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

June 19, 1991

35th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

MINISTER OF TRANSPORTATION

Mr Mancini: Last week the Minister of Transportation announced that he had received an award for innovations in bicycling policy. We have to question what the minister could possibly have done to merit such an award. It could not have been for his decision to give an engineering firm $150,000 to ask the public what it thought about bicycling. Yet there have been no other bicycling-related announcements from the minister.

Looking beyond cycling, the award could not have been given to the minister for his decision to leak the cabinet decision to cancel the Red Hill Creek Expressway. I do not think the people of Hamilton would think an award was in order for that policy.

As well, it could not have been for the minister's decision to break the NDP election promise to extend GO Transit rail service to Peterborough and to Brantford.

It could not have been for his losing his copy of the Solicitor General's letter on parking tickets. Surely those actions do not merit an award.

I am sure that Ontario truckers facing a 31% increase in diesel fuel taxes from this year's budget do not feel the minister deserves an award. Fare hikes, layoffs and service cutbacks by the TTC do not justify any kind of award either.

We cannot find any reason why anyone concerned about transportation policy would give the minister any kind of award. In fact, the only member of cabinet who might be eligible for an award on bicycling policy is the Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations, who actually bicycles to work. Unfortunately, the Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations has her driver follow her in her ministerial limousine as she cycles in order to transport her briefing books.

MAXVILLE CELEBRATIONS

Mr Villeneuve: Good news from eastern Ontario. On 28 June the village of Maxville, my home community, will celebrate its centennial with a homecoming weekend. This is the highlight of our centennial year, which has special events throughout 1991.

Maxville, in historic Glengarry county, traces its roots back to Scottish settlers and Loyalist times. The Scots began arriving in the area in the 1790s, but as late as 1851 the census then showed no record of Maxville. With the coming of the railway in the 1880s, the settlement grew.

Today's phone book lists MacDonalds, MacDonells, McEwans, MacGregors, MacIntoshes, MacKinnons, MacLeans, MacLeods, MacMillans, MacRaes, McNaughtons, etc, which explains why Maxville was originally spelled starting with "Mac."

Today, the village of some 850 people and the surrounding area also has its share of Bourdons, Derouchies, Guindons, Seguins, even Villeneuves and many others.

On Friday 28 June, the celebrations will begin with a wine and cheese party and will continue Saturday with the centennial parade, opening ceremonies and entertainment. On Sunday, after church and an ecumenical lunch at the United Church, entertainment continues at the fairgrounds and ends with a barbecue and fireworks.

Many members will remember that Maxville is also the home of our Glengarry Highland Games, the biggest and best in the country. Everyone is welcome to visit us.

WORKERS MEMORIAL DAY

Ms S. Murdock: Tomorrow marks a tragic anniversary in my riding. On 20 June 1984, a rockburst killed four miners at the Falconbridge mine in Sudbury.

A rockburst occurs when pressure builds up along the fault line of a rock and the rock ultimately bursts to release the pressure. That rockburst incident prompted the Sudbury Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers' Union, Local 598, to organize memorial services to commemorate the workers and their families in the tragic accident and thus Workers' Memorial Day was born.

Over the years, Workers' Memorial Day has grown from a small event in remembrance of the Falconbridge rockburst to a day set aside to pay tribute to all workers who have died in the performance of their duties. Workers' Memorial Day now honours workers from all walks of life, from police officers to lumberjacks. This day also commemorates the untold numbers of workers who have perished due to industrially related diseases, many of which are not being acknowledged as such at this time.

The anniversary of the rockburst at Falconbridge obviously has special significance for me and the people of my riding. But Workers' Memorial Day is an opportunity for all of us to acknowledge the tremendous sacrifices and losses that are realized by working people across this province. At 10:12 am tomorrow, the time of the rockburst at Falconbridge seven years ago, I urge all members to pause and reflect on the lives that were lost, not just at Falconbridge but all over this province.

COMMUNITY NEWSPAPER

Mrs Fawcett: I have in my hand a copy of the Colborne Chronicle. This weekly newspaper keeps the village of Colborne and surrounding area up to date and aware of the latest happenings in the village and throughout the county. One might ask, "How is the Chronicle different from any other newspaper of its kind?"

This terrific paper has just been named winner of first place for the best front page, second place for the best all-round newspaper, second place for the best editorial page and has been awarded the Canadian Community Newspapers Association blue ribbon for excellence in the association's 1991 class 1 better newspapers national competition.

The editor of this national award-winning paper is Eileen Argyris, who has been with the paper for 12 years. For nine of those years, Mrs Argyris did everything involved in getting the paper to the press -- layout, typesetting, photography, editing, page design, reporting, editorials and soliciting advertising.

No matter what is going on in the community, Eileen is there with her trusty camera and notepad. Whether it be the annual figure skating carnival, Summerfest celebrations, special events at the public schools in the area, library news or council meetings in Colborne or Cramahe, all events get comprehensive reporting and picture promotion every week. The insightful editorials are always articulated clearly and are very thought-provoking.

I am sure all members will join in congratulating the editor, Eileen Argyris, for producing this award-winning weekly newspaper. The community and the paper's owner, Northumberland Publishers, are very proud of the blue-ribbon community newspaper, the Colborne Chronicle, and its editor, Eileen Argyris.

YUN YEE CHOW

Mr Eves: Last Thursday, the University of Toronto faculty of medicine named this year's recipient of the Dr Louis R. Harnick Memorial Award. This award is one of the University of Toronto's largest post-graduate medical awards. The Dr Louis R. Harnick Memorial Award was established by friends, relatives and associates of Dr Harnick in appreciation of his outstanding leadership in the field of radiology.

A fund was established to make an award for a fourth-year medical student with a specific interest and aptitude in diagnostic radiology. Candidates for this award are interviewed and expected to demonstrate the qualities that exemplify the standards, priorities and style of Dr Harnick -- leadership, compassion, community service and service to the medical profession with a high regard for the quality of life.

This year's winner is Yun Yee Chow. Yun Yee Chow, while achieving very high marks in medical school, stands out as a very highly motivated individual. Her well-rounded personality combined with her enthusiasm for excellence in the field of radiology make her a truly deserving recipient of the Dr Harnick award.

On behalf of the Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario and the late Dr Harnick's son, Charles, my colleague the member for Willowdale, I would like to congratulate Yun Yee Chow.

TOWN OF INGERSOLL

Mr Sutherland: I had the great pleasure of participating in the town of Ingersoll's Heritage Day parade last Saturday. While Heritage Day is meant to be a celebration of Ingersoll's past and present, this year's event took on a greater significance.

On Tuesday 4 June, Ingersoll lost some of its heritage as a result of a fire on the main block of the town. In all, five buildings, including some that were built in the 1800s, were lost. Residents living above the five businesses escaped with only the clothes on their backs. Fortunately, no one was seriously injured as a result of the blaze. The fire threatened to burn down the entire main block. However, effective teamwork by the Ingersoll fire department in conjunction with fire departments from surrounding communities prevented the blaze from spreading.

The people and businesses of Ingersoll are resilient and supportive of each other in time of need. Within a few days, several of the burnt-out businesses had reopened in new locations. The Salvation Army co-ordinated a clothing drive and found temporary accommodation for those tenants who lost everything. A benefit concert is also planned to raise money to help those residents affected by this fire.

I would like to congratulate the fire departments, the Salvation Army and all those people in Ingersoll who have provided support to the people and businesses of Ingersoll. As a resident of Ingersoll myself, I know that each time I walk up the main block of the town it will feel like a large piece of heritage is missing, but the large turnout of people who came out to participate in Heritage Day events and watch the Heritage Day parade makes me confident that the town of Ingersoll will recover from its devastating fire and continue to demonstrate pride in its strong heritage.

ANTI-RECESSION PROGRAM

Mr Miclash: Throughout the fall and winter months, the NDP government kept telling northerners who were losing their jobs and giving up hope to wait, wait for it, wait just a little bit longer, until the anti-recession fund money starts to flow and then everything will be peaches and cream in northern Ontario.

It has been said that the only jobs this NDP budget will create will be those in the United States, but let me bring to the attention of this government an example of one of their job creation projects going to Manitoba.

Notwithstanding the NDP's opinion on the awarding of contracts for the Kenora bypass to Manitoba contractors, which arose during the election campaign, this government recently announced $772,000 to the town of Ignace for the construction of a much-needed public library in that town. However, the jobs this money will create or maintain will be in Manitoba because the contract was tendered to a Manitoba firm.

This of course happened because the NDP has no criteria for the anti-recession funds to ensure that they be spent in Ontario to create short-term jobs in Ontario. It is another example of NDP mismanagement of the anti-recession program, one which can only mean fewer jobs in northern Ontario.

I urge the minister to investigate immediately how many other cases like this have taken place, where job creation contracts have gone to create jobs in other provinces, and to put the necessary controls in place to ensure that this cannot happen again.

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION

Mr Tilson: Later today I will be introducing a bill to provide taxpayers with better access to information about how their tax dollars are spent at both the provincial and municipal levels. This bill reflects my conviction that taxpayers have a right to know the details of salaries and wages paid to provincial and municipal employees. It also reflects my frustration as a member of this assembly with not being able to obtain information through either the order paper or the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act on public sector wages and on severance and termination packages.

I would note that these frustrations are shared by my constituents of Dufferin county who, because of the current law, have been unable to learn the percentage increases in the salary and benefits packages paid to senior county staff over the last three years. I find it offensive that taxpayers cannot have access to details on an expenditure which accounts for between 40% and 50% of the county budget.

I trust that all members committed to making government more open and accountable will support this bill. I hope the government itself will endorse this effort to reduce the level of public cynicism about its institutions by improving our ability to scrutinize its operations.

WELLAND ROSE FESTIVAL

Mr Kormos: Most members of this Legislature know I am from Welland-Thorold, down in the heart of the Niagara Peninsula. One of the great things that happen down there come summertime, and especially the month of June, is the Welland Rose Festival, beginning at the beginning of June, when it should begin, and culminating this coming Sunday, 23 June, with the Welland Rose Festival parade.

That parade attracts people from all over this province as well as friends from south of the border, American friends of ours who visit Welland and enjoy the spectacle, because to call it anything less would be an understatement.

It does not happen without the hard work of a whole lot of people; the honourable members know that. These are people like Jeff Ward, who is the chairman of the rose festival committee this year; people like Jennie DiMarco, the chairperson of the rose parade committee; people like Joan Bosilevac, the chairperson of Day in the Park.

It is also people like Denise Coring, who is the chairperson for the first time this year of the coronation ball. She has done a whole lot of hard work -- a long-time member of the rose festival committee putting in exceptional effort this year. It is people like Sherry Boudreau, the co-op student working in the rose festival office; people like Sandy Rudyk, the office supervisor; Claude Breault, the second vice-president of the rose festival committee; Jim Montgomery, the first vice-president; Michelle Mercier, former Rose Queen, Brock student, and now active in assisting the organization. They are the sort of people who make it a great success.

Sunday 23 June, 1 pm, Welland. Be there.

Hon Mr Mackenzie: I would like to ask permission of the House for unanimous consent to make a statement concerning Occupational Health and Safety Week.

The Speaker: Do we have unanimous consent?

Agreed to.

STATEMENT BY THE MINISTRY

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

Hon Mr Mackenzie: As honourable members will know, this week is Canadian Occupational Health and Safety Week. Maintaining sound health and safety practices in the workplace is something we should all strive for on a daily basis. The aim of Occupational Health and Safety Week is to remind us of that important goal.

This is the sixth year that the Canadian Society of Safety Engineering has sponsored the event with support from the Canada Safety Council, Canadian Standards Association and Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety. Throughout the week there will be organized campaigns across the country to increase awareness of the vital need for effective health and safety programs.

We are privileged to have in the members' gallery today John Irwin, the chairman of the Ontario steering committee for Canadian Occupational Health and Safety Week.

On behalf of the government of Ontario, I would like to commend these organizations for their commitment to the promotion of health and safety in the workplace.

This year's theme is "Excellence: Today's Goal, Tomorrow's Reward." It reflects the Ministry of Labour's goal to provide a solid foundation for the best health and safety conditions possible in the workplaces of Ontario.

At the beginning of this year, the ministry implemented Bill 208, a bill that requires equal participation by labour and management in ensuring better health and safety on the job. There are now 20,000 to 40,000 more businesses across the province that are required to have health and safety committees. The bill also created a bipartite Workplace Health and Safety Agency which will develop training standards for the committees and co-ordinate the activities of the provincial safety associations.

Last week I announced major amendments to the construction projects regulation that will contribute greatly to safer and healthier working conditions at construction sites. Among the changes are amendments designed to reduce the number of fatalities and serious injuries caused by falls from heights, trench cave-ins and electrocutions.

As well, another new regulation was enacted last week to provide firefighters with safer protective clothing. The approved clothing will provide superior protection from injuries caused by heat and flame.

These important improvements to health and safety legislation and regulations were made after close consultation with health and safety groups across the province. My ministry intends to continue to work closely with labour, management and safety organizations to demonstrate this government's commitment to improved health and safety in the province.

RESPONSES

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

Mr Offer: I am pleased to respond on behalf of our party to the week that has been designated as Canadian Occupational Health and Safety Week. This week not only identifies the need for health and safety in the workforce, but the very purpose behind the health and safety legislation in Ontario as outlined in Bill 208.

I am particularly encouraged by this year's campaign theme, which is "Excellence: Today's Goal, Tomorrow's Reward." As honourable members know, excellence is achieved through teamwork; that is, partnership in managing risks in the workplace. This is the fundamental principle that lies at the heart of Ontario's occupational health and safety system.

I would also like to welcome John Irwin as the chairman of the Ontario steering committee for Canadian Occupational Health and Safety Week.

I believe it is now appropriate to bring to the attention of the Legislature the objectives for this week.

These are: to increase awareness of employees towards current occupational health and safety programs; to increase awareness of employers towards the benefits of occupational health and safety programs; to increase awareness of the general public towards occupational health and safety programs; to increase awareness of employees and employers of the purpose and role of the occupational health and safety professional; to inspire the development of new occupational health and safety programs and activities by organizations which will help reduce occupational injuries and illnesses in the future.

I think the minister would agree with me and all members of this House that when even one worker in Ontario dies or is injured in the workplace as a result of a job-related accident or disease, that is one worker too many. It is and remains incumbent upon all of us as legislators to instil a safe working culture in Ontario which will ensure, and continue to ensure, that every week is occupational health and safety week in the province.

Mrs Witmer: I am pleased to have this opportunity to rise on behalf of my colleagues in the Progressive Conservative Party and join the members from the other two parties in recognizing Occupational Health and Safety Week.

The aim of this week is to make all citizens in this province aware of the vital need for sound health and safety programs in our workplaces. We must all focus our efforts on minimizing the risk of death and injury for workers and providing as safe a workplace as possible. In order to do this effectively, our occupational health and safety laws must be kept up to date and relevant to the changing nature of the workplace.

I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate those individuals and organizations who sponsored events this year to promote this very special week. I would like to thank them for their commitment to the promotion of health and safety in the workplace.

This is a good time to focus on safety in the workplace since many of our young people will be looking for employment for the first time as they look for summer jobs. Statistics show that there are more young people hurt on the job than older workers.

I would like to conclude by indicating our party's commitment to working with all others in this province to make our workplaces even healthier and safer in the years ahead.

FISH AND WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT

Mr Cleary: On a point of privilege, Mr Speaker: I brought an extremely important matter to the attention of the Minister of Natural Resources on 3 June and I have only received an empty acknowledgement from a staff person.

Mohawk Indians of Akwesasne are demanding that all area fishermen buy authorized Mohawk licences to fish in waters between Cornwall and Lancaster. Natives have said that anyone caught without a Mohawk licence faces penalties of fines and impoundment of boats and equipment. Meanwhile, the Ministry of Natural Resources has said that fishermen need only an Ontario resident's sports fishing licence to fish in Ontario waters.

Frustrated fishermen in the area are angry and are threatening to carry guns. I am afraid that any confrontation may have tragic results. Since the Premier is going to be in the riding --

The Speaker: The member for Cornwall, it is not a point of privilege. It is certainly a matter possibly for question period. It is a matter that the member may wish to raise with the minister responsible, but I appreciate your drawing it to my attention.

ORAL QUESTIONS

TAX INCREASES

Mr Nixon: I have a question of the Treasurer leading from his comments made rather informally yesterday that he had decided to change in some way his gas guzzler extension announcement in the budget.

Can he not announce to the House, in an area that just as desperately needs adjustment, that he is contemplating a change to the imposition of a 31% increase in the diesel fuel tax as it is imposed on the trucking industry? I need not bring to the minister's attention the economic problems truckers are facing. He is well aware of them.

Hon Mr Laughren: I should clarify something that the leader of the official opposition said. What I said yesterday was that we were working very hard to try to fine-tune the gas guzzler tax in a way that satisfied a lot of differing demands of that kind of tax.

On the diesel tax to which the member specifically refers, I have not contemplated making a change in that. I do appreciate the fact that there are problems in the trucking industry in this province. I would remind him, however, that those problems were there long before any increase in the diesel tax.

Mr Nixon: I think the honourable Treasurer is correct when he says the problems have been growing for many years. But he would also be aware that his announcement in the budget of a large increase -- two 1.7-cents-per-litre increases, apparently following the visit of the lobbying association connected with the trucking industry -- was considered a decision by the minister that was difficult to understand.

He would be aware from the information that comes from the industry of the numbers of people involved. They estimate 230,000 involved with $5 billion in economic activity. The fact that every day bring lists of bankruptcies, the most recent being Glengarry Transport with 800 drivers, and the Ontario operations of the Canadian Transport Group the most recent one with 153 drivers, shows that this is a matter leading directly to unemployment. It is a matter over which the minister has direct control and on which he might very well adjust his tax decision.

Can he not see fit in his mind to give them the same treatment that was given the gas guzzler tax sufferers and give further consideration in this regard?

Hon Mr Laughren: I would remind the honourable member that even before the truckers came to see me and to see the Minister of Transportation, the minister, the member for Etobicoke-Rexdale, took a major step towards helping to resolve the problem in the trucking industry by declaring a moratorium on the issuance of new licences. As well, the minister is conducting a study into the competitiveness of the industry and has assured the people in the trucking industry that the study will be complete in August, if my memory serves me correctly. At that point, he will be reporting back to the trucking industry.

Mr Nixon: We recognize the government's penchant for regulation, and we will be looking at this carefully to see how it benefits the industry. But the minister has to be aware of the appearance in this situation, where the Canadian Auto Workers had a very powerful spokesman indeed to lobby for it. He had no trouble to get in to see the Treasurer and probably has regular meetings with the Premier as well. Once Bob White, the vice-president of the NDP, indicated some displeasure with this, the Treasurer was very quick to indicate publicly that he was going to reconsider and, yesterday, that he was going to fine-tune.

I think this would be very acceptable indeed, particularly to the Canadian Auto Workers. For the independent truckers, they do not happen to have a strong union voice. I hope it is not unfair for me to ask the Treasurer if he is prepared, along with the leader of the government, to represent all the people in the province, not just those who can knock on the doors of the temporary high and mighty with the imprimatur of a labour union. Does he not understand that not all the workers in this province are unionized but they must have a positive response from the Treasurer and the Premier?

Hon Mr Laughren: That is a most unfortunate characterization put by the leader of the official opposition. I remind him that when the truckers had a problem, they came in to see me. The door was open, they saw me, and they saw the Minister of Transportation. As well, when we talked about the gas guzzler tax, it was the industry that came in to see me. It was the dealers who came in; it was the representative of the workers, the union, CAW came in, and it was the environmentalists who came in. Why the member persists --

Mr Nixon: Because the Treasurer won't see the truckers.

Hon Mr Laughren: That is not true; I have seen the truckers. Why the member insists on playing the trade unions in this province as some kind of bad actor is beyond my comprehension.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order.

Hon Mr Laughren: As a matter of fact, we are most anxious to work with the business community, along with working people in this province, to make sure that we develop the kind of partnership that was never there when the Liberals were in office.

NATIVE ISSUES

Mr Conway: I have a question for my friend the honourable member for Algoma, who is responsible at one and the same time for this government's management of provincial parks, fish and game policy, timber management, crown lands and native affairs.

I would like to ask my friend arising out of his statement to the Legislature last week, about the dispatch of an unheard-of law firm named Sack, Goldblatt and Mitchell to act as this government's negotiator in the question of the land claim of the Algonquin first nations in my part of eastern Ontario.

Can the member for Algoma, as the minister responsible for his several, not entirely compatible responsibilities, indicate what specific direction the New Democratic government has provided to its negotiators, Messrs Goldblatt etc, as they go forward to negotiate a framework to resolve the Algonquin land claim?

Hon Mr Wildman: I appreciate the member's question. This is a very important issue. I want to say parenthetically that I do not believe there is any inherent conflict in the many responsibilities the member enumerated.

The instructions specifically to the law firm are quite straightforward. They are to enter into negotiations to identify the issues related to the land claim, the areas involved, the need for the conclusion and finalizing of interim subagreements with regard to the exercise of the aboriginal rights to hunt and fish. They are to be specifically responsible for wide consultation with other interested groups in the area from various fields such as the naturalist community, the parks community, the tourist industry and so on. As the member will know, that process is on its way.

The initial meeting was held at Golden Lake last Saturday, and this week there have been consultation meetings taking place; one was held in Huntsville last night. The law firm is responsible for finding out what the concerns are of other groups specifically with regard to the negotiations and representing them at the negotiating table.

Mr Conway: Still, the consultation meetings are the best-kept secret in my constituency. The Ottawa Valley press this week is replete with very positive, upbeat stories from all sides about the progress being made, and, given the significance and the sensitivity of this claim, we are undoubtedly encouraged by this.

The question of the 80,000 people I represent in a county whose entire territory is subsumed in this land claim is this: What is on the table? What are Messrs Goldblatt et al, mandated by the executive council of this province, to negotiate?

Would the minister care to comment, for example, on this possibility? Would he comment, in the negative or in the affirmative, that one of the possibilities is a willingness by this government to turn over entirely, on a permanent basis, the management of Algonquin Provincial Park, as we have known it, to the Algonquin first nations?

Hon Mr Wildman: I guess the short answer is no. In adding to that, I do not want to prejudge the negotiations. Obviously we have to identify the issues and determine how we can reach a settlement which is a win-win settlement, an agreement that is acceptable to both sides.

I frankly do not understand why the member is unaware of the meetings. There was one held last night in Huntsville, and one the night before in Barrys Bay.

Mr Conway: As the local member, I do not ever recall being informed, and I met a lot of people who were very interested to know about the meetings who were not informed.

Mindful of this government's anxiety, I am sure, to avoid anything like a Meech Lake catastrophe or the Alan Pope fiasco of some years ago, since the minister does not want to talk about what is on the table or what the government is prepared to negotiate by way of substance, would he perhaps answer this question: What kind of constituent assembly does the New Democratic government of Ontario imagine and plan for to involve the scores of stakeholders whose economic and recreational livelihoods are materially and vitally affected by whatever happens in these enormously important talks?

Hon Mr Wildman: I want to emphasize once again that we as a government have emphasized to our negotiators that it is their responsibility to consult as widely as possible with all the stakeholders my friend enumerated. It is incumbent upon them to do that because we must inform them of what we are doing, we must determine what their interests and concerns are so that we can properly negotiate with the Algonquins of Golden Lake first nation and represent their concerns at the negotiating table.

In terms of a constituent assembly, that is sort of a novel approach to negotiating. The Premier has indicated that we would entertain that approach in terms of the negotiations and discussions around the Constitution of Canada. Negotiations of a land claim are somewhat different, I am sure the member would understand, in terms of the kinds of issues involved. We cannot really anticipate having a multitude involved in the negotiations directly, but they must be involved in the consultations around that negotiation, and we are committed to ensuring that they are.

AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE

Mr Harris: My question is for the Minister of Financial Institutions. On the weekend, the Toronto Star reported that auto insurance companies must seek bureaucratic approval to cut their premium rates. Can the minister explain to me why some well-established companies, in business for a long time in this province, have had to wait months and months on the bureaucracy to lower their rates and pass savings on to Ontario consumers?

Hon Mr Charlton: The leader of the third party, when he is preparing for questions like this, should perhaps have his research staff check a little more carefully in terms of the approvals process.

First, the member will know that the approvals process was set up a year ago on the passage of Bill 68, a piece of legislation introduced and passed by the former government. Second, there has been only one application to the Ontario Insurance Commission regarding a rate reduction, an application which was turned around in two weeks. The member should know that nobody has been held up for months and months as a result of the regulatory process.

Mr Harris: I realize the Liberals set up this disastrous bureaucracy, but the minister is now in charge of this disastrous bureaucracy. If the minister wants to blame the Liberals, I understand that and I blame them as well for their

part in this disaster we are dealing with.

I would like to know if the minister has made any representations to the Treasurer on behalf of Ontario consumers and drivers with regard to all those policyholders of the province who are insured with Dominion of Canada auto insurance, which had a rate application proposal ready to go to the government to lower rates by 3% to 5%. When the budget came out and increased the tax on insurance companies by 3%, in effect the Treasurer of Ontario took that 3% to 5% rate cut right out of the pockets of drivers and consumers.

I would like to know what representations the minister, who I presume is the advocate for drivers and consumers in this province who must buy the government's compulsory auto insurance, has made to the Treasurer and to the cabinet on behalf of consumers of auto insurance in this province.

Hon Mr Charlton: The leader of the third party seems to fail to understand what has happened with auto insurance premiums in the province and the profitability which has evolved under the Ontario motorist protection plan brought in by the former government.

The profits for the last half of last year, after offsetting the losses in the first half of the year, equalled $250 million; profits for the first quarter of this year equalled $229 million. The fact that Dominion has not proceeded with a rate reduction application is the choice of Dominion. Others, as I have suggested, have proceeded with their rate applications. The profits in the industry indicate clearly that premium reductions should be happening across the board. Unfortunately, the insurance companies are not following that responsible route.

Mr Harris: The question had to deal with insurance companies that wanted to follow that route, but the Treasurer plucked that money out of the drivers' hands before they had a chance to pass it on to the consumers and the drivers of this province.

I wonder if the minister can explain to me why last Christmas Eve State Farm hand-delivered the application to the Ontario Insurance Commission and was not able, with the final approval and nod, until three months after that to pass on the savings to consumers, and what he is going to do to ensure that when the auto insurance companies -- those that do not get the taxes and the money taken away by the Treasurer and the Premier -- to expedite it so that those savings can be passed on immediately to consumers?

Hon Mr Charlton: First, the member again should do his research just a little bit more carefully. State Farm did not file a rate application for a rate reduction. What State Farm filed was a rate application for a complete reworking of its classification system, including adding one additional class which most of the other companies in this province already had. There was no overall rate reduction provided by State Farm, but it provided a very complex submission, which had to be reviewed. The basic rate applications for increases or decreases are turned around on average in two weeks, as I have already suggested.

Mr Harris: The minister says there has only been one. It took three months, but he has an industry average of two weeks. Give me a break. He has only got one to base his average on, he told me, and it took three months.

Mr Villeneuve: You didn't say there was a reduction, right?

Mr Harris: That is right.

GOVERNMENT SPENDING

Mr Harris: My second question is to the Premier. On 6 June, a Burlington company received these 17 envelopes, 17 of them to one company, each with a 40-cent stamp on it, each, I assume, costing the private sector an average of at least a buck, probably more than that, to send a letter out.

These were from the Workers' Compensation Board. All the envelopes were mailed on the same day. All these envelopes contained one sheet of paper. Each paper was a form letter confirming a claim.

This may be profitable for Canada Post, but it is one more example of the type of waste by government and government agencies that is driving taxpayers and businesses across this province absolutely bonkers. This type of mismanagement could only occur in the public sector and in crown corporations.

I would like to ask the Premier, why does his government not have some form of commonsense controls in place to prevent this type of bureaucratic waste of money?

Hon Mr Rae: I think the member points to an interesting suggestion with respect to an improvement in efficiency. I am sure people at the Workers' Compensation Board will be interested in hearing his suggestion. I think he points to a problem. I would not diminish it or belittle it in any way. I think it is a good consumer and business-friendly suggestion and I will certainly bring it to the attention of WCB.

Mr Harris: I brought it to the Premier's attention in that spirit, because what we have is something costing $17 instead of $1, or a 17-times cost on this type of thing.

Anybody who receives mail from the Ministry of Housing or others will know this is rampant and widespread in the government.

The director of the Allied Boating Association of Canada indicated that 750 copies of a 7-page kit describing proposed new regulations to ban discharge of waste water were sent to him for distribution to his association. He believes the kits must have cost about $500 to send to them. This particular individual has a total of 80 members in his association.

Can the Premier tell me what type of controls he has in place in all of his ministries to ensure that this massive amount of paper -- in this case for the environment, most of it going back into dump sites somewhere in the environment -- that we do not continue to waste these kinds of dollars on postage, on letters, on garbage that is being sent out daily from ministry after ministry in this government?

Hon Mr Rae: Again, the member will appreciate that I am not familiar with all the facts of the case which he has described. I would just say that if there are any extra copies, they can always be sent back. But I would certainly say to the member that, again, I think he points to a problem, I think he points to an issue that people are becoming increasingly aware of. We are working at it within the government in terms of trying to reduce the paper flow and trying to turn the government into a more environment-friendly, user-friendly place. All these suggestions, which are very positive and very constructive, are ones we will certainly want to look at.

Mr Harris: Let me try another. I brought an issue to the Premier's attention some time ago about a $40 courier bill for a letter from his office. My office is receiving calls daily from taxpayers complaining about how this government is wasting money.

One taxpayer called this week to tell me he received information from the Ministry of Tourism and Recreation by courier that could just as easily have been sent by mail. When he phoned and told staff at the ministry there was no rush, he was told, "Don't worry, we usually send these things out by courier."

In these tough times, the private sector is forced to tighten its belt. Companies like General Motors have to cut costs to survive. It is unacceptable to me, it is unacceptable to taxpayers, to businesses, to families, to have this government carry on wasting money daily, just in the simple communication to constituents. The Premier would know that a courier has to cost 5, 10, 15 times, in his case 40 times, more than simple mail.

Since we brought to his attention the flagrant abuse in his office, are there any directives or is there any action he has taken to ensure that we cut down on this kind of bureaucratic waste?

Hon Mr Rae: The suggestions the member is making are very positive ones. I do not think there is anybody in this House who looks with favour upon examples of waste. When you can show examples of conspicuous waste, I think it is important that everyone hear about them and that we try to improve the situation. I think what the member is suggesting is something that everyone can agree on. No one is in favour of that kind of thing.

I would just point out to the member that in terms of our overall approach to the budget, we have insisted to ministries that they severely restrict increases in departmental expenses to no more than 2% over the last year. That is going to require some efficiencies just to be able to reach that level.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Mr Elston: I would like to return to the content of our notice of want of confidence motion yesterday and ask the Premier if he is familiar with the fact that one of his members, who advertises himself as the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Tourism and Recreation, has gained a benefit for one of his constituents in front of the LLBO and in fact has bumped four other applicants from their hearing

schedule so that his constituent may receive an early hearing. Is it the Premier's view that it is perfectly in compliance with his conflict-of-interest guidelines and his code of conduct for parliamentary assistants that they are able to receive preferential treatment for their constituents over other valid applicants in front of a provincial tribunal?

Hon Mr Rae: The member has made an allegation. I think I owe it to the House and to others to look into it, as I think would be fair in the circumstances, and to try to get back to the member.

Mr Elston: I will send the material that I have at hand to the Premier, but I must say that the information which was given to us includes the following, and I will quote from written material:

"For more than two weeks, the Premier's office has been aware of these concerns. Undertakings to inquire into and respond to the matter have not been met and the method by which the highest political office in the province has handled the complaint has been totally unsatisfactory."

Since his office in fact has not responded for more than two weeks to this matter, and since the Premier's office has known about this incident, predating the one of confidence, predating the interesting events that transpired here last week, I wonder if the Premier can now tell us that his office is totally without control or responsibility when it comes to the matter of conflict of interest and inquiring into the conduct of his members.

Hon Mr Rae: I do not think, in fairness, that is fair. The member will appreciate that there is a very real difference between an allegation that is made and an investigation which is carried on in terms of looking into the allegation and proving the allegation. I think the member knows perfectly well, as well, that if there is a concern with respect to the Members' Conflict of Interest Act, there is a procedure to be followed with respect to filing a formal complaint with Judge Evans. These provisions are there, and I would say to the member that if he has such a complaint or comment to make, that is another place where he can take it as well.

GARBAGE DISPOSAL

Mrs Marland: My question is to the Minister of the Environment. On 11 April the minister announced her decision to ban all future municipal solid waste incinerators. However, there are examples of incineration which do not precisely fit that definition of municipal solid waste incineration. The minister's position on these related practices is not clear.

For instance, a company in my riding, St Lawrence Cement, wishes to burn refuse-derived fuel in its cement kilns. I know the minister is very familiar with their proposal. As the name of the fuel suggests, it is derived from municipal solid waste, but it has been processed so that it no longer is municipal solid waste.

Does the minister's ban on municipal solid waste incineration include the burning of refuse-derived fuel?

Hon Mrs Grier: I am sure the member is well aware of the kind of semantic

definitions we get into when we are talking about refuse-derived fuel and the forms in which it comes. There are those who say that shredded tires can in fact be refuse-derived fuel, and there are those who take the general definition of municipal solid waste, what is usually picked up by municipalities, from which pellets or bricks are created; is that burnable?

The policy I announced on behalf of the government was that all future incinerators designed to burn municipal solid waste would be banned in Ontario and that I would look into the operations of the existing and already approved municipal incinerators.

I made the point that there are a number of specialty incinerators. The member's colleague raised the issue of biomedical waste yesterday, and I know there is wood waste and those others, which we are quite frankly looking at trying to clarify the

definitions, but we have not yet announced any policy with respect to that.

Mrs Marland: The minister did not make it quite clear whether she considers refuse-derived fuel a municipal solid waste in another form, and I would appreciate that answer. I have written to ask the minister that, by the way.

Also, in the minister's announcement she said she would review the Peel resource recovery incinerator in Brampton, which has not opened and which she just referred to a minute ago. The Peel resource recovery facility would incinerate more than just municipal solid waste. It would also incinerate the huge amount of garbage that comes off the planes from Pearson International Airport. As the minister knows, the garbage from planes must be disposed of in the vicinity of the airport since international regulations prohibit returning the garbage to its destination. Airline garbage is not solid municipal waste, so again it is unclear whether the minister's policy announcement applies to it.

Can the minister tell this House whether she will permit airport garbage to be incinerated, and if not, where she will dispose of it? Will she permit airports to incinerate solid waste because it is on federal lands? There is no federal air zone freeze.

Hon Mrs Grier: The member raises an issue with which I suspect both she and I are very familiar, having constituencies in municipalities abutting the airport. As she will be aware, and perhaps other members of the House are not, the federal government has been struggling for some time with what to do with the waste from international airlines. Again, we are into

definitions. Essentially, it is food waste and packaging waste and all the things that come off a plane, which if it were collected from a hotel in downtown Toronto would be municipal solid waste. Under the federal Department of Agriculture guidelines it cannot be landfilled, and that has been a very real issue.

What I said with respect to the Peel incinerator was that we were reviewing its certificate of approval. The member indicated in her question that this incinerator was presently licensed to burn the waste from the airport. That is not my understanding of the situation, and examination of that would be part of the review of the certificate of approval we are currently undertaking.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Hon Mr Rae: Mr Speaker, having received a copy of the record from the member, I wonder if I might possibly give an answer to his question.

First of all, I had the distinct impression from his question that the member wrote the letter. It was not; it was his constituency assistant. She says: "I have been asked to find out why his client must wait so long for a hearing and, second, if there is any way of shortening the waiting period. If you could respond to this letter, the above Bracebridge constituency resident would be most appreciative."

This is for a licence under the name of Uncle Buck's Sports Lounge. The executive director of the Liquor Licence Board of Ontario says in response to this request of Uncle Buck's for a speedup: "As a result of the applicant's plea for urgency, and having received telephone calls from the applicant" -- and he advised the applicant of the process -- "four applications for licences which predated the application by Uncle Buck's were bumped." There is no reference at all in the correspondence or anywhere else to there having been any interference by the member for Muskoka-Georgian Bay whatsoever.

Mr Elston: What the Premier did not read was the final page, which I knew he would not, because the testimony printed in front of his very eyes and underlined so he could distinctly see it is an indication that the hearing was held because pressure was put by Mr Hutton. He said Mr Hutton said, "You would not believe the pressure we put on the member so that we could get this hearing now."

It is quite clear that the member for Muskoka-Georgian Bay's office represented the facts on behalf of the lawyer for Uncle Buck's and that in fact this was made as a change.

It is obvious the Premier takes the easy way out, and in this case the Premier must still answer the question: If it was so easy for him within 15 seconds of looking at the material, why is it that over two weeks elapsed before his office would reply to the people who responded to the early hearing date for Uncle Buck's Sports Lounge?

Reading the full material, it is obvious the pressure made was what caused the change in the date. How does he address the concerns of the applicants who were bumped?

Hon Mr Rae: If you look at the record --

Mr Bradley: Read the page.

Hon Mr Rae: I have the last page right here. It says:

"With all due respect, Mr Chairman, you will not believe the pressure I had to put to bear upon my local member of parliament to make sure the hearing was this month. The board wanted to have it in July or August."

If you look at that statement there is nothing to suggest pressure, either in the response from the executive director or in the correspondence, which is not from the member for Muskoka-Georgian Bay; the correspondence is from a constituency assistant. This is the heavy pressure we are hearing from the constituency assistant: "I have been asked to find out why the client must wait so long for a hearing and, second, if there is any way of shortening the waiting period." If that is pressure, give me a break; put it in some perspective.

The Speaker: Before proceeding, just a reminder to the member for Sault Ste Marie, who believed he was next on the list. By our practice, when a member of the cabinet or the Premier stands to respond to a question asked earlier, there is a supplementary added, but we then move next in rotation beyond the government party. That is our practice. If you want to change the rules, go to the rules committee.

SOFT DRINK CONTAINERS

Mr McClelland: My question is for the Minister of the Environment. Last October she made a speech to the Recycling Council of Ontario. In that speech she stated her intention to maintain and continue to enforce the existing regulations with respect to soft drink refillable containers as of 1 April 1991. We have the figures in for this past April and they indicate the refillable container returns are at 13%. The regulation states and requires that 30% of containers be refillable. Is it still the minister's intention to maintain and enforce the existing regulations?

Hon Mrs Grier: The member is quite right. The challenge I had issued to the soft drink companies was to meet the regulation of 30%. They have not done that, so the data submitted by the companies and the information has been referred by me to the investigations and enforcement branch of the ministry.

Mr McClelland: The minister said she was going to vigorously and rigorously enforce the regulations. Have any charges been laid, and if not, why not? Is she going to maintain and enforce the regulations as she promised she would? Why have no charges been laid, if they have not? What is the minister going to do about keeping her promise?

Hon Mrs Grier: The member was a parliamentary assistant to the former Minister of the Environment. I am sure he knows full well that the charges are not laid by me. When the information is received and totalled, as it has been in the first two weeks of June, it is referred to the investigations and enforcement branch, and decisions beyond that are made by that branch. I indicated in my response to the first question that is precisely what has been done, that is how it ought to have been done and that is, I suspect, how it has always been done.

NATIVE ISSUES

Mr J. Wilson: My question is to the minister responsible for native affairs and Minister of Natural Resources. On 28 March he announced in this Legislature he had signed a statement of intent to begin the process of resolving the land claim of the Algonquins of Golden Lake, which he described as being very strong.

The government's position is apparently based on a five-year-old research report which contains a disclaimer that the report's author reached no conclusions and recognized that other facts might subsequently be found having a bearing on the admissibility of the claim.

Has the Ontario native affairs secretariat carried out additional research since the document in 1986 which assisted the minister in concluding that the Algonquins have a very strong land claim?

Hon Mr Wildman: The report to which the member refers is the report by Lise Hansen of the Ontario native affairs secretariat. It is certainly true that during the process of analysing the claim there will be other information available. That is of course one reason we are consulting with all groups, including the ad hoc committee represented at the meeting in Huntsville last night. We are looking forward to receiving more of the information they have as part of their research. The advice we received was based on the analysis done by officials in both the native affairs secretariat and the Ministry of the Attorney General.

Mr J. Wilson: One of the problems is that the minister put the land claim together with the subagreements on hunting and fishing. The Ad Hoc Committee to Save Algonquin Park has been invited and has participated in discussions on the subagreements, but it has not been invited to participate in discussions concerning the land claim. I am specifically asking him about the land claim today.

The minister knows the Ad Hoc Committee to Save Algonquin Park released an information bulletin this morning and it examines the claim of the Algonquins of Golden Lake in great detail. As anticipated in the 1986 research report by his ministry, the committee has found other facts it believes are relevant to the land claim. In all, it points out no fewer than eight major flaws in the claim.

On the basis of the committee's findings, will the minister now undertake an in-depth historical and legal review of the Golden Lake claim to determine its validity and, until this is done, will the minister suspend negotiations on the land claim and the interim fishing and hunting agreements?

Hon Mr Wildman: The member raises some important questions, but I want to indicate that the

preamble to his question is incorrect. Last night, specifically in Huntsville, our negotiator said to a representative of the ad hoc committee that he would be interested in receiving the research they have done on the land claim. If the honourable member has been informed that they have been told we do not want their information, that is completely incorrect.

The fact is that the interim agreements are directly related to the land claim. Obviously, there would not be a need for interim subagreements on the aboriginal rights if there were no land claim file we are now beginning to negotiate. There may be some inaccuracies in the Hansen report; I am not certain. But if there are, we are happy to discuss those and look at the research that indicates there are

I point out, though, there are also some inaccuracies in the paper presented at the news conference this morning. For one thing, it says I announced in January there would be unlimited recreational hunting and fishing and unlimited access by trucks, all-terrain vehicles and snowmobiles to over 1,000 members of the Golden Lake band. At no time have I ever made such a statement.

ALGOMA STEEL CORP

Mr Martin: My question is for the Minister of Municipal Affairs. Members are aware that those of us who work and live in Sault Ste Marie these days are on the edge of our seats as we await the outcome of the task force on Algoma Steel's future and watch the daily drama unfold.

A couple of particularly worrisome pieces are around the commitment to the city regarding Algoma Steel paying its taxes. We were hit not so long ago with an appeal of its assessment, which takes millions of dollars out of our pool of money. Just recently we found out that Algoma is not going to be able to pay its present instalment of taxes and in fact states it will have difficulty meeting its September commitment. This removes $16 million from city coffers.

What assistance, if any, can we expect from his ministry in light of these very serious decisions and the impact they are having on my city's ability to carry out its functions?

Hon Mr Cooke: I appreciate the question from the member. I also appreciate his ongoing interest and the many contacts he has made with our ministry to try to get this matter resolved and to achieve assistance for the people of his community.

Our ministry has been in touch with the city of Sault Ste Marie, and discussions will be going on to see what involvement and assistance we can provide. We have a program under our ministry to help communities detrimentally affected by drops in assessment due to the economy or assessment appeals, and we will be able to provide assistance. It is now just a matter of the negotiations and discussions with the city to see the level of assistance that will be needed in the member's community.

Mr Martin: In light of the very serious nature of this question and the fact that as each day goes by the money not coming in accumulates and the projects we have on stream, especially the anti-recessionary projects this government wants to participate in with the municipality, can the minister give me some time lines as to how quickly this will happen or some assurance it will be as quickly as possible?

Hon Mr Cooke: As a result of the conversations I had with the member earlier today, I have talked to ministry officials and impressed upon them, and they already understood very clearly, that his community needs an answer very quickly. I can assure the member that answer will be within the next few days. We are working with the community as quickly as we can to determine the level of assistance required, but the answer will be quick.

MINING INDUSTRY

Mr Miclash: My question is to the Minister of Mines. All indications are that the Ontario mining industry is in serious trouble. All we have to do is look at the facts. By the Minister of Mines's own account, nine mines have recently closed in Ontario. There are few prospects of new mines on the horizon, and when there is a potential for a new project, like Shoal Lake in my riding, the NDP seems to want to ignore it.

Ontario exploration expenditures have plummeted as well, and two days ago the Minister of Northern Development announced that the final 700 direct mining jobs in Elliot Lake are to be phased out in the next five years. This brings the total direct mining jobs lost to over 3,000 in Elliot Lake alone. The facts are clear: People are losing their jobs and, as I say, Ontario mining is in crisis; yet we have a Minister of Mines who continues to act as if everything is as it should be.

My question to the Minister of Mines is specific and direct. As late as 25 March, the minister told the House that there was nothing to worry about and that in fact mining employment levels are the same now as they were two years ago. Can the minister tell us whether he really still believes the statements he made on 25 March are accurate and if not, can he clarify this information for the House now?

Hon Mr Pouliot: If you choose to put the onus on the negative, you will say the mining sector has been somewhat or severely impacted. If you wish to put the onus on the positive, and therefore to look to the future with confidence, you will readily acquiesce that the mining industry is still an industry that contributes $7 billion to the economy of Ontario, that employs directly and indirectly 80,000 to 85,000 people and that among industrial sectors, mining pays the most money; it puts the most money into people's pockets.

We do not, unfortunately, control the price of gold. We do not have an input with the London Metal Exchange. We do not control whether a major corporation in Chile will significantly impact the price of copper, zinc, lead, industrial or other minerals. But all systems are go. We are spending $4 million with the Ontario prospectors assistance program to help prospectors. There is $11 million of taxpayers' money for junior exploration companies. That is not all. There is $30 million between the feds and the province so that mining will continue to have its rightful place under the sun and a leading role in the economic development of this province.

Mr Miclash: That answer is not going to stand well for the many miners who are out of work or for the many mining towns that have been closed down. By improperly representing the health of the mining industry, as the minister just has, he is actually jeopardizing any chance that this industry, vital to the economy of this province, as he indicates, is going to recover.

The Ontario mining industry is in a crisis and permanent job loss is the result. The minister knows that very well. Yet while the rest of the world is adapting to global technological changes, the NDP Minister of Mines is handing out fake gold coins reliving Ontario's past. While Quebec steams past us in terms of exploration incentives, the minister again is sitting on his hands, again blaming the federal government. While other jurisdictions are aggressively seeking out mining investment, this minister is content to oversee many programs that, as he indicated, were initiated by our former government.

Again, my question is a simple one. Can the Minister of Mines point to one significant new initiative, one personal intervention, anything that has renewed investor confidence, buoyed exploration expenditures or lured industrial growth in the mining industry to this province? One example of his own initiative since taking office is all I want.

Hon Mr Pouliot: As the member is aware, it is not the style of this government to take credit for the increase in the OPAP program. We work in the collective for the benefit of people outside these walls, whom I respect. After such a lengthy question, it would perhaps have been appropriate if the member opposite had come up, in the spirit of partnership, with some innovative, imaginative ideas.

Yes, he is right, we are constantly rising to the challenge by rearranging the dollars that are available to mining. We are very cognizant that you cannot turn gravel into gold. Only the opposition can pretend to do that. We know about our responsibility. In a mining town, while the going is good, you survive for five, 10, 15 and 20 years. We are most aware that resources are finite, that we have a responsibility to diversify. Fascinating, interesting. We are doing what we can to find other mines and yet we are diversifying. Not tales of Houdini, the real world of today.

TRUCKING INDUSTRY

Mr Arnott: That is a hard act to follow, but I have a question for the Minister of Transportation and it deals with his moratorium on the issuance of new trucking licences.

On 25 April the minister announced he would issue no new trucking licences to applicants who wished to operate in Ontario. It has been suggested to me from a number of sources that the minister had no statutory authority whatsoever to do this and so has been acting without statutory authority for almost two months. Would the minister indicate whether this is true? If it is, when is he going to introduce the required amendments?

Hon Mr Philip: No, it is not true, and the legislation will be introduced hopefully before the House adjourns.

Mr Arnott: I do not understand the response. He said it was not true and yet he has to put forward legislation.

The minister has repeatedly been asked by the trucking industry for lower taxes to level the playing field so our carriers can compete against their US counterparts, but we have heard today from the Treasurer that he is not contemplating a reduction of the diesel fuel tax.

Would the minister care to share with the members of this House what specific initiatives he is considering, other than the licence moratorium and the registration and bonding of load brokers, to save Ontario's trucking industry? Can he assure the House that his plans do not include further reregulation of the trucking industry, such as the introduction of a route rate schedule?

Hon Mr Philip: I had a very interesting and favourable meeting with my federal counterpart, the Minister of Transport, in Ottawa last week. We are looking at a variety of proposals and seeing where we may be able to work together in a co-operative spirit to deal with the problems of the transportation industry that were caused, of course, by the deregulation by the federal Tories in Ottawa and the provincial Liberals here in Ontario.

I am pleased at the result of that meeting. The federal government does have a study, which is now before the federal Minister of Transport. He has said he will work jointly with me after he has had a chance to study that. Both my federal counterpart and I hope to work together with the trucking industry to resolve a very difficult situation, which was not created by this government but which we are willing to deal with.

COMMUNITY INFORMATION CENTRES

Ms Haeck: My question is for the Minister of Culture and Communications. My riding is very fortunate to have a community information centre. It is called Information Niagara, and I wish to take this opportunity to congratulate them for a job well done. They have been there for many, many years. This centre serves St Catharines and the Niagara Peninsula, responding to people's inquiries for a variety of crucial community information; for instance, day care, community information in general, single-parent programs, housing, family assistance and questions relating to food and shelter.

I understand the minister has quite recently provided a 5.5% increase in operating grants for community information centres across this province. Given the current economic situation and the increased demand for the services provided by community information centres, is the 5.5% sufficient to provide these very valuable and necessary services and enough for the survival of CICs themselves?

The community information centres have been experiencing chronic underfunding for many years. What is worse is that the previous government eliminated community information centres from the ministry's budget in a constraint program. What we have done as a government, which I think will help many of them across Ontario, is we have reinstated the full CIC budget into the ministry, and we have given a 5.5% increase in operating grants in 1991-1992, which is the most significant increase in over five years. As well, we have just announced a safety net funding program to prevent layoffs and reduction in hours of operations.

Ms Haeck: I would further like to ask what the future holds for community information centres in light of all the funding the minister has now put back into place?

Hon Mr Marchese: This government is undertaking a review of public access to government human services information. This review will look at how the average person obtains information from governments. It will also look at whether we are duplicating services.

We are also looking at how community information centres fit into the whole network of access to information. I think it is important for the Liberal Party as well. The Association of Community Information Centres in Ontario and other community organizations as well as other ministries will be part of an advisory group to advise us on how well people are receiving information in Ontario. We will have the recommendations of that later on this year.

Mr Bradley: I thought there was going to be some revenge for five years, three months and four days of those kinds of answers from me, but there is not.

JORDAN BRIDGE

Mr Bradley: Jordan Bridge is falling down. My question is for the Minister of Transportation, who would likely be aware that the bridge over Jordan Harbour is falling apart at this time. The mayor of Jordan, the mayor of Vineland, the mayor of Beamsville, the mayor of all Lincoln, Ray Konkle, has called for its replacement. In fact, he said: "It is not a question of if the bridge will fall; it is a question of when. They've got an accident waiting to happen. Three pieces of the Niagara-bound bridge have already fallen into the harbour, with the last piece measuring about 46 centimetres by 20 centimetres." The St Catharines Standard in an editorial on 17 June has called for its replacement.

Will the minister give instructions to his ministry to replace the bridge over the Jordan Harbour immediately to avoid an unfortunate accident and potential long delays for the member for Lincoln, the member for St Catharines-Brock and all the people in the Niagara Peninsula and the tourists? Will he do this favour for us? Will he announce this today and make everyone in the province satisfied and our visitors to this province as well?

Hon Mr Philip: I am so pleased the member has asked a question of me on this. I am sure he would be more familiar with Mr Konkle than I am, but I have read Mayor Konkle's statements. Indeed, there was a failure in the sense that there was a punching failure, which occurred in the deck of the south structure on 20 April 1990. It was a single, localized failure involving a piece of deck about the size of a dinner plate, not large sections of deck, as some people have indicated and as the press may have played up. I would not want the member to exaggerate the seriousness of the problem in any way, as some people may have.

I am sure the member, being a member of the standing committee on public accounts, would want value for money. The member knows we are committed to replacing that bridge in the next five years. I can assure him that my staff have examined the bridge, that we are monitoring it, that there is no safety problem and that the bridge will be replaced on schedule. But it would be completely premature to make major alterations to a bridge that is going to be replaced on

schedule within the next five years. I am sure the member, being concerned about the taxpayers, would agree with the actions of the ministry.

VISITORS

The Speaker: I am pleased to acknowledge the presence this afternoon of five visiting police officers from New York City who are seated in the members' gallery west.

NOTICE OF DISSATISFACTION

Mr Conway: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: Under standing order 33(

a) I would like to serve notice of my dissatisfaction with an answer provided by the member for Algoma, and I serve notice that I would like to pursue this at adjournment later today.

The Speaker: If the member will fill out the necessary documentation.

PETITIONS

SOCIAL WORK

Ms Poole: I have a petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, which contains some 120 signatures.

"Yes, I demand that the Rae government act immediately to introduce a social work act for Ontario. Without this urgently needed legislation, every member of the public in Ontario, including those most vulnerable and disenfranchised, remains at enormous and unnecessary risk.

"Mr Rae, your government must act now. Building a strong Ontario for tomorrow is dependent on protecting the children and families of today."

I have signed this petition and wholeheartedly agree with it.

FRENCH-LANGUAGE SERVICES

Mr Runciman: I have a petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly. It reads in an abbreviated fashion:

HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION

Mr Martin: The following people have signed this petition, and it is for the Minister of Transportation:

"We oppose any highway development that would encroach on the pristine environment of the Hiawatha conservation areas, including Kinsmen Park, Crystal Creek Conservation Area, Wishart Park and all Ministry of Natural Resources and fish hatcheries property, including adjacent buffer zones and watersheds. This includes the Ministry of Transportation-proposed highway corridor alternatives.

"We feel that any highway development within these corridors would degrade the quality of life in residential communities, have a high impact on the social environment, ski paths, trailways, and have a direct impact on natural environments that are currently enjoyed by thousands each year. In addition, substantial economic impact would occur on prime tax and recreation land.

"We strongly urge that the above proposed highway corridors not be given further consideration, and be removed from the list of alternatives."

I send this to the Minister of Transportation with a letter signed by myself.

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON REGULATIONS AND PRIVATE BILLS

Mr Hansen from the standing committee on regulations and private bills presented the following report and moved its adoption:

Your committee begs to report the following bills without amendments:

Bill Pr31,

An Act respecting the City of Ottawa;

Bill Pr42,

An Act to revive Magnum International Productions Inc;

Bill Pr65,

An Act to revive Multimobile Corporation Limited;

Bill Pr75,

An Act respecting the City of Chatham.

Your committee begs to report the following bills as amended:

Bill Pr33,

An Act respecting the City of Toronto;

Bill Pr34,

An Act respecting the City of Toronto;

Bill Pr50,

An Act respecting the City of Toronto;

Bill Pr63,

An Act respecting the City of Ottawa.

Motion agreed to.

STANDING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

Mr Runciman from the standing committee on government agencies presented the committee's 11th report.

The Speaker: Pursuant to standing order 104(g)(14), the report is deemed to be adopted by the House.

INTRODUCTION OF BILL

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION AND PROTECTION OF PRIVACY STATUTE LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 1991 / LOI DE 1991 MODIFIANT DES LOIS RELATIVES À L'ACCÈS À L'INFORMATION ET LA PROTECTION DE LA VIE PRIVÉE

Mr Tilson moved first reading of Bill 128,

An Act to amend the Law related to the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy.

M. Tilson propose la première lecture du projet de loi 128, Loi portant modification des lois relatives à l'accès à l'information et la protection de la vie privée.

Motion agreed to.

La motion est adoptée.

Mr Tilson: The purpose of this bill is to amend the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, 1987 and the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, 1989 to provide access to information relating to the salary of public service employees.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

ONTARIO LOAN ACT, 1991 / LOI DE 1991 SUR LES EMPRUNTS DE L'ONTARIO

Miss Martel, on behalf of Mr Laughren, moved third reading of Bill 81,

An Act to authorize borrowing on the credit of the Consolidated Revenue Fund.

Mlle Martel, au nom de M. Laughren, propose la troisième lecture du projet de loi 81, Loi autorisant des emprunts garantis par le Trésor.

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

Interjections.

The Speaker: No? All those in favour will please say "aye."

Hon Miss Martel: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: There will be a short debate on this, as I understand.

Mr Bradley: As we seem to be moving towards the end of the session, this is an opportunity to deal with the matters directly or indirectly related to this particular bill, and I will attempt to do so today.

There is a recognition that governments do not have all of their funds coming in immediately and that there is a need for at least some borrowing to take place in the province. We are concerned about the level of borrowing taking place, the amount of money required and the amount of interest that is going to be paid, but those matters have been dealt with rather extensively in the House in previous interventions, mine included, during second reading.

I did want to mention a couple of the things where I thought the borrowing would be applicable. I am concerned that if this bill goes through the money will not be allocated to these areas of great importance. One of them is the Ontario scholarship, which used to be offered in the final year of secondary school, which we used to call grade 13, to students who worked very hard and were able to achieve at least 80% in their six best subjects in that last year.

This was something a lot of students looked forward to, not only the recognition of being called Ontario scholars but the financial reward of $100, which was tangible recognition of the particular work on their part and of their achievement. It was a bit of an incentive for some who saw that they were close to the mark and perhaps were able to put in a little extra effort to mobilize the resources in appropriate fashion in order to achieve this.

I expect that the Ontario Secondary School Teachers' Federation, the members of which understand there is a great deal of good in providing this scholarship to young people in our province, would be opposed to this, and I am sure the government will be hearing from them.

Those young people I have discussed it with who in the past have received this particular award, or who were working very hard in anticipation of receiving it this year, are very disappointed that it is being discontinued. I ask members to think, for instance, if they were students working extremely hard in secondary school this year, recognizing that one of the titles they could attain was Ontario scholar and one of the rewards they could receive was the $100 scholarship that went with it, how they would feel to be told almost at the end of the school year that they were not to receive that money.

I hoped the government would reconsider in its budget -- the largest budget; I think we are over $52 billion now -- that it would not take it out on the young people in our province. I have not come to a conclusion yet whether they are right or wrong, but some people in this province have suggested that the real reason is that the NDP does not like to reward success or excellence because somehow it elevates some people above other people. Certainly I am evaluating that particular point of view put forward.

I hope that if the Minister of Education recognizes that there are some who feel this way, some who perhaps unjustifiably or justifiably have come to this conclusion, and that it is necessary to restore the faith of the young people in our province, the Ministry of Education and the government of Ontario. It was particularly disconcerting that the rug was pulled out from underneath them at the very last minute. It would have been bad enough had the government announced, "Next year you're not going to receive it." But taking it out at the very last moment I thought was rather mean on the part of the government.

We had some police officers here from New York City. I was wondering whether those officers would be people with golden helmets and part of a special precision team in New York state, as we have in Ontario. The member for Algoma-Manitoulin was telling me that the OPP Golden Helmets precision team visited Little Current or one of the other communities in his constituency for the last time as the OPP Golden Helmets.

He explained to me how sad the people of that community were that the NDP government was removing this tradition and taking away from the police force of Ontario a very good public relations component, a good relationship with the people of this province.

They said, "This must be in keeping with the fact that the OPP Pipes and Drums are disappearing" -- another institution which has been so well received, particularly in the smaller communities of the province, certainly in my own community in the grape and wine festival parade, where some of the largest and most boisterous rounds of applause come when the Golden Helmets come down St Paul Street in St Catharines or when the Pipes and Drums are heard from a distance.

But the Golden Helmets are disappearing and the OPP Pipes and Drums are being silenced by a government that simply does not seem to care about the traditions that have been built up in this province over the years. The member for Durham East is a man who respects tradition, and in his heart of hearts he probably believes the funding should be restored for the Pipes and Drums, which have instilled pride in so many, not only in Canada over the years but in a place across the large pond called the Atlantic Ocean. I lament that.

The Minister of Health was here earlier. She smiles each time I rise because she believes I am going to ask her a question about the CAT scanner, or lack thereof, in the Niagara region. I thought when the Treasurer was borrowing the large amount of money contained in this bill, that he was borrowing part of it for Ministry of Health operations.

He would not have to borrow it, mind you, for the capital cost of a CAT scanner or one of the other machines similar to it to serve people in the Niagara region, because the capital costs would be assumed by the people of the community, who would be delighted to have the opportunity to raise those funds. But of course they need the permission of the Ministry of Health.

We heard the stories the other day of some animals, in the middle of the night, being able to get some CAT scans in the greater Metropolitan Toronto area.

People were concerned in St Catharines and Niagara Falls and Virgil and Niagara-on-the-Lake and Bismarck and Camden and the very many communities in the Niagara Peninsula when they heard that it was available for animals, but we could not get a second CAT scanner to serve the people of the Niagara region, people who have to wait some four months to receive this service in many cases, and people who have to go through discomforting and disconcerting tests which are much more intrusive than a CAT scan would be, also the people who have to head to the United States to receive this service, costing the taxpayer additional money and costing themselves additional money to go to the United States.

I would have hoped that when the Treasurer was borrowing, he was borrowing for the purpose of the operating cost of this CAT scanner for the Niagara region.

I would have liked to have gone to the Niagara District Health Council's annual meeting today, because this is the number one priority for it, but of course I said I would be in the Legislature today, raising this particular issue once again and drawing it to the attention of the NDP government, which in opposition seemed to be so much in favour of good investments in health care and is now being stingy and taking a long time dithering and delaying about putting a second CAT scanner in the Niagara region.

I see members from the Hamilton area here. They have CAT scanners in their hospitals that service people in their area. Sometimes people are fortunate enough to be able to access those. The members for the Hamilton area know that the CAT scanners they have are necessary to serve the people in their immediate area and that they do not want their people bumped from the list because someone has to come in from outside, someone who does not have that service available to them. I hope the Treasurer will reconsider that.

The registrar general's office: The Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations will be interested in this. The move has taken place to Thunder Bay, and the staff do their very best to attempt to service everyone in Ontario, including the MPPs. Something the minister probably does not know is happening, however. I have to keep this relatively confidential, because it is in a confidential area. The member for St Catharines-Brock would be aware of this; her office received the same telephone call yesterday. This is from social workers who are dealing with adoptive parents.

They cannot call my office or the member for St Catharines-Brock's office or any other office to get us to assist in obtaining a birth certificate in an expeditious manner because of confidentiality. These are certified birth certificates, the long birth certificates, we are talking about. Because they are dealing entirely in confidentiality, they cannot share that information with any of the members of the Legislature. I know one person said she had waited since October for one of the long birth certificates.

What is disconcerting is that people are now hiring lawyers in Thunder Bay to expedite the service. I do not mean in any illegal fashion at all. They happen to be in Thunder Bay and they happen to know the law. People are now having to spend -- how much does a lawyer make an hour? Any lawyers in here? -- whatever they make an hour. It can be very expensive, depending on the quality, I guess, of the lawyer or the community, but it is costing these people some considerable sum of additional money than it would otherwise to get these expedited. When they say expedited, they mean a matter of weeks, not a matter of days.

I am glad the Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations is here. I know she would be concerned about this. I know she will look into this matter, because no one should have to hire a lawyer in Thunder Bay, no social workers, no adoptive parents should have to hire a lawyer in Thunder Bay to do this work, which should normally go through the Ministry of Consumer and Commercial Relations. Knowing her concern, I know she will be quick to look into that.

I heard the leader of the third party raise the issue of waste. Earl Armstrong in St Catharines, a person who speaks his mind on many occasions, spoke to a number of MPPs and government offices about getting information from the select committee on Ontario in Confederation. The Chair of the Constitution committee is here today. He is one of my favourite members of the House because he knows how to vote politically on all the issues that come up on private members' day. I always tell the members of the NDP they should watch him, because he is a smart politician.

Anyway, his committee -- and it is not his fault personally; I do not want to attribute it to him or to any of the members of the committee -- I know the members want to get the information out. This is a dilemma. I should not be understanding of the government, but I am going to be understanding.

These people have received three and four and five copies of certain things coming from that committee, and they have received it in pretty expensive mailing operations. I hope this government and all of us who are associated with the Legislature, and all members are in this category, would do our best to provide the information expeditiously, but at the same time to do it in a way which is economic for the people of this province and environmentally sensitive.

Hon Mr Pouliot: It's the other guy. The third party does it better.

Mr Bradley: Certainly the leader of the third party as his lead question raised this issue today, so it must be important.

I mentioned that Jordan Bridge was falling down. Certainly the mayor of the town of Lincoln, Ray Konkle, has had his photograph taken taking photographs of the bridge falling down. It is not only a matter of the people who go in boats under the bridge, and the cement falling down and the wood falling down on those people, but what is important to those of us in the peninsula, and we know this, is that I would not want to see the member for St Catharines-Brock delayed getting to the Legislature for a vote which could cause the downfall of the government because the bridge is falling down.

I would not want to see damage to her car, because she would have to access the insurance system and she would find out that the rates are remaining quite low, despite the chagrin of this government at that fact.

Mr Scott: Peter Kormos will have introduced fault by then.

Mr Bradley: I know there is another member who has a Corvette, and he likely would not be faced with a problem with this, because the Corvette moves more quickly than some of the other vehicles and he is unlikely to have this problem.

But it is a serious problem. Some may remember reading the story about a situation in New York state where a bridge fell down and I think there were some fatalities and some people who were hurt. We do not want this to happen. It is a heavily travelled road. I know, as the minister has pointed out today, there is a

schedule five years from now when the bridge is to be replaced. I hope the minister would consider accelerating that, particularly in view of the fact we are in a recession. It is money that has to be spent anyway. It is not new money, it is not over and above, it has to be invested anyway. Therefore, this problem, which has arisen since the NDP came into power, is one that must be solved by the New Democratic Party.

I also would like the Treasurer, when he is borrowing money and when he has to talk to the other ministers, to consider using his influence with the federal government, which is considerable -- I saw that he was getting along very well at the recent federal-provincial meeting; he said no one was picking on him at that particular meeting -- to bring about a situation where one of the Department of National Defence contracts goes to Port Weller.

The reason I say that is that the Treasurer's government is borrowing money, and one of the reasons he is borrowing money is to construct a new ferry for Pelee Island. This was negotiated by the previous Liberal government and confirmed very well, and I gave credit, by the new government of Ontario to go through with this contract. That is helpful to Port Weller. The province is doing its share.

I hope the Treasurer, when he is talking about this loan bill to his federal minister, will indicate that Nora Blyde of St Catharines is correct when she says that Port Weller needs more contracts, that we need employment. We have to bring it back to its days of 800, 900 and 1,000 employees. The federal government has it within its jurisdiction to do this.

The member who sits in the chair now, a member from eastern Ontario, knows of a concern when he sees so many contracts of a federal nature going to an adjacent province and his municipality perhaps does not have the same access to those. I share that concern with him, and I hope that the federal government, when it is considering this, will remember that our Treasurer is in the midst of attempting to fight a recession and that he needs some federal government help.

One of the best ways to do that is to invest money in the province by having a contract for a minesweeper or one of the other major contracts for the Department of National Defence going to Port Weller Dry Docks in St Catharines. I know the representatives of the union in that case -- Dave Brown has called me on a number of occasions, and other representatives of the union -- would appreciate this as well, because they are people who are excellent workers and people who require this to keep bread on the table for their families.

I also would like to talk about the tax on auto workers one more time, because the borrowing will be influenced. That is how I get this into this particular debate. The Treasurer will say that perhaps I have raised this too often in the House, but I do not think you can raise anything too often.

I want to say I at long last have a glimmer of hope, because while the Treasurer talked before about some meetings he would have with others about this matter, he has now suggested he is going to, I think he used the word "fine-tune" this particular tax measure. I want to commend him on at least taking that step of fine-tuning, because certainly auto workers in my constituency, the CAW bargaining unit in my constituency, and I am sure in all auto-making communities in the province -- the Minister of Labour would be on my side on this.

I know he is probably the buzz-saw in cabinet now who is making the Treasurer sit up and think about these matters, because he and I have been on the same platform at the CAW hall, Local 199, in St Catharines fighting for many of the same causes in years gone by. I know he is on my side on this issue, and it is good to see that he is there.

I see the member for Lincoln and the member for St Catharines-Brock. They probably both agree with me. I do not expect them to rise in the Legislature and say so, because both would like to be in the cabinet some day and you do not get into the cabinet by rising in the House and publicly pestering the Treasurer or any other members of government.

But I am sure that behind closed doors they have made similar representations, because the member for Lincoln, for instance, was a valued employee at General Motors who knows the operation there probably as intricately as any member of this Legislature, and he knows how important that industry is to the city of St Catharines and the Niagara Peninsula.

Hon Mr Laughren: Who?

Mr Bradley: I am referring to the member for Lincoln on this occasion.

I was reading a story about the Treasurer in the Hamilton Spectator that said he had roots in southern Ontario as well, in the Haldimand area, so he understands, I am sure, and he has had it brought to his attention by representatives. You often have a hard time, and the member for Lincoln would understand this, and some other members, bringing management and labour together. They disagree on many, many items, particularly in terms of collective bargaining.

But our Treasurer has brought labour and management together on an issue by imposing a tax on auto workers in this province. He has done this, and the company has said, "This is bad for our sales; this is not good for the auto industry." The union has said, "This is bad for our workers and their employment prospects." All of them understand that we are in the midst of the deepest recession since the 1930s, and they understand that the competition that is being faced today is unprecedented, from offshore, from Mexico, from Asia, from South America even, now, from Europe and certainly from the United States. They know the imposition of this tax at this time is unwise.

The Treasurer has chastised me in the House from time to time to say: "You were the Minister of the Environment. You should understand the reason we're doing it. It's for the environment." I wish I could believe that. I would never say that the Treasurer would be misleading the House, because he is a man of integrity and he would not do that. But I know generically what Treasurers are like, right across the country, and the thing they like most is putting their hands on the money of the taxpayers in the province, of getting revenues. I suspect -- I could be wrong; the Treasurer would tell I am wrong -- it is a tax grab disguised as an environmental tax, disguised as a conservation tax.

I really believe our Treasurer should not just tinker with it, not just -- what is the word we are using now? The word they were using in the newspaper that said he was doing something with the tax.

Hon Mr Laughren: Fine-tuning.

Mr Bradley: Fine-tuning. He should not just fine-tune it, because it is not that our vehicles in Ontario would not benefit from some fine-tuning; what they really need is replacement.

Mr Conway: That is what John White attempted to call his famous energy tax.

Mr Bradley: John White, a former Treasurer of this province, attempted to call his energy tax "fine-tuning," and of course he had to withdraw his tax.

Mr Conway: He tried to call his backdown fine-tuning.

Mr Bradley: It was a backdown.

I would say to the member for Renfrew North, who intervenes in this debate, that I have already promised the Treasurer that if he withdraws his tax I will not call the retreat. I have promised him that. A strategic withdrawal, perhaps; a retreat, never. I said I would publicly compliment him if he totally withdrew this tax and replaced it with a financial incentive for people to purchase new vehicles in Ontario.

Hon Mr Laughren: What about the revenues?

Mr Bradley: What would that do? First of all, it would increase revenues for the Treasurer. That is what he is most concerned about. How would it do it? More people would buy vehicles; they have to pay sales tax --

Hon Mr Laughren: Sounds like Reaganomics. Ronald Reagan is a Liberal.

Mr Bradley: No, no. They have to buy vehicles, they pay sales tax and it increases the revenues. It is interesting that the number one concern of the Treasurer as he interjects is revenue. I thought the number one concern was the environment. Now I hear it is revenue. He says, "What am I going to do for the revenue?" I am suggesting to him that he will benefit from this stimulation of the provincial economy.

You say, "What does that do environmentally?" Environmentally, what it does is the following. Brand-new vehicles have far better emission controls than the older vehicles. Second, their fuel efficiency is far better than the older vehicles' is. So if the Treasurer is really interested in an environmental gesture of importance, he accomplishes both by following my direction and suggestions. He improves the air quality, he improves the fuel efficiency in this province, and at the same time the bonus is this: he gets some cash from it, although maybe not as much as he would like.

But the other benefit is for the auto workers in this province, people who live in my street and whom I and others in this Legislature represent, who would then see increased sales of vehicles and so the assembly plants do much better economically and the parts plants, those who produce parts for the vehicles in this province, do better.

Mr Hope: They get most of their parts from the States.

Mr Bradley: The member for Chatham-Kent says they get most of their parts in the United States. I will have to check with representatives of the CAW in St Catharines and my neighbours --

Mr Hope: Local 199.

Mr Bradley: Local 676 at Hayes-Dana as well. I will check with those people, add in 199 in St Catharines and I will check with my neighbours who work in various auto plants and parts plants in our area to see if indeed most of the parts are made in the United States and they do not have to worry about the Treasurer's tax on auto workers. I will have to see if that is the case. I somehow do not think so from my conversations so far with those individuals and what I have read about what they have had to say.

Anyway, I look forward with anticipation to the announcement of the provincial Treasurer of this change. I hope it is momentous.

If he does it in the Legislature instead of waiting until the Legislature stops, I want to be able to rise in this Legislature and pay tribute to a Treasurer who had the intestinal fortitude and wisdom and consensus-seeking ability, as had the Minister of Labour who did the same thing with Bill 70, who did a lot of consulting with people and then came in and said, "It's not the bill I wanted originally, but I understand it's probably a better bill the way I have developed it." I will look forward to the Treasurer doing that.

Knowing that he is the open-minded person he is, everyone who represents Chelmsford over the years and Walden and many of those fine communities, Chapleau and others --

Hon Mr Laughren: Shining Tree; do not leave out Shining Tree.

Mr Bradley: Shining Tree -- would be a person who would think possibly about that potential change.

The other thing I think this loans bill deals with, and I wonder about passing it, is patronage.

Hon Mr Laughren: You are running on a bit, though.

Mr Bradley: The Treasurer suggests I sit down right now. I have observed the New Democratic Party in the federal Parliament over the years. I used to get the federal Hansards. I still have them down in my basement. Some would suggest I have everything down in my basement -- newspapers, you name it, it is down there; even the federal Hansards.

I have observed the New Democratic Party. I used to read the speeches of David Lewis, and what an eloquent orator he was in the federal House. Son Stephen, in the provincial House, I had the privilege of sitting with for some period of time.

Mr Conway: Stephen was so eloquent and so pure that when Brian Mulroney called he said, "Ready, aye ready."

Mr Bradley: I was not thinking of that patronage appointment because I think that was a good choice. I happen to think that when Ian Deans, former member for Hamilton Mountain in the federal Parliament, took the federal appointment at $94,000 -- it would be over $100,000 now -- that was fine; it was a good appointment and I did not become angry with him.

When Ed Broadbent took his appointment from Brian Mulroney at over $100,000, no one heard me get up in this Legislature and object, because I know that was a good appointment to a commission which deals with human rights. When Stephen Lewis was appointed as ambassador to the United Nations, I did not object to that; I think it was an appropriate appointment.

I was convinced, as perhaps the Speaker was, that the NDP was different; that somehow there would not be the list of patronage appointments. Now I look in my own area and other areas and see that all the New Democrats are getting appointments.

Hon Mr Hampton: We are appointing former Liberal MPPs as judges.

Mr Bradley: The Attorney General interjects. I am not standing here to object to that. I am standing here to object to the fact that the New Democrats portray themselves as different from other parties. The Treasurer and I probably agree on the matter.

This morning before the committee, Michael Cassidy, former leader of the NDP, was just appointed to the Ontario Hydro board. I have not seen a more partisan performance before a legislative committee than I saw with Michael Cassidy. But I expected it. I happened to like Michael Cassidy; a lot of people in the NDP apparently did not. I admired him. I did not agree with him all the time, but I thought in the House he made some interesting points against the government of the time.

Mr Conway: They would not even know that his father ran for the Liberal leadership and was denounced, I think, after the fact by his son.

Mr Bradley: But there we are in committee. We do not vote this week on this. I have to give it some serious consideration.

We have had several New Democrats who have been appointed to various positions. There is a token Liberal and a token Conservative who are appointed, but by and large this bunch makes the Liberals and Conservatives look like amateurs when it comes to patronage appointments. My concern was, I was always led to believe the New Democrats were different, that they are a different breed of people in terms of public morality and ethics and that things such as patronage would disappear.

The Premier set up a committee of the Legislature which, of course, is somewhat of a joke because the government has the majority, there is so little time to consider the appointments, it is just going through the motions. But there is Michael Cassidy before the committee this morning saying, was it not nice that we have this new process. He just zipped right through the committee and his appointment was confirmed.

Ish Theilheimer, who was the many-time candidate for the NDP in Renfrew North, did not even have to go to the committee. He was appointed right away.

I remember when we used to sit around the cabinet table and there would be some really good former Liberal members and we would say, "We can't appoint those people because that's political patronage to do it." But I look at these people and they do not worry about that. Ish was there right away.

I had a number of people who were perhaps not happy with me in the Liberal Party because I would not champion the cause of former candidates or necessarily those who had worked hard for the party. What happens now? The NDP is not different. What we would conclude in this Legislature over the last nine months is not that the NDP -- I had better be careful when I say this -- was measurably worse then the other parties but that it is the same as the other parties.

The Premier changes his tune. The Premier is a different man today than he was before. I used to watch him in opposition. Some of our members resented the Premier of the province of Ontario, Bob Rae, when he was Leader of the Opposition. I remember he called for my resignation at least once or twice -- everybody did at one time or other -- and people said to me: "Don't you dislike Bob Rae for that? He is so unfair. There is no evidence at all of tainted fuel. Here he is. He has his members walking out and he puts on a big show and he wants you to resign. Don't you resent that?" I said: "No. That is the role of the Leader of the Opposition."

The Leader of the Opposition has the role and responsibility to criticize and to establish standards. My objection is to how the Premier's standards have changed now he is the Premier instead of the opposition leader, and how his own members, when they commit indiscretions, are allowed to continue in cabinet or are allowed to be apologized for, when I can recall that his standards were different in opposition, when he pointed the finger and called for everyone's resignation.

What does that say? It says that Bob Rae is the same as any other politician we have seen in Ontario. It is part of government; it is part of opposition. I could say he is worse, but I am waiting to make a judgement on that. I have always liked the member for York South as an individual. Members of this Legislature know that, but I certainly have found my view different today watching how his standards have changed in government from when they were in opposition.

I know the member for Renfrew North is probably interested in making an intervention in this particular debate. I do not think he has spoken on this, but before I finish, I just saw something else I should mention. When the Treasurer is borrowing the money, I want him to know there is a rally on the bridge at Port Weller on 30 June. This rally is set up by Nora Blyde, who wants to see that federal government contract. I want the people of this province to know about that.

I have many other issues we could deal with, but in fairness, we are in third reading of this bill and third reading is why it should not be read. I want to give other members an opportunity to make some interventions because I will have a chance, when the tax bills come before the House, to make my representations at that time.

I will have a chance to talk about whether the tax is going to provide money so that the Minister of Education can provide 60% of the cost of education, as the NDP promised the Ontario Secondary School Teachers' Federation and other teacher affiliates with which I am well acquainted and in which I know many people. I could deal with a number of other issues, but I really believe the member for Renfrew North probably has a contribution to make of some significance that should be permitted at this time.

Mrs Haslam: I was almost out the door today when I heard the member for St Catharines get up and talk about a committee that I serve on, and I thought perhaps I would share some other, clearer views of that committee with people.

We are trying to be very different. We have opened up the process, we advertise for these positions out in the community. That book is available. I know my riding office has it; I know my library has it; I know I have one in my office right now. Anybody who wants to come and look at a job can do so. I have people come in and say they would be interested and I always say: "Please make an application. Here is the process. Here are the forms." I think that is very, very good for the community. They feel there is now an open process, that they all have a chance at some of these positions.

Let's face it, I do not give patronage positions. I do not say: "Here is a New Democrat here. Here is a New Democrat there." They send in a resume, they send in their job application, and I think that is very important.

When the member talks about voting for Michael Cassidy this morning, I find that very strange because the only person there besides the four government members was one other member. One other member bothered to show up to vote today, and I find it very, very interesting when he says, "Gee, we don't want to have him come in."

It is very interesting, when we interview people, one of the first questions is, "Are you a member of a political party?" We have had more Liberals come up there, we have had more people with no allocation to any party whatsoever, and when they finally find somebody that says, "Yes, I am a member," there is utter shock. They grab their hearts, they go, "Oh my God, an NDP is going to get a job there." Talk about theatrics. It is just amazing to sit in this committee and look at the surprise and shock on their faces.

I see my time is up, but I just feel it was important to bring the true things out in this debate.

Mr Bradley: In reply, I mention first of all that when Mr Cassidy was before the committee, there were four Liberal members sitting there, even though three is all that are allotted, and all were involved in the discussion of his appointment.

The appointments in the province have been advertised for some period of time now. They have got a new book. It is all nicely bound and very colourful, and they think this is something new. Those have been advertised for some period of time now in changes made by the previous government.

The government majority in the committee ensures that anybody who is appointed by the Premier of Ontario will in fact be appointed. I am sure there may be some consultation with the members of the NDP caucus ahead of time, to tell them that these are the people who are going to be appointed.

There is a very limited amount of time available to question these people. Frankly, the committee could have sat the entire morning questioning Michael Cassidy on his views on Ontario Hydro and his qualifications to sit on that particular board. We were very concerned that this board is becoming a political board, which will be instructed and directed by the Premier's office, the corner office in this building. That is why we were concerned and why we wanted to ask those questions.

We know we cannot call independent witnesses. We cannot call somebody else in to say, "Michael Cassidy is not qualified," or "Michael Cassidy is qualified for the following reasons." Nor can we receive formal written representations in that regard. We are limited in the number of people we can see coming through this particular committee.

It is essentially a sham. It is an illusion of some kind of scrutiny and process that makes a difference when in effect it is simply a rubber stamp for the Premier of Ontario to make his patronage appointments. He has every right to make those appointments. He was elected as Premier. But he does not have a right to portray this committee as independent and useful.

Mr Turnbull: This of course is a routine type of bill, getting borrowing authority. What is not routine about this is the enormous amount of money we are talking about. The government wants authority to borrow $10.4 billion in the fiscal year 1991-92, which accounts for $9.7 billion of the debt it is running up and $639 million for debt retirement.

We see that the province's total debt will be $51.7 billion in 1991-92, which is up from $42.3 billion last year. As a percentage of our gross domestic product the total debt will increase from 15% in 1990-91 to 18.3% in 1991-92. Per capita debt will jump from $4,338 last year to $5,226 this year. That is an increase of 20.5%, and according to the budget documents, we are going to see an increase in debt load of up to approximately $8,000 for every man, woman and child in the province within the next four years, this government's mandate.

I am absolutely alarmed. I am struck by a couple of the comments that were made to the Treasurer on his sojourn to New York, where he attempted to sell this ridiculous budget of his. The comment was made, "There is an absolute lack of reality." Another commentator said, "This is lotusland ostriches." Indeed it is true. We have a government which admittedly does not have any experience. Unfortunately they are getting the experience the hard way, and the whole of Ontario is paying for that experience.

I have a very strong belief that I should speak to this issue constantly, irrespective of what government may be in power. That is the fact that if we as a society believe we need that vast array of government services, then we should at least have the decency to pay for it in taxes. We should not leave that debt to our children, and that is what we are doing --

Mr Carr: And our grandchildren.

Mr Turnbull: And our grandchildren indeed.

Mr Hope: It sounds like a Conservative slogan.

Mr Turnbull: It is a Conservative slogan. The member across the way is exactly right. This party very clearly believes in living within our means. It is something which has been very good for Canada over the years, and as we move away from that value, we see that the options that are open to this province and indeed the country are severely limited.

I have often heard comments made by the governing party with respect to the federal debt. I am not happy with the debt, which certainly was Trudeau's debt, but the federal government has not wrestled it down. I ask the Treasurer if he wants to repeat the mistakes that were made at the federal level. Does he want to pile up that debt so we do not have options in the future, we have no manoeuvring room? Eight thousand dollars per man, woman and child by the end of this government's mandate. That is absolutely frightening. It does not just hurt Ontario, it hurts the whole of Canada. Any effort to reduce the interest rates in Canada are defeated by this level of government borrowing.

The Treasurer is nodding his head. I do not know if he is going to sleep or if he is agreeing with me or what, but it is indeed a fact that we directly attack the ability of the Bank of Canada to reduce interest rates when we go out and have huge public borrowings. Not only that, but we also have the problem that private industry has to suffer because of this. Money becomes less available to them.

We have had 14 tax increases in the last budget, a little over $1 billion worth of taxes, but the worst is yet to come. When we peruse the budget documents, we see from the revenue forecast -- this is the Treasurer's revenue forecast, obviously based upon the kind of growth he is predicting for the economy -- we are going to have something in the region of $9 billion or $10 billion worth of extra taxes before this government's mandate is over, and I do not know if our industry can take it.

We have had 40 tax increases from 1985 and business is concluding that this is a very bad place to do business. I was struck by comments that were made by the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology in Paris this week: "We expect the economy to begin recovering later this year. We are now forecasting an average growth of nearly 4% in each of the next three years."

If we are going to have that kind of growth, why on earth do we continue to run the huge deficits that are predicted? There is no excuse for this. If you run a deficit in a year when you have a great recession, given the fact that I understand the Treasurer is a Keynesian economist, then Keynes would surely dictate that you would pay it back in the years when you recover. But there is no projection for the payback of that.

A further comment was made by the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology in Paris: "The forecast is based on the underlying strengths of the province's economy, strengths that give Ontario a competitive edge in the global economic race, strengths that we must constantly build on to maintain our competitive edge."

That is absolutely correct, but we are not helping our competitive edge with some of the silly laws that are being brought forward. Thank goodness this government has had the sense to take away some of the absolutely ridiculous aspects of Bill 70.

The worst about that is the message that it sends out to business. If any of the unions think the government is doing them a favour, they are wrong, because companies are leaving and they are very quiet about it. They just simply leave very quietly.

Interjection.

Mr Turnbull: I have a rather foolish member across the floor raving on about free trade, the same member who made the statement before, quite erroneously, that most of the auto parts are sourced from the United States. He obviously does not understand numbers and he should indeed examine the record. Last year was the first year in history that Ontario had a positive balance of trade with the United States and a big chunk of that was from the automobile sector. In other words, free trade has given us a positive balance of trade. Amazing.

The member can stick his head in the sand as long as he wants. I can tell him the trouble is that industry is not sticking its head in the sand. It is leaving, and it is leaving with our jobs, jobs for our children, jobs that allow people to pay taxes to give all of the support services we hold dear to have a good, solid, compassionate society.

Another comment was made by the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology: "As such, we believe that long-term competitiveness in today's global economy is achieved through a well-trained and educated workforce, partnership between labour and management, concern for the environment and investment in both innovation and research and development."

I could not have said it better. That is exactly what we need, co-operation. But this is not a government which is show