Dwight

Elliott, Christine

Flynn, Kevin Daniel

Fonseca, Peter

Gravelle, Michael

Hardeman, Ernie

Hoy, Pat

Jeffrey, Linda

Klees, Frank

Kular, Kuldip

Kwinter, Monte

Leal, Jeff

Levac, Dave

Marsales, Judy

Martiniuk, Gerry

Matthews, Deborah

Mauro, Bill

McMeekin, Ted

McNeely, Phil

Meilleur, Madeleine

Miller, Norm

Milloy, John

Mitchell, Carol

Mossop, Jennifer F.

Munro, Julia

O'Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Parsons, Ernie

Patten, Richard

Peters, Steve

Peterson, Tim

Phillips, Gerry

Pupatello, Sandra

Qaadri, Shafiq

Ramal, Khalil

Ramsay, David

Rinaldi, Lou

Runciman, Robert W.

Ruprecht, Tony

Sandals, Liz

Sergio, Mario

Smith, Monique

Smitherman, George

Sterling, Norman W.

Takhar, Harinder S.

Tascona, Joseph N.

Tory, John

Van Bommel, Maria

Watson, Jim

Wilkinson, John

Wilson, Jim

Witmer, Elizabeth

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Yakabuski, John

Zimmer, David

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

Nays

DiNovo, Cheri

Horwath, Andrea

Martel, Shelley

Tabuns, Peter

The Deputy Clerk (Ms. Deborah Deller): The ayes are 76; the nays are 4.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

HEALTH CARE

Hon. George Smitherman (Deputy Premier, Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I rise in the House today to speak about our government's proposed health system improvements bill. If passed,

this significant and far-reaching legislation would bring about much-needed change in a number of areas in Ontario's health care system.

We've drafted this bill because we want to ensure we give the people of this province greater access to more health care professions, usher in a new era in public health, better protect public safety, and

bring more accountability and transparency to the system. With this bill, we will proceed with our agenda for positive change, historic changes first felt here in the Legislature where we are joined today by a multitude of stakeholders who will

see themselves and their colleagues reflected in laws that we have had the privilege here to debate.

But make no mistake: Today's bill, if passed, includes changes that are about all of us, changes to keep us healthy, changes to help us if we are really sick. Our bill is a comprehensive one. This simply

reflects the complexity of our health care system.

Since coming into office three years ago, our government has not shied away from doing the necessary work to build the system we all refer to, to ensure that the many cogs of our health care system are

integrated, to deliver quality care for patients. We were elected to transform the system for the better, and while much has been done by so many in the last three years, our work continues.

Now on to some of the specific changes.

In 2004, in a rare act of unanimity, this Legislature acted to suspend a medical audit system that had lost the respect of Ontario's doctors. Under the guidance of former Supreme Court Justice Mr. Peter Cory,

and in lockstep with our partners at the Ontario Medical Association, today's bill introduces a medical review process that will restore doctors' confidence in the fairness of the audit system and provide the public with accountability for

doctors' payments.

I'm so pleased to see Dr. David Bach and others from the Ontario Medical Association, who represent Ontario's doctors so well, and I'm glad to welcome them to the Ontario Legislature today. They're in the west

public gallery.

In 2003, 44 of our Ontarians were lost to SARS. As the government that followed, we've dedicated ourselves to learning and applying all lessons and advice of leaders named Campbell, Naylor and Walker.

This bill would establish the Ontario Agency for Health Protection and Promotion. An independent agency, modelled like the Centers for Disease Control, our agency would bring together academic, clinical and

government experts to create a centre of public health excellence in Ontario -- public health excellence to keep us well in the first place, and excellence to maximize our protection against known threats and those not yet identified.

No one has been more dedicated to the health of Ontarians than Dr. Sheela Basrur, who is here today in the Legislature with her family. She has been a driving force behind the proposal for this agency, along

with other professionals who have worked with her, including people like Terry Sullivan from Cancer Care Ontario and Dr. Michael Christian. They are both with us here today, and they have our thanks as well.

Next, this bill moves to broaden the scope of practice of existing regulated health professionals, brings four new groups under self-government and streamlines the complaints process addressing the concerns of

patients.

Specifically, this bill would expand the scope of practice for optometrists, for dental hygienists and pharmacists. Patients would have increased access to services through the safe and appropriate use of

these health care providers. This proposal is based on the advice from the Health Professions Regulatory Advisory Council. Barbara Sullivan, HPRAC's chair, is with us in the east members' gallery.

Our government recognizes that the current process for deciding which drugs can be prescribed by nurse practitioners and some other providers is limiting and cumbersome. That's why this legislation proposes

categorizing drugs and then working with the key stakeholders to develop a better approvals process. Again, it is the patient who will benefit as they will have greater access to appropriate care.

We also know that health care providers working in teams can increase patient satisfaction. This new legislation will make the encouragement of team-based care models a basic element of the regulatory

college's mandate. As well, through this bill, the regulatory colleges will be able to collect and share key information about the health care workforce to help the government and our partners, in order to be able to make sure that we have the

right number of health care providers today and in the future to meet the needs of Ontarians.

I'd like to recognize these individuals, but they represent a much larger group of people. I'd like to recognize specifically Alison Dantas from the Ontario Association of Naturopathic Doctors, Fran Richardson

of the College of Dental Hygienists of Ontario, Naseema Siddiqui of the Coalition of Mental Health Professionals, Gerry Cook of the Ontario College of Pharmacists, and Irwin Fefergrad of the Royal College of Dental Surgeons, who have all worked

with the government on this bill.

For years Ontarians have had the benefit of a world-leading air ambulance service staffed by dedicated, highly trained paramedics. By adding critical care land ambulances in designated Ontario communities,

Ornge, the new name of our service, will be able to extend their high-calibre care to many of our sickest patients. Patients win, and hospitals and municipal land ambulance services in places like Sudbury will have their loads lightened.

I'd like to recognize Dr. Chris Mazza, the president and CEO of Ornge. He's in the east members' gallery.

Chase McEachern passed away from a heart condition at the age of 11. In his lifetime, though brief, Chase raised awareness about publicly accessible defibrillators. The Chase McEachern act would protect most

individuals from civil liability for any damages that might occur from the use of a portable defibrillator in an emergency. This measure builds on the dedicated efforts of our colleague Bruce Crozier, the MPP for Essex, who brought forward a

private member's bill with the same objectives.

Each year in Ontario about 6,500 people suffer from cardiac arrest. We know that defibrillators can increase survival rates by up to 50%. Thanks to the good work of people like Chase McEachern and

organizations like the Heart and Stroke Foundation and the Mikey Network, who work hard to get more defibs into Ontario communities, more Ontarians will have a fighting chance of survival and recovery. I applaud their efforts and hope that

everyone will join with me in recognizing Chase McEachern's family, who are here in the east members' gallery with us today.

As I said at the outset, these are the highlights of our government's proposed Health System Improvements Act. Ultimately, what's important to bear in mind is the wealth of improvements this bill would bring

for Ontario's patients. The proposed legislation is part of our government's overall plan for innovation in health care and for building a health care system that delivers on three crucial priorities: keeping Ontarians healthy, reducing wait times

and providing better access to nurses and to doctors. I look forward to the passage of our proposed Health System Improvements Act.

MANDATORY RETIREMENT

Hon. Steve Peters (Minister of Labour): Today I rise on a very historic day for the province of Ontario. Today mandatory retirement is eliminated in this province.

A little over a year ago, this Legislature voted to end mandatory retirement. At that time, a one-year transition period was included to give Ontarians time to get ready for the change.

On December 12 last year, the Lieutenant Governor gave royal assent, and so today, one year later, there is no more mandatory retirement in the province of Ontario.

It was the right thing to do one year ago, it's the right thing to do today and it's the right thing to do for today's society.

The journey to ending mandatory retirement began in June 2001 when the Ontario Human Rights Commission released a paper entitled Time for Action: Advancing Human Rights for Older Ontarians. In it, the

commission stated that mandatory retirement policies undermine the dignity and sense of self-worth of older workers.

I want to thank people like Keith Norton, Mike Colle, Carl DeFaria, Chris Bentley, Lillian and Murray Morgenthau, co-founders of CARP and, as advocates for this legislation.

Premier McGuinty demonstrated very clear leadership and made it very clear that he did not want to have a policy that undermines the dignity and sense of self-worth of a large segment of our population. It

wasn't fair, it wasn't right, and today it no longer exists.

Today, we are here to give Ontarians freedom, the freedom to choose to retire or not retire at the age of 65. Today, we are here to say to people all across this province, "Do you want to continue to work?"

Well, now you can. "Do you want to continue to contribute in the workplace?" Well, now you can. "Do you want to continue to earn your livelihood?" Well, now you can.

Today, the law puts an end to mandatory retirement, and that takes effect here in the province of Ontario. Today, thousands of Ontarians will have the choice of whether or not to retire; that choice will be

theirs to make. Starting today, citizens of this province will be able to decide for themselves whether or not to continue working past the age of 65. Some may ask, "Why would they want to work past the age of 65?" For many reasons: Some workers

decide to retire based on lifestyle, circumstances and priorities -- the decision may be personal or practical -- and some people want to continue working because they want to continue working. As of today, they have that right.

People today are living longer, more active lives. Many people still have a keen interest in their working lives. They believe they still have much to contribute. As of today, they have that right.

The age of 65 was an artificial construct -- it always was. Winston Churchill was born in 1874. That means that he turned 65 in 1939, at the very start of World War II. Still ahead lay for him the brilliant

leadership of Britain during that war. It's probably a good thing that the British public didn't say to him, "Okay, Mr. Churchill, you're 65. It's time to step aside."

Are we to say to Margaret Atwood, who turned 65 in 2004, "That's enough; put down your pen; no more writing for you"?

For ongoing influence and significance we only have to look to the city of Mississauga and the enthusiastic, fireball mayor, Hazel McCallion. She is 85 years old. This past November, the residents elected her

to her 11th term. They clearly recognized in Mississauga that age was not a factor.

Astronaut John Glenn orbited the earth in 1962. In 1998, he went back into space aboard the space shuttle at the age of 77.

The sum of 65 years does not mean it's over.

Employers' and employees' organizations have spoken to me about their concern over a coming workforce shortage. The end of mandatory retirement now gives them access to a highly trained, highly motivated new

source of labour. They can tap into their own employees. This is a good thing for employers, this is a good thing for employees and it is the right thing to do.

Human rights in this province have taken a great step forward today. Today, we are seeing Ontario adapt to changes in our society. Today, we are fulfilling the promise we made. Today, there is no more

mandatory retirement in the province of Ontario.

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

Mr. Gerry Martiniuk (Cambridge): In 2003, the Progressive Conservative government introduced an amendment to the Ontario Human Rights Code to eliminate the last vestige of state discrimination

in Ontario, that of age. Three long years later, the McGuinty government followed that lead, effective today.

The Progressive Conservative caucus, under the leadership of John Tory, wishes well any senior who takes advantage of their new freedom to work and share their valuable experience with our community, province

and country.

HEALTH CARE

Mrs. Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener-Waterloo): I'm going to respond to the health legislation. Obviously we're very pleased that this legislation has been introduced. Many of these

recommendations are long overdue, whether it's dealing with the public health agency or the Cory report or the response to HPRAC. So we are pleased that the legislation is here today.

Having said that, I think the first thing that causes some great concern is the fact that this is an omnibus bill. As somebody said to me, it is a monster bill. It is immense. I think it has caught many people

by surprise in that it amends 42 diverse acts. Certainly the packaging and the scope of the legislation is very surprising. The legislation probably has the potential to involve the largest number of stakeholders ever in any bill.

I have some concerns about the timing. We are nine months away from an election and I really wonder if the government has introduced it so late that there's no intention for it to pass before that time. I

think it's really important that we take a look at what is contained in here and, if we're going to protect the public, that we do allow the public ample opportunity to analyze this bill. It is huge.

I know the minister has highlighted some of the main points, but in any omnibus bill you also have to be very suspicious as to what may be contained therein that has not been carefully analyzed or --

Interjection.

Mrs. Witmer: You're right.

Anyway, let me begin first with the Cory report. This report was released in April 2005. We've not had an audit system in place since that time. If this bill does not pass in the spring and it's held over

until the next election, it's going to be almost three years. The Minister of Health promised a response by the summer of 2005 and now we're seeing it about 18 months later. The response is actually buried in this extremely huge bill. I do believe

that report deserved a more timely response. Of course, the Auditor General just recently spoke to that as well and he criticized the lack of an audit system in his report.

The new public health agency: We've heard many experts over the past few years indicate the need for this agency. We have this recommendation now for an agency, but there is little meat on the bone. We know

that we don't have enough health professionals in Ontario at the present time. We're now going to be requiring more individuals, so this is certainly a huge concern. By the time this agency is set up, it's going to be beyond what a spokesperson

for the minister said at one time, that this was going to be up and running in short order.

If we take a look at the fact that a lot of our public health units -- in fact, 12 of the 36 -- are without a full-time medical officer of health, it just emphasizes the fact that we don't have the human

resources to staff what is being proposed here. We are not at the present time appropriately staffed and resourced and fully integrated with the rest of Ontario's health system.

If you take a look at HPRAC, HPRAC came out with a huge 300-page report and now the responses to that report are buried in this huge bill. We just spent a lot of time on one college and now we're going to

spend very little time --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you. Responses? The member for Hamilton East.

MANDATORY RETIREMENT

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): I have to say I'm responding to the Minister of Labour's marking of the ban on mandatory retirement today. I still have to try to figure out in my mind why

it was so absolutely necessary to make this a priority. In fact, the minister used Margaret Atwood as an example of someone who might be turning 65 and all of a sudden her pen is going to have to drop. That's just passing strange because we know

there are many Canadian authors who have been -- actually, some even started their career after the age of 65. So we know darn well that he was really being facetious when trying to indicate that the ban on mandatory retirement is going to have

anything to do with people like Margaret Atwood.

Nonetheless, what I really think is important today is to mark the fact that most workers in this province want to retire early; they don't want to work until they drop. But the problem is that most workers

would prefer to see that retirement in dignity with a pension so that they don't have to live in poverty. In fact, 60% of Ontarians are not covered by workplace pension plans of any kind, and 83% of workers in the private sector who do have

pension plans have no inflation protection on those plans, so they do end up retiring into poverty.

The government created a task force recently on pensions. Unfortunately, they forgot to include in the mandate of this task force the very fact that most workers in Ontario are not even covered by pension

plans. So the very task force they set up doesn't even deal with the most important issue, which is that most people don't have pensions. That's the biggest problem that the workers in Ontario face. Unfortunately, the McGuinty government

disagrees.

HEALTH CARE

Ms. Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): In response to the Minister of Health's announcement, I want to say that this is an omnibus bill, make no doubt about it. Here is the copy before printing.

The Liberals in opposition used to be against omnibus bills because, as they used to say, these were attempts by the government to throw everything in the pot, everything that the minister or the government had made a promise about but had never

gotten out the door in a timely fashion. That's exactly what's happening here.

Justice Cory released his recommendation on a new audit process in April 2005; here we are, in December 2006, only now seeing amendments to make the changes he proposed. The government itself indicated that

there was going to be a new agency on health promotion and health protection in June 2004; here we are, in December 2006, only now seeing the legislation to create that.

This is a really bad way to deal with important policy issues, especially health issues, especially ones that are going to have a big impact on key stakeholders, patients and the public. The way this is being

done is virtually going to guarantee that important health policy issues that many individuals and organizations spent a long time dealing with -- including HPRAC, Justice Cory etc. -- are going to get short shrift because we are up against a

timeline. Everybody can see that and everybody can see that the time for debate and public hearings is going to be significantly reduced as a result of that timeline.

I want to highlight several concerns. Number one, with respect to the agency for health protection and promotion: David Naylor, in his final report, said that this agency was going to need an operating budget

of at least $45 million, over and above the base budgets from the public health labs, and a capital budget of $35 million. The question is, is the government going to put that money on the table to ensure that this agency can be created?

Secondly, with respect to the public health laboratories, the task force also said that before any transfer to the agency, there had to be a very well-developed human resources plan that was agreed to by all

parties and the immediate establishment of a transition team to aid in that planning. We need to see those things in operation now, because it is clear that the laboratories are going to transfer to the agencies.

I'm really concerned about the funding for public health units because the amendments in the bill transfer current responsibilities of the Ministry of the Environment around inspection of water plants and

small water plants to the public health units without any transfer of funds or human resources to do that. We already know that the public health units wrote to this minister in October 2006 pointing out the many, many jobs that were not created

in the public health units because of this government's cap on public health funding in 2006. Where are the resources going to come from to allow the public health units to deal with this new responsibility?

With respect to the regulation of psychotherapy that has been proposed, the minister knows, because he and many others have received many letters from people who are concerned about regulation of mental health

services generally -- I hope that the provisions in this bill will allow for that, because otherwise the public will not be protected and many people who receive counselling services in northern Ontario and remote areas will have that access

denied.

Finally, with respect to the audit provisions that are in the bill, these have to respond to what Justice Cory recommended. The former MRC process was badly flawed; it led to tragic circumstances and

consequences. Any new process must really ensure that there's a fair audit process in place with an appeal mechanism.

VISITORS

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne (Minister of Education): I'd like to recognize two wonderful individuals from Thorncliffe Park in my riding of Don Valley West: Thillai Sinnadurai and Lathina

Sinnadurai, his grade 4 student who's very interested in politics. Welcome to Queen's Park.

DEFERRED VOTES

EDUCATION AMENDMENT ACT

(LEARNING TO AGE 18), 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 MODIFIANT

LA

LOI SUR L'EDUCATION

(APPRENTISSAGE JUSQU'À L'ÂGE

DE 18 ANS)

Deferred vote on the motion for third reading of Bill 52,

An Act to amend the Education Act respecting pupil learning to the age of 18 and equivalent learning / Projet de loi 52, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur

l'éducation concernant l'apprentissage des élèves jusqu'à l'âge de 18 ans et l'apprentissage équivalent.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Call in the members. This will be a five-minute bell.

The division bells rang from 1440 to 1445.

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

Ayes

Arthurs, Wayne

Balkissoon, Bas

Bartolucci, Rick

Bentley, Christopher

Bountrogianni, Marie

Bradley, James J.

Broten, Laurel C.

Brownell, Jim

Bryant, Michael

Cansfield, Donna H.

Caplan, David

Chambers, Mary Anne V.

Colle, Mike

Crozier, Bruce

Delaney, Bob

Dhillon, Vic

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duguid, Brad

Duncan, Dwight

Flynn, Kevin Daniel

Fonseca, Peter

Gerretsen, John

Gravelle, Michael

Hoy, Pat

Jeffrey, Linda

Kular, Kuldip

Kwinter, Monte

Leal, Jeff

Levac, Dave

Matthews, Deborah

Mauro, Bill

McGuinty, Dalton

McMeekin, Ted

McNeely, Phil

Meilleur, Madeleine

Milloy, John

Mitchell, Carol

Mossop, Jennifer F.

Parsons, Ernie

Patten, Richard

Peters, Steve

Peterson, Tim

Phillips, Gerry

Pupatello, Sandra

Qaadri, Shafiq

Ramal, Khalil

Ramsay, David

Rinaldi, Lou

Ruprecht, Tony

Sandals, Liz

Sergio, Mario

Smith, Monique

Smitherman, George

Sorbara, Gregory S.

Takhar, Harinder S.

Van Bommel, Maria

Watson, Jim

Wilkinson, John

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Zimmer, David

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

Nays

Arnott, Ted

Barrett, Toby

Chudleigh, Ted

DiNovo, Cheri

Elliott, Christine

Hardeman, Ernie

Horwath, Andrea

Hudak, Tim

Klees, Frank

MacLeod, Lisa

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

Martiniuk, Gerry

Miller, Norm

Munro, Julia

Murdoch, Bill

O'Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Prue, Michael

Scott, Laurie

Sterling, Norman W.

Tabuns, Peter

Tascona, Joseph N.

Tory, John

Wilson, Jim

Witmer, Elizabeth

Yakabuski, John

The Deputy Clerk (Ms. Deborah Deller): The ayes are 61; the nays are 27.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

Be it resolved that the bill do now pass and be entitled as in the motion.

SHEELA BASRUR

Hon. James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism, minister responsible for seniors, Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I believe we have unanimous consent for each party to speak for up to five

minutes to recognize Dr. Sheela Basrur.

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

Hon. George Smitherman (Deputy Premier, Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I'll be sharing my time with the Minister of Health Promotion.

Sheela Basrur came to the service of the people of the province of Ontario at a time when service was very much needed. The circumstances for our new government were clear: We had come to office and Ontario's

public health system was seen to be in need of a major revamping.

In our province, 44 of our people had perished in a circumstance which we can all call SARS, but for many of us was subject to so much consumption of daily media and so much searching within all of that media

for people in whom we could have confidence in trying times. For so many people, Sheela Basrur was the public face of SARS. She was that voice in difficult and desperate times who offered reassurance when, frankly, many of us had a difficult time

finding reassurance.

We were very much privileged to be able to ask Dr. Basrur to come and join the service of public health in the province of Ontario by assuming the joint responsibilities of chief medical officer of health and

assistant deputy minister in the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care. In the two and a half years since, she's launched a review of 36 public health units and laid the groundwork for extensive examination of programs and services delivered by

public health units. Sheela Basrur's leadership, fingerprints, valuable advice and direction are found in significant elements of the bill that I'm privileged to have stand in my name and that has been brought to this House today.

We were all struck, I think, by the irony of circumstance quite recently when Dr. Basrur indicated, in her penultimately powerful way, without any hesitation, to put in the public domain the most personal of

circumstances. I know how many members have been touched, because I have been fortunate, if you will, to be their conduit. So many people have come and said to me, "I want to make sure that I reach out and let Dr. Basrur know just what a degree of

respect we have for the dedication she's brought, for the professionalism she's brought." I know that all members of this House, and indeed all Ontarians, whether they've had the privilege, as we have, to have been touched by her so personally or

whether they've only experienced her through television, wish her Godspeed -- on the basis of all those Ontarians to this one very accomplished public servant who has done so much for all of our health -- and best wishes as she seeks to dedicate

herself, with the level of dedication that she has and that few of us can muster, to the subject at hand, which is her own health. Accordingly, I'm privileged to offer on behalf and alongside all members our very, very best wishes, our love and

our gratitude.

Hon. Jim Watson (Minister of Health Promotion): I join my colleague the Minister of Health in thanking Dr. Sheela Basrur for her leadership and commitment to health promotion and public

health. In fact, she helped shape the very foundation of our ministry's work. Despite being perhaps one of the busiest people in the public service, Sheela always made time to listen, to teach, to share her ideas and advice, and to demonstrate a

profound commitment and passion for creating a province in which everyone can be healthier.

Dr. Basrur has a deep understanding of the complex issues related to the social and economic determinants of health and has helped others understand the impact that these have on the health of Ontarians and

the need to work collaboratively to improve the health of the population.

Let me just talk about two signature items.

Smoke-free Ontario: Dr. Basrur was instrumental in the development of the government's tobacco control strategy. She chaired the community action working group since its inception last year and guided the

development of the SFO strategy in concert with all of Ontario's major health partners. She also worked with public health units across Ontario, helping them to understand the impact of this legislation.

Healthy eating and active living: Her report in 2004 entitled Healthy Weights, Healthy Lives sounded the alarms about the serious issues related to obesity and the lack of physical activity. In the report, Dr.

Basrur set out a plan to promote healthy weights in Ontario, and the result was the healthy eating and active living action plan, the provincial government's response and the first plan to integrate the two key risk factors for obesity and chronic

disease: poor nutrition and physical inactivity.

She cared very much about our First Nations and led the development of a protocol with the Nishnawbe Aski Nation and represented the province at the signing ceremony in Thunder Bay.

Sheela has a rare combination of skills and characteristics that make her a charismatic and dynamic leader and a compassionate human being. We've been extremely fortunate to have worked with her and learned

from her. We sincerely appreciate the humanity and compassion she has brought to her post and to everything she's been involved with. We wish her Godspeed with her next challenge and thank her for her dedication to the people of the province of

Ontario. Thank you, Sheela.

Mrs. Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener-Waterloo): It is a pleasure and an honour to pay tribute today to Dr. Sheela Basrur on behalf of my leader, John Tory, and my colleagues in the Progressive

Conservative caucus.

I first had the privilege of meeting Dr. Basrur when I was Minister of Health. Of course, she was serving as the medical officer of health for the city of Toronto. I soon learned that she was one of the most

sincere, hard-working, energetic and dedicated health professionals I had ever met. In fact, she truly was dedicated to the cause of health promotion and keeping individuals as healthy as they possibly could be. She was also very committed to

promoting women's and children's services. I was pleased to be involved with her when we did our tobacco strategy and also when we introduced heart health.

One other thing that always impressed me, and I know my staff used to talk about this as well, is that when Sheela decided to undertake a task and focus on an activity, she was able to motivate and inspire the

people around her -- in fact, the people in the entire community -- to work with her. She was able to recruit and retain many well-qualified and talented health professionals, who helped her to achieve the goal of keeping individuals as healthy as

they possibly could be.

She has many achievements, but certainly I think one of her greatest achievements occurred during our time of office, and that was her strong performance in what were then uncharted waters during the SARS

outbreak. This brought her to the attention not only of people in Toronto, Ontario, and across Canada, but to people in the world. She certainly earned the respect and admiration of people far and wide for the very extraordinary leadership she

exhibited. She was always that calm, reassuring voice of reason who provided easily understandable information to a very nervous population.

I was pleased -- I think we were all pleased -- that shortly after, she was appointed by the McGuinty government to become the chief medical officer of health for the province, where she leaves to this day a

very strong legacy.

She can be very, very proud of her work on the anti-smoking strategy -- certainly it is one that is most unique to North America -- her efforts to combat obesity, and the focus that she brought to fighting the

challenges of air pollution and the need to make sure that we in this province were prepared for any future flu epidemic.

I could go on and on, and some of her accomplishments have already been spoken to. But I decided to seek out some comments from those people with whom she worked most closely: her fellow medical officers of

health. Dr. Robin Williams was kind enough to send some of those comments to me. Although they acknowledge that they were still reeling from your announcement, they were delighted to share, in some way, in paying tribute to you, Sheela. This is

what they said:

She was "a mentor and role model to young women entering the field of public health in demonstrating that strong leadership can come in unexpected packages, and that as a woman it is possible to command a

great deal of respect and get the job done in an exemplary way through compassion, listening, decisiveness and competence." She was able to teach others, and was always willing to share "her knowledge and experience."

Another said, "Her leadership has inspired the trust of" Ontarians "as well as the trust of her colleagues" in knowing she will always safeguard the public's health.

Another said, "Her ability to deal with us, a fractious lot of medical officers, in a steady and often gently humorous way, while building consensus, commitment and passion for a vision of public health in

Ontario has always been exemplary."

And yet another: She has a "sharp intellect -- cool under fire and an extremely gifted communicator."

And yet one more: She is "able to make and take decisive actions, in the most difficult of situations, with the wisest of judgment -- the latest public example being her approach in these past few weeks to the

challenges of her personal health, while making provision for the best interests of the health of the public."

Yes, Sheela, you have truly earned the respect not only of your own colleagues the medical officers of health and of us in this House, but I can truly say that anybody I have talked to in recent weeks has

spoken of you in a manner that I've never heard before. You are a pioneer in public health. You are a truly remarkable and courageous person, daughter and mother. You have exhibited grace in times of tremendous pressure.

I want you to know, and I know I speak for many Ontarians, that you will be front and centre in our hearts over this period of treatment and recovery. We wish you well in your fight against cancer. Our

support, our prayers and our love go with you and your daughter, Simone, and your parents.

Ms. Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): As the third speaker today, I suspected that by the time it was my turn to speak, the many and varied accomplishments of Dr. Basrur would have already been

listed and read into the public record, and indeed that has been done, so there is nothing more I could add to make those accomplishments more meaningful than they have been publicly today. Instead, I'd like to offer these two thoughts to Dr.

Basrur, and I trust, Sheela, that you'll accept them in the spirit in which they are given.

First, my mom has beaten cancer, not once but twice. The first time she had a bout with cancer, I was only eight years old. I don't have much recollection of that first fight. I do remember much more clearly

five years later when she was given a clear bill of health after having been monitored for those five years.

The second time she fought cancer I remember much more clearly, because it only happened three years ago. On December 27, my brothers and I and our families were at home for Christmas when my mom received the

results of her biopsy. She had a very aggressive form of breast cancer, and there was nothing that struck fear into all of us more than hearing that message.

My mother, who was much more courageous than all of us, said very clearly, "I have much to live for, and I intend to do just that." She had a mastectomy and three years later is still being monitored, but

things are good. I share that story with you because I have learned to always have hope, and as you face this current challenge, I trust that you will have hope too.

The second thing I want to say is that I'm not a betting person. My one and only experience with a casino in Ontario occurred 10 years ago at the then interim casino in Windsor, where I parted company with $40

in about 10 minutes. Having said that, if I were a betting person, my money would be on you. There is no one I know who, given your otherwise good health and very positive attitude, could give cancer a run for the money in the way that I know you

are going to. I know that with the support of your parents, who are here today, and your daughter, you will face this newest challenge with the same kind of focused, disciplined and unwavering commitment that you have faced so many other

challenges, not the least of which was the SARS crisis.

In conclusion, I want to thank you on behalf of the Ontario NDP, I want to thank you personally for the enormous contribution you have made to public health in the province of Ontario, and I look forward to

your continuing to make an enormous contribution to the public in Ontario when your personal health allows you to best do so. Godspeed, and all of our thoughts are with you.

Applause.

VISITORS

Mr. Richard Patten (Ottawa Centre): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I would like to introduce two individuals who work for a company that resides in my riding: Don Rippert, the chief

technology officer, who is visiting us from the United States; and Darren Nippard, the head of government services, Canada, for Accenture, a very dynamic technology company that does business with all levels of government.

ORAL QUESTIONS

GOVERNMENT SPENDING

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): My question is to the Premier. It seems that the litany of waste and abuse of taxpayers' money runs wild through every nook and cranny of the Dalton

McGuinty government. Whether it's millions on hotel rooms for the ministries of education and health, $163 million at Hydro One with no receipts or $60,000 SUVs at the children's aid societies, the government seemingly can't help itself when it

comes to treating the taxpayers and their money with contempt.

The Auditor General confirmed that the government itself is a big part of the problem, as reported today in the Toronto Sun. In a few short cabinet meetings at the very end of the year, you spent hundreds of

millions of dollars without proper controls, exactly the same thing as was found at Hydro One: spending money without proper controls.

When are you going to stop treating the taxpayers' money like it is play money and start insisting that all of the rules be followed all of the time in all circumstances, without exception?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): To state the obvious, I take issue with the leader of the official opposition's characterization of past events and our

management of the public's money. I think what he really objects to is the fact that, yes, we did invest significant dollars year-end. We put $670 million into a subway expansion; he objects to that. We put $65 million into the Mississauga transit

system; he objects to that. And we put $95 million into the Brampton transit system; he objects to that.

We had a choice with respect to whether we should be using $400 million at year-end to invest in roads and bridges, and to help our municipal partners manage those heavy challenges. We could have paid down the

debt, I guess, or reduced the deficit further. But we thought we owed it to our municipal partners to help them out. The leader of the official opposition objects to that. What he's really saying today is that it's not so much the process he

objects to; it's the fact that we continue to make the kinds of investments the people of Ontario need.

Mr. Tory: Actually, the Premier has it wrong. What I object to is the complete contempt you show for the rules that govern the expenditure and safekeeping of the taxpayers' money. That is what

I object to, and that is what a lot of other taxpayers object to. You treat this money like you can do anything you want with it, and people object profoundly to that. You treat it like you're on some kind of all-expenses-paid shopping spree. You

just go around and grab anything you want -- forget the rules.

Here is what the Auditor General had to say: "In many cases," referring to this year-end spending, "normal accountability and control provisions were reduced or eliminated...." That's what he said. The

McGuinty government is just as guilty, in those words, of skirting the rules as were the people at Hydro One who spent without proper controls.

You made a solemn commitment to fix things up, change the rules and show some respect. Are you just going to continue with these spending sprees and ignore the rules like you did in handing out the $3 million,

or are you going to do something to address your own recklessness?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: Again, Speaker, as I'm sure you would surmise, I cannot agree with my friend opposite when he says that investing $670 million in subway expansion is part of some

irresponsible spending spree.

Earlier, I listed some of the things we invested in, but there are many more. We chose to invest in the future of our farmers with a $125-million payment to grain, oilseed and horticulture farmers. Now, he may

characterize that as part of a spending spree; we see it as providing essential support to our farmers.

We chose to invest in cultural centres; the party opposite voted against that. That's $49 million to support the Royal Ontario Museum, the Art Gallery of Ontario, the National Ballet School, the Royal

Conservatory of Music, the Canadian Opera Company and the Gardiner ceramic museum. Again, the leader of the official opposition may characterize that kind of investment as part of an irresponsible spending spree, but we see it as a good investment

made on behalf of and for the people of Ontario.

Mr. Tory: The fact is that every single one of those projects and initiatives could have been undertaken and the rules followed at the same time. You don't have to do those things and break

the rules.

March 9 cabinet meeting, $432 million: That's $2.4 million a minute. March 23 cabinet meeting, $640 million: $3.5 million a minute. March 30 cabinet meeting, $205 million: $1.4 million a minute. According to

the auditor -- not me -- no accountability, not following the rules, relaxing or eliminating the controls on taxpayers' money.

The auditor is critical of this kind of recklessness. Taxpayers are worried that you're going to embark on another wild spending spree to try and buy the next election. Will you commit here and now to take the

auditor's words to heart and to follow the rules and the controls without exception every single time you're going to spend one dollar of taxpayers' money? Will you commit to doing that?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: Let me just say that we will always be respectful of the process. But where my friend and I

part company is in terms of the end that we have in mind. He categorizes

investment in public transit, investment in the future of our farmers, investment in our cultural centres, investment in our public libraries, investment in research and innovation as being part of some kind of an irresponsible spending spree. We

see things differently. We will always be respectful of the process. At the same time, we are equally determined to make the kinds of investments that we've made in the past, the kinds of investments that are meaningful to the people of Ontario,

that enhance their prosperity and improve their quality of life, and we will not shrink away from fulfilling that responsibility.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): New question, the Leader of the Opposition.

Mr. Tory: My question is to the Premier. The auditor points out as well that none of the money has actually been spent. He says that right in his own report.

In any event, the Auditor General's report, if you keep going through the pages, is a nightmare before Christmas for Ontario taxpayers. Every turn of the page has another horror story on their hard-earned

dollars getting misused and abused.

Now we've seen a real problem, not confined to any one place, with people dining out on the taxpayers: hydro employees, school board employees, children's aid employees, money spent on fancy meals -- $100 per

person, $130 per person of taxpayers' money, money that should be going to classrooms and vulnerable kids. You have guidelines for government employees: $40 a day total for meals, no more than $20 a day on any one meal. The Minister of Education

says she sent a note out in her area. Have you bothered to send a note out or issue any directive at all to the broader public sector saying there are guidelines on this, they must be adhered to and we are not going to have people dining out on

these kinds of monies across the public sector, money that's meant for education and kids? Have you done that?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: It's interesting to note that virtually all of the references to misspending just made by the leader of the Conservative Party were the kinds of events that were discovered

as a result of us providing new authorities to the Provincial Auditor. Had we not done so, he never would have discovered those kinds of things.

We are proud of the fact that, as a government, we believe in true transparency and accountability; proud of the fact that we've extended the ambit of authority for the Provincial Auditor; proud of the fact

that he has seized those new opportunities and is now looking at our school boards, our colleges, our universities, our hospitals, OPG, Hydro One and children's aid societies; proud of the fact that he's making specific recommendations to those

bodies after he looks into them. Also, I've taken the opportunity -- and the leader of the official opposition will know this -- to tell the people of Ontario that there's a new standard, a new and higher standard in place. There's more

transparency, there's more accountability, there's more responsibility, and we all have to act responsibly when it comes to --

The Speaker: Thank you. Supplementary.

Mr. Tory: I guess it's the same transparency we saw with Mr. Parkinson. The fact is, you can make all of the statements that you want, but if you don't do anything about it and say to people,

"We're going to enforce new rules and impose new rules," it doesn't matter.

Another potential leakage in this nightmare of horrors before Christmas is the leakage of millions of dollars of taxpayers' money that comes from the auditor's findings. There are 7,000 cases of possible

improper use of OHIP cards in a 10-month backlog. The auditor says 40% of those cards historically have been found to be ineligible. That's 2,800 cards. If you assume each of those 2,800 cards spent $2,800 on health care, which is a commonly used

number, and the backlog gets bigger and bigger, that's $8 million of taxpayers' money for health down the drain. Your government's response to the Auditor General in the report is to say that you "will review business processes." Why can't you

move quickly? Why won't you move quickly to get the resources in place even temporarily to get rid of these cheaters and stop this gross misuse of the taxpayers' money? Why won't you do it?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: To the Minister of Health.

Hon. George Smitherman (Deputy Premier, Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): The honourable member made up a lot of numbers there, had a lot of hypotheses, but at the heart of it, we

understand that the auditor has given us good advice with respect to the circumstances related to OHIP cards. The honourable member, for the purposes of a question, likes to pretend that he doesn't know about the improvement that has been made,

even since the report began in December 2005.

Indeed, today's bill, the health system improvement bill, contains even further legislative capacity on the part of the government to ensure that Ontarians are keeping up to date with all of their information

on the card; that is, if they move, that they fulfill their obligation to apprise officials and to get new cards as required.

We take everything that the Auditor General says seriously. We're working diligently in the ministry to improve on circumstances, and, indeed, last week in the House I indicated the level of improvement that

has already occurred. But we're restless and relentless to drive further change and improvement forward and, accordingly, we will.

Mr. Tory: It's certainly amusing to hear from the minister of made-up numbers about made-up numbers on the part of other people.

Another example from the Nightmare Book Before Christmas is over at OPG, and my question, of course, is to the Premier. They approved $498,000 -- properly -- on renovations to the corporate offices, and then

that renovation ballooned to $1.8 million without any competition or documentation at all. The auditor identified in the very same report in a different

chapter literally hundreds of publicly owned buildings that were either in poor condition or

defective condition, but somehow they find $2 million, more than half of it unauthorized, over at OPG to renovate the corporate offices.

Can the Premier tell us what the $2 million was for and if he has told these corporations, "Follow the rules. If you don't follow the rules, there are going to be consequences, including people losing their

jobs, and when it's these kinds of things, do the buildings that need to be done first, that most need it, not just some $2-million project to renovate anything that comes to anybody's mind"? Have you done that?

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: To the Minister of Energy.

Hon. Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy): Yes, we have. In fact, I spoke at length with the chair of OPG. I'd remind the Leader of the Opposition that the auditor provided a number of

recommendations. I have had that conversation with the chair of the board there and the chair at Hydro One, and they are taking appropriate action.

I would remind the member opposite of some of their multi-million-dollar projects. There was the $4.6 million in untendered contracts to Michael Gourley, $1.074 million in untendered contracts to Paul Rhodes,

and the list goes on and on. There was the booth at the Air Canada Centre that some of your colleagues had the opportunity to be part of.

This government shone the light on the challenge. This government is addressing the challenge. This government will respond to all of the auditor's recommendations, because the auditor is right: We have to do

it better. We will ensure that happens.

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Premier. This morning hydro consumers found out they paid for Tom Parkinson's $96,000 BMW 645ci. That's the latest example of

unchecked greed at Hydro One.

You promise things will be different, but what you're trying to hide is the fact that under the McGuinty government hydro salaries have exploded. Today in Ontario, under the McGuinty government, 15 hydro

executives receive more financial compensation than the president of Hydro-Québec, a much bigger hydro utility.

My question is this: Can the Premier tell us why Ontario under the McGuinty government has so many high-priced hydro executives gorging at the public trough?

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

Hon. Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy): The member opposite only has that information because we provided it to the public, and that is the first step in addressing what's going on at Hydro

One and OPG. We acknowledge the challenges that are here today. We acknowledge that they have been there for many years. Unlike past governments, this government will respond in a timely and responsible fashion to ensure that the ratepayers of

Ontario get value for for money.

We brought in the auditor. We're glad he went in. We will respond to all of the recommendations. And I would remind the member opposite -- I know he has a history of opening and stripping collective agreements

-- that a lot of these salaries and benefits are based on collective agreements, and I would urge the member to think long and hard about that. You learned what happens when you don't do that in an appropriate fashion.

It's time to address the problems. We are doing it in a timely and responsible fashion. We accept the auditor's recommendations.

Mr. Hampton: I think people across Ontario want to know what union Tom Parkinson belongs to. I suspect it's the Liberal union.

We heard lots of bluster. Here is the reality. Dalton McGuinty has created a hydro hydra, a five-headed electricity bureaucracy that's devouring working families' money every day. Dalton McGuinty has a hydro

bureaucracy for setting hydro rates, a bureaucracy for transmission, a bureaucracy that writes RFPs, a bureaucracy for some of the supply, a bureaucracy that regulates a market that doesn't exist and a bureaucracy for a conservation plan that

doesn't exist. At the top of every one of these hydro bureaucracies, hydro fat cats rake in big bucks.

Premier, with so many people struggling to pay their hydro bills, how does the McGuinty government justify the explosion of bloated salaries across the hydroelectricity bureaucracies that you have created?

Hon. Mr. Duncan: I suppose the member doesn't want to regulate an electricity sector. Is that what he's saying? I suppose the member doesn't want to have a planning authority. Is that what

he's saying? I suppose the member doesn't want to deal with the real problems that are out there, and it's clear he doesn't want to acknowledge that the challenges we're faced with today have been faced at Ontario Hydro for many years.

For instance, his government spent $73 million purchasing an electrical utility in Peru. Now, would I blame the member opposite personally for that? No. But let me tell you, what this government is doing

differently from the government he was part of is that we're dealing with it. We put the auditor onto it, we're going to fix it, we're going to give ratepayers an assurance that they can expect better in the future and we're moving in that

direction today.

Mr. Hampton: I guess the McGuinty government's giving Tom Parkinson $1.6 million and then a further $3 million is what the McGuinty government calls fixing things.

If we look east, to the province of Quebec, we see a unified hydroelectricity system, supply is plentiful, rates are reasonable and executive compensation is reasonable. There is only one president of

Hydro-Québec and he gets paid less than $500,000.

If we look to the west, a unified hydro system: Manitoba Hydro. Executive pay is reasonable: only one executive, who gets paid $339,000.

In Ontario, Dalton McGuinty has created a multi-headed hydro monster where rates are skyrocketing, supply is spotty and fat-cat executives are at the top of everything, raking in the money.

Premier, people are losing their jobs because they can't pay the hydro bill. How do you justify paying so many hydro executives multi-million dollars in pay?

Hon. Mr. Duncan: This government is going to respond in an appropriate and timely fashion to all the recommendations of the auditor.

If the member wants to suggest that our system is as ideal as Quebec's or Manitoba's, it's not. We don't have the geography. He may not be aware of it, but they're net exporters and have lots of power to

export. We have a much more complex situation.

It's interesting, though. Again, hydro has a long history of money being spent in ways that are a little bit questionable, and that's why we brought the auditor in. Your government spent $1.3 million on a

survey designed to understand the whole person. And do you know what they concluded, from that survey they spent $1.3 million on, about electricity? It's important to be in love and have a love relationship that lasts. Those are the kinds of

expenditures that have gone on historically. There are enormous challenges. The member doesn't have an answer for them. All he has is bluster. This government is responding to the auditor. This government is bringing order to this --

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

Mr. Hampton: To the Premier. You say you're considering salary caps for your horde of hydro executives, but your word doesn't match your actions. Take the chair of the Ontario Energy Board. In

2002, before you became the government, he was paid $122,000. In 2003, he gets a pay increase to $191,000. In 2004, the McGuinty government raises his pay to $498,000. In 2005, the McGuinty government raises this executive's pay to $691,000. So

that's a $569,000 pay increase in three years.

Premier, how can you tell the people of Ontario that you are capping hydro executive salaries when it's the McGuinty government that's been raising them through the roof?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty: To the Minister of Energy.

Hon. Mr. Duncan: First of all, the individual he has referenced is not an executive at either OPG or Hydro One. He's the head regulator of the Ontario Energy Board. It used to be Floyd

Laughren. You remember him. We replaced him with somebody who had been the head of the Ontario Securities Commission and a number of other regulatory functions, and contracts were signed at the time of his hiring.

It is important that we respond to the auditor. It is important that we have these discussions. It's important that we handle them in an appropriate fashion. This government is committed to doing that. This

government is committed to working with the entire sector. Most of all, this government is committed to ensuring that there is an adequate and reliable supply of electricity at affordable rates for ratepayers. We're delivering that and we're going

to continue to deliver that.

Mr. Hampton: I just want to provide a few more examples. Thierry Vandal runs Hydro-Québec, a very complex transmission and generation hydro company with $57 billion in assets. In 2005, he

was paid $470,000. In Ontario, under the McGuinty government, 15 hydro executives all get paid more than that. Tom Parkinson pocketed his $1.6 million and $3 million on the way out the door. Howard Wetston, at the Ontario Energy Board, gets his

$691,000. The Premier's former Bay Street bagman, who's now head of the Ontario Power Authority, gets $637,000. The Independent Electricity System Operator's Dave Goulding, $720,000, and OPG's Mr. Hankinson is in line to get $1.6 million.

Premier, how can you justify these kinds of salaries when you tell people that you're capping the salaries?

Hon. Mr. Duncan: The key issue is to ensure that we have an adequate, reliable supply of electricity. We're dealing with all of the challenges that have been discussed and, by the way, haven't

been dealt with in the past. I could go through executive compensation at Ontario Hydro from 1990 to 1995. I could reference expense records. I could reference the $34-billion debt that came about at that point. I could reference the $10 million

to $12 million spent acquiring a Costa Rican rainforest. The point is that we have to move forward. We brought in freedom of information, we brought in the Auditor General, and we're going to bring in change to make those utilities more

accountable to the public and ensure that we continue to have an adequate, reliable and affordable supply of electricity in this province, something, sir, that you never did.

Mr. Hampton: I think the people of Ontario understand what the truth is: The McGuinty government has been welcoming hydro executive fat cats with open arms. They also understand that the

McGuinty government has been giving hydro consumers the back of the hand. Low-income people are struggling to pay the hydro bill. Literally thousands of workers have lost their jobs because their paper mill or their factory can't afford to pay the

hydro bill. Meanwhile, the McGuinty government doles out millions of dollars to dozens of hydroelectricity executive fat cats whom you've appointed and put in their position. Now the McGuinty government expects people to believe this latest

promise.

Premier, why should people believe your promise to cap hydro executive salaries, when you're the one who has been raising them through the roof and you have such a spotty record of keeping promises you've

already made?

Hon. Mr. Duncan: It's this government that brought the auditor in; it's this government that shone the light on OPG and Hydro One; it's this government that brought in salary disclosure; and

it's this government that has finally addressed the critical supply shortage of electricity we have had. There are many more challenges, including ensuring that OPG and Hydro One remain accountable to the people of Ontario. We're doing that. We

are acting on the auditor's recommendations, and we will be moving forward with more change in the coming weeks and months to ensure that those ratepayers can have confidence in their public utilities. And we're going to continue, sir, to ensure

that there's an adequate, reliable supply of electricity into the future.

The Speaker: New question.

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the Premier. Premier, several days have passed now and we're still not clear, after all the discussion, on the circumstances

surrounding the resignation of Tom Parkinson from his position as CEO of Hydro One.

We all know that this came after revelation after revelation of mismanagement of the taxpayers' money. What the people who are e-mailing me -- more e-mail than I've received on anything else since I've been

here -- don't understand is this: The board said they didn't want him to go and that they accepted his resignation reluctantly. They wonder, the people who are writing, why he then received a $3-million payoff when he left of his own volition. The

Minister of Energy says this was the cheapest option. I would suggest and would ask the Premier why he didn't consider the cheaper option, which is to give him one of those thank-you cards that they're using over at OPG now, hand him that and wish

him well? Why didn't you pursue that as the cheapest option if, in fact, he left of his own volition and he quit? Why didn't you do it?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: To the Minister of Energy.

Hon. Mr. Duncan: As I've indicated in the past, the advice the government had was that this was in fact the least expensive way of resolving the set of circumstances we found ourselves in. The

advice was clear and unequivocal, and we accepted that advice, just as we accept and will be moving on all of the Auditor General's recommendations. That's why we brought in the provisions that we did, to allow the Auditor General to look at these

things. In the longer course of events, given the historic situations that are still out there in terms of legal issues, we felt that this was the least expensive way of dealing with the situation and feel it was also the most responsible.

Mr. Tory: It's really quite simple. I think the taxpayers might have even accepted one of those leather coats plus the thank-you card if the fellow quit and was in need of something to thank

him for his service. When you quit your job -- especially when you quit under a cloud -- you don't get a multi-million-dollar, multi-year package. Mr. Parkinson's choice apparently was to leave this job. The board said they were reluctant to see

him go; they wanted to see him stay. You say the least expensive option, leaving aside entirely any matter of principle involved, is that he gets $3 million for that. Will the Premier please tell us under what circumstances, what possible

circumstances, the $3-million, multi-year payout could be justified if Mr. Parkinson quit on his own, under circumstances that are even more lavish than the retirement gifts we heard about at OPG that they now say are unacceptable? Why is this

acceptable? Why is this the cheapest option? Why is it happening at all if he quit?

Hon. Mr. Duncan: Again, the board and the government have acted in a way that we believe will minimize the cost to ratepayers associated with the situation. The member opposite knows full well

that these are complex issues. In fact, he said on December 6, "It's always unfortunate when you have to pay out a big severance package, but those are a part of contractual provisions that are entered into that you can't ignore." You simply can't

ignore that. I concur entirely with what he said. You have to take it in the context of all the circumstances surrounding the situation. That being said, I think the Leader of the Opposition and all members of this House are concerned about what

was found. We are concerned. We intend to respond in a positive way to the auditor's report, and we intend to deal with OPG and Hydro One, and the broader public sector, in a way that not only previous governments did not want to deal with it but

that previous governments didn't even want to speak about. We want to talk about it, we're going to deal with it, and we look forward to the ongoing discussions we're going to have around these issues.

PROPERTY TAXATION

Ms. Cheri DiNovo (Parkdale-High Park): My question is for the Minister of Finance. Toronto businesses continue to get squeezed by your inequitable property tax regime and your government does

nothing about it. Toronto's commercial property taxpayers are paying a rate that is 44% higher than the lowest urban rate in the GTA region and 30% higher than the GTA average. Toronto's business taxpayers do not receive a higher level of service

than those outside the city, nor do Toronto schools benefit from businesses paying a higher rate of education taxes. Minister, this is causing serious problems for Toronto's small business owners. What are you going to do about it, and when are

you going to do it?

Hon. Greg Sorbara (Minister of Finance, Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet): This is a great day for democracy, when my friend the NDP member from Parkdale-High Park starts to argue for

lower taxes. I'm not sure it's the subway; I felt the room shake a little bit.

Let me tell her that we have been working particularly with small business to lower both the paper and regulatory burden and the tax burden. So we negotiated an historic agreement with the federal government

to eliminate the entire process of filing and paying the provincial corporate tax, and soon I will have more to say to her on that.

On the subject of business education taxes, I simply say to her that it is one of the issues that we are putting before a special committee task force of the province and municipalities right across

Ontario.

Ms. DiNovo: The members of TABIA are here, and they have been waiting for 10 years. They met with you last June. Experts say this business tax regime is a significant contributor to the loss

of business activity and employment in the city of Toronto to the 905 regions. Over the last 15 years, the 905 regions have gained 700,000 jobs while Toronto has lost 100,000. The business leaders here today want to know that their government has

a plan. They don't want another commission or committee or promises. They want action. This is causing serious problems. People are losing their businesses. I ask you again, what are you going to do about it?

Hon. Mr. Sorbara: I just point out to my friend that Toronto business property owners benefited from some $262 million a year due to cuts in business education taxes. I could be here for the

rest of the afternoon listing what we have invested in city of Toronto over the past three years: hundreds of millions of dollars in transit, a brand new City of Toronto Act that recognizes the unique circumstances of the city of Toronto, but I

simply say to her, and to those in the gallery, that the business education taxes of the city of Toronto are one of the things that we are going to be looking at as we examine initiatives moving forward toward a budget in 2007.

APPRENTICESHIP TRAINING

Mrs. Carol Mitchell (Huron-Bruce): My question is for the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities. The McGuinty government is committed to ensuring that the youth of this province are

given the opportunities they need to succeed in life. That's why, after so many years of cuts and neglect by previous governments, we're making historic investments: the $6.2-billion Reaching Higher plan. We're giving people access to the

education training they need to succeed, and in an economy where over 70% of all new jobs require post-secondary education, parents feel that for success, their sons or daughters need to go to university or college. Yet Ontario's rich

post-secondary options also include an extensive college system with an enhanced skills training network. That's why I was pleased to hear you announce yesterday the Ontario youth apprenticeship program. It's been incredibly successful in

attracting many of Ontario's young people. I saw 600 students participating in my own riding of Huron-Bruce last year.

But, Minister, my question is, for the benefit of those who aren't familiar with OYAP, can you tell us how OYAP prepares students for a career in the skilled trades and how it differs from a regular

co-operative education program?

Hon. Christopher Bentley (Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities): It is indeed a very important and good question. OYAP is the Ontario youth apprenticeship program. It gives students

the opportunity to not only earn high school credits but, at the same time, start their apprenticeship while they're in high school. We know how important the skilled trades are. In fact, the member for Huron-Bruce often speaks about the need to

ensure more skilled trades, not only for the traditional businesses in her riding but for the new and emerging businesses in the power and green power areas.

She mentioned that her riding has benefited from over 600 placements in the past year. This year we expect even more in Huron-Bruce, upwards of 650, and across the province, we expect 26,500 students will have

that opportunity. That's more than twice as many as just three years ago. The program is working. The McGuinty government is proud to support it.

Mrs. Mitchell: It's very encouraging to know that every Ontarian has the opportunity to get the training they need to qualify for higher-paying jobs so that they can obtain a better quality of

life while becoming valuable contributors to our economy.

This leads to my next question: With all that we are doing to prepare Ontarians for the workforce by way of job training, what do these students and apprentices have to look forward to after receiving the

skills they need? What job prospects and opportunities are there for these hard-working and well-trained Ontarians?

Hon. Mr. Bentley: A question for the Minister of Economic Development and Trade.

Hon. Sandra Pupatello (Minister of Economic Development and Trade, minister responsible for women's issues): I'm very happy to respond to the second question, related to the kinds of jobs we

can expect to see in Ontario in the future and those that we're moving to now.

Like my colleague in training, colleges and universities, we have never had stronger links with colleges, universities and training centres and industry than we have today. A number of examples show us the

kinds of jobs these people can be prepared to take: Sutherland, new opportunities in Windsor of 1,000 value-added jobs; Kellogg's new plant, its first plant in 20 years, being built now in Belleville with 100 new jobs just to start; Toyota

Boshoku, as well, a new plant opening, with assistance, being close to that Toyota plant, that new greenfield site.

We are looking, through the auto sector alone, at 7,000 new jobs coming to Ontario. We're proud to be partnering not just with post-secondary institutions but, in fact, with industry to create real opportunity

for Ontarians.

CHILDREN'S AID SOCIETIES

Ms. Lisa MacLeod (Nepean-Carleton): To the Minister of Children and Youth Services: Since the leaked Auditor General's report on the misuse of funds by children's aid societies, I've been

asking the minister what has been done. I have written a letter to the minister, I've submitted an order paper question and I've asked several questions in this House. No action, no answers, no accountability from the minister in this House, just

an accountability office slated for January. Yet on Monday, the minister felt compelled to write a letter to the editor of the Lindsay Daily Post defending her rampant misspending at CASs while responding to my colleague Laurie Scott's monthly

column.

Why is the minister spending her time responding to columns in local community papers rather than taking responsibility and responding to the people she is supposed to represent in this Legislature regarding

her department's utter failure at CASs?

Hon. Mary Anne V. Chambers (Minister of Children and Youth Services): I'm very pleased to have the opportunity to once again speak about what we are doing here. I should also tell the member

for Nepean-Carleton that she can expect to receive my response to her letter within a day or two. In fact, I have seen it and I expect to be signing it today. I improved and expanded upon the response, so I think she should be satisfied that

she'll be getting a comprehensive response.

With regard to responding to the ill-advised piece from her colleague in the Lindsay paper, I think it is fair and reasonable for the people of Ontario to get the facts of this situation, not some political

spin on the situation.

Ms. MacLeod: It's funny that she thinks it's fine to do a four-day turnaround time for community papers, but when legislators in this place have a question, she decides it's a two-week

turnaround for them. What a lack of respect. Instead of defending rampant misspending at children's aid societies in local community papers, the minister should be worried that Lindsay has no Best Start spaces -- absolutely zero.

But zero Best Start spaces in Lindsay aren't the only inaction by this minister. Let's look at her record of inaction in the last two weeks in this House. On November 30, the day the CBC story broke about CAS

misspending, I asked her a question: What had been done? No response. On December 1, I sent her a letter asking what had been done. No response. On December 4, December 5 and December 6, John Tory and I questioned her on what had been done. No

response. On December 7, the minister tried to sneak away and hide from the question, but it was asked, and guess what? No response.

What has been done, who has been fired and when will this minister respect Ontarians and take responsibility in this Legislature for her own --

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): The Minister of Children and Youth Services can respond.

Hon. Mrs. Chambers: In spite of the theatrics, I am happy to respond again, as I have over several days since the report's official release. We are creating a new accountability office that

will monitor whether children's aid societies are meeting their legislative requirements for the care and protection of children and ensure that corrective action is taken as needed; assess and report on agency performance; and provide my

ministry's staff with the training and tools they need to provide better oversight and create a new culture of continuous improvement in the CASs.

We are requiring children's aid societies to meet higher standards, as non-discretionary as those of the Ontario public service, for their own employees and programs in such areas as the procurement of goods

and services; travel, meal and other expenses; hospitality; and the management of fleet vehicles. We're conducting an independent assessment of the fleet requirements of children's aid societies so that, where less expensive alternatives exist,

CASs will be directed to relinquish vehicles as quickly and economically as possible, with savings redirected into service for children and youth. We are acting.

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

Mr. Peter Tabuns (Toronto-Danforth): My question is for the Premier. Premier, Bruce Power has applied to the National Energy Board to export 2,000 megawatts of nuclear-generated electricity to

the United States. Instead of reserving limited capacity on high-voltage lines out of the Bruce area for clean, green wind energy, your government has capped wind energy development so that Bruce nuclear can export power to the United States. Will

you stop Bruce Power from exporting even one megawatt of nuclear-generated power until you lift the cap off green power development in the Bruce area?

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

Hon. Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy): No. The fact is that that power is exported at off-peak times when the wind power that you've been talking about -- which, by the way, isn't up and

running yet. So the answer is no. This has been going on for many years. The power is exported at off-peak times. It's baseload power. It's power that we would pay for otherwise -- a tremendous cost to do that. It's not that that's causing the

challenges with getting the power out of new opportunities in the Bruce; it's the lack of transmission. I know that that member opposite and his party will support us as we move forward to deal with the transmission issue. There is absolutely no

correlation between the two issues. In fact, to not export the power would not be in the interest of ratepayers; it would hamper the development of new renewable power. So the answer to the member is no.

Mr. Tabuns: I find it a passing strange answer, but I'll continue on. Dalton McGuinty said that the lights would go out unless this province threw $40 billion at dirty, unreliable and

expensive nuclear power. Now, a few months later, Bruce nuclear is applying to export up to one third of its potential generation, some 2,000 megawatts, thanks to your sweetheart deal that sees Ontario ratepayers and taxpayers subsidize Bruce

Power's fuel costs, nuclear waste disposal costs and decommissioning costs. Why are you letting Bruce Power export Ontario taxpayer- and ratepayer-subsidized nuclear power to the United States?

Hon. Mr. Duncan: I will try to explain to the member that we are net importers of power in Ontario at the moment. Perhaps had your government not cancelled the Conawapa project, perhaps had

you built at least one new energy installation in five years, we wouldn't be in this. So if the member is suggesting that a province that imports power at peak times in summer and winter shouldn't be exporting at off-peak times, that we should cut

ourselves off, that's a recipe for blackouts and economic disaster. I say to the member, I'd think that through long and carefully if I were you, because you've just advocated essentially shutting off major power supply that we need at peak time

both in summer and winter. By the way, the power we sell at off-peak time helps maintain the operations and ensure not only that we can import power when we need to, but also helps to ensure that prices continue to remain as competitive as they

are.

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: Could I ask for unanimous consent to extend question period to its full hour?

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): Is there unanimous consent to extend question period past 4 o'clock for a full hour? Agreed. Next question.

HIGH-OCCUPANCY VEHICLE LANES

Mr. Kevin Daniel Flynn (Oakville): I've got a question today for the Minister of Transportation. As we approach the one-year anniversary of high-occupancy vehicle lanes in Ontario, my

constituents were asking if they've really made a difference. As you know, there are plenty of folks, myself included, who drive in and out of Toronto from Oakville through Mississauga almost every day. Could you tell the members of this

Legislature, and for the benefit of my own constituents, how this initiative has really dealt with the challenges around traffic congestion in the greater Toronto area?

Hon. Donna H. Cansfield (Minister of Transportation): I'd like to thank the member from Oakville for his question and also for his constant encouragement around this particular issue, as we

move from one part of the QEW through to the end at the border.

We are the first government in history to put in an HOV lane. We've spent $100 million -- 404, 403. It's making a difference. One of the reasons we can actually identify it is making a difference, because we

put in right at the beginning, where people started to use it, and how they have used it incrementally -- we now have information that indicates that at peak time we have double the capacity.

It's also changing congestion in terms of people who are now using buses. More people are using buses because, of course, buses can use the HOV lanes. So it's a good example of how we're tackling gridlock and

congestion, which is a priority in our government. It's another example of using an innovative way to use or add on to our existing highways. I'd be more than pleased to add additional information.

Mr. Flynn: Thanks to the minister for her response. The introduction of HOV lanes on the 403 and 404, by most accounts, has certainly contributed to easing some of the pressure on our roads.

However, there's no denying that gridlock continues to be a challenge that is faced throughout the greater Toronto area. I certainly know it is one that commuters in my riding face and know all about. I often hear stories about the hours spent

travelling to and from work every day.

Minister, what else is this government doing to ease the pressure on Ontarians, to ensure that we're all able to spend much less time in our cars and much more time with our families?

Hon. Mrs. Cansfield: Again I thank the member for the question. We have something called the Compass system across our highways. Currently across the 401, every five minutes you can have an

update as to what the status of that highway is in terms of an incident, a collision or construction. We have now extended that to the QEW. So you can either go online beforehand or you can find out through the Compass signs as you're

travelling.

We've invested $400 million -- the first time in many years -- to help our local municipal roads. We've put a huge amount of money, $1.3 billion, into public transit. Again, it's the first time in many years

that we've made this kind of commitment in public transit -- $830 million alone for GO Transit -- because we recognize that we need to value the public transit system as much as we value other forms of transportation.

We have also invested in the Greater Toronto Transit Authority. This is the first time in the history of this province --

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): Please conclude your response.

Hon. Mrs. Cansfield: -- that we have had an integrated approach to transportation planning that includes all forms of transportation, starting with GO Transit from Hamilton to Durham, enabling

people to actually cross-border and to do it in a seamless fashion, using for the --

The Acting Speaker: Thank you very much. New question.

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

Mr. John Yakabuski (Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke): My question is for the Minister of Energy. You promised to shut down coal power, and you proceeded to break that promise. You promised that you

would replace it by leading the way in wind power generation, and it appears you're breaking that one as well.

Minister, after luring developers with your promises and watching them make huge investments, you have now shut down wind power over a substantial portion of Ontario. In March, with your standard offer,

everything was a go: "No transmission constraints -- we need everything we can get." They go to work with Hydro One, they make deals with landowners, and now you're telling them that everything coming off Lake Huron, from Tobermory to Longwood,

from Lambton to London -- it's like Caledonia, it's a no-go zone. But it's a no-go zone for wind power.

Minister, why are you shutting down wind power in Bruce county, basically, off Lake Huron? Why are you --

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): Minister of Energy.

Hon. Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy): In Ontario, we've gone from last to first in Canada for wind power. We have brought on more than 450 megawatts up until now. There are another thousand

scheduled to come online between now and the end of the year; they are under various stages of construction.

I welcome the member's question, because there is a transmission constraint in Bruce -- no question. The projects that are already approved have line space; the Enbridge project is a good example of that. It

will make standard offer more difficult in that particular part of the province, where there are a lot of opportunities. Based on your question, I know now that we can count on your support and the member from Grey county's support as we deal with

the transmission constraint coming out of Bruce county, because you're right: It is one that needs to be dealt with. We're dealing with it, and we look forward to your support, because we want to get all of that wind, every last bit of it, out of

Bruce county.

Mr. Yakabuski: Well, Minister, why could you not have dealt with them honestly in March when you told them that transmission is not an issue? "Come on, guys. Bring in your money and build.

We'll take it." That's what you told them in March. As a matter of fact, 37 different connection impact assessments have been done, covering 397 megawatts. Some 61% of the wind power applications across this province are in this area, and you've

told them no -- the standard offer, the under 10 megawatts. You've told all of these people who have put their heart and soul, their hard-earned dollars and their investments into this province -- you are saying no. Why couldn't you have been

straight with them in March? Why are you now telling them, once they have invested millions? What kind of signal are you sending to everybody else in the world? Do you know what you're telling them? The only consistency of your energy policy is

inconsistency. You continue to send mixed messages across this province and across this country. Minister, it is time to get a hold of yourselves and come out with a policy that people can depend on.

Hon. Mr. Duncan: Let me say to the honourable member, first of all, that he is right that there are a large number of applications in Bruce. But they are all very small and don't represent a

large percentage of the overall wind opportunity in Ontario. That's number one.

Number two, the transmission constraint coming out of Bruce county has been well known for some time. It has been the subject of the ISO's reports every six months. It has been well identified to investors and

others alike.

Finally, in terms of the opportunities in Bruce county, there are a number of opportunities. Once we address the transmission constraint -- and I note that the member for Grey county is vigorously supporting

his colleague in dealing with that transmission constraint, as I'm sure the members in a number of other surrounding counties are as well. I'm delighted you're going to support us on that, delighted you'll work with us on that, because I agree: We

have to maximize the opportunities we have in Bruce county.

Carol Mitchell deserves enormous credit for all the work she has done in dealing with those particular --

The Acting Speaker: Next question.

MUNCIPAL GOVERNMENT

Mr. Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): My question is to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Mr. Minister, last week I asked you about calling an immediate provincial investigation

into the allegations of wrongdoing, or alleged wrongdoing, in the city of Vaughan. But I want to further point out that 28 sessional days ago, I stood in this House and presented a petition from the citizens of the city of Vaughan requesting a

ministerial inquiry. In those 28 days, you have not responded. So I am asking you, on both those behalves -- the question I asked last week which was not answered and the petition that has not been answered -- when are you going to put your office

in charge of this and call an investigation, as the citizens have requested?

Hon. John Gerretsen (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): It's passing strange that this member asked me about an hour and a half ago whether or not I was ready to meet with the mayor

of Vaughan. As I told him then, I'm ready to meet with the mayor of Vaughan at any time. As far as I know, she has not asked to meet with me, but I'm ready to meet with her. I told him I'd meet with her tomorrow, and if he wanted to come along, he

could come along. That was the whole conversation. So I have no idea why he's standing up in the House right now asking a question to which he already knows the answer. The point quite simply is, we're willing to meet with the mayor of Vaughan,

I'm willing to discuss it with her, and if he wants to come along, he's more than welcome.

Mr. Prue: For the minister's edification, because obviously you don't know, your staff has already arranged a meeting for Thursday, not for tomorrow, just so that you know that. You pretend

you're in the loop; you're not even in the loop.

The lead editorial in the Toronto Star says that the province should be involved in the investigation --

Interjections.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): Would the members please come to order.

I return to the member for Beaches-East York.

Mr. Prue: The lead editorial in yesterday's Toronto Star quite clearly said that there should be an investigation into the allegations that have been made in the city of Vaughan. Concerned

citizens have petitioned you to get involved, but you refuse to do so.

I thank you very much for agreeing to meet with me and with the mayor, albeit on Thursday. I thank you for that. But I still want to know from you, and the citizens of Vaughan want to know from you, what are

you intending to do following that meeting? Are you prepared to put your office to the investigation, or are you content simply to have a 15-minute meeting and wash your hands again?

Hon. Mr. Gerretsen: He's right: I said tomorrow, and it's Thursday instead. He's right. Okay? The other thing, Speaker, I should tell you is that he said, "She only wants to meet with you for

15 minutes." I said, "Okay, I'll meet with her for 15 minutes."

The point simply is this: Under the new Bill 130, which we hope will be passed before the end of this session, a municipality will have the right to have an inquiry of the nature we're talking about within the

meaning of the bill. I'm prepared to meet with the mayor, but I am not prepared to tell anyone what we're going to do until I actually have the conversation with her as to exactly what needs to be done and what kind of an investigation or

undertaking is necessary. I'm prepared to meet with her tomorrow or Thursday; it will happen this week. I'm sure we can deal with the issue at that point in time.

WATER QUALITY

Mr. John Wilkinson (Perth-Middlesex): My question is for my colleague the Minister of the Environment. Minister, as you know, under the previous government the Ministry of the Environment was

neglected. Its budget was slashed. The number of wonderful staff people at the MOE was reduced. Ontario finally has a green government that takes the protection of the environment for future generations of Ontarians very seriously.

I know that in addition to toughening the standards for air quality, this government is working with municipalities to further protect the sources of our drinking water. Justice O'Connor had several

recommendations for the government following the Walkerton inquiry. Minister, can you