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

March 1, 2010

39th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2010-Mar-01 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Monday 1 March 2010 Lundi 1 er mars 2010

WEARING OF TEAM CANADA

HOCKEY JERSEY

INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS

JOE THORNTON AND JIM WAITE

ORAL QUESTIONS

HEALTH CARE

RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

HOSPITAL SERVICES

PENSION PLANS

RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

SOCIAL ASSISTANCE

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

WASTE DISPOSAL

GREENBELT

ANSWERS TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS

MINING INDUSTRY

TRANSPORTATION

SKILLS TRAINING

LABOUR DISPUTE

CONDOMINIUM RESERVE FUNDS

INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

BECKY KELLAR

FRYDERYK CHOPIN

AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY

PROVINCIAL DEFICIT

HEALTH CARE

EPILEPSY AWARENESS MONTH

TAXATION

JOB CREATION

EPILEPSY AWARENESS MONTH

PETITIONS

DOCTOR SHORTAGE

MIDDLE CHILDHOOD PROGRAMS

POWER PLANT

TAXATION

CLAYTON BROWN PUBLIC SCHOOL

HOSPITAL FUNDING

POWER PLANT

TAXATION

TAXATION

TAXATION

ORDERS OF THE DAY

IPPERWASH PROVINCIAL PARK

FULL DAY EARLY LEARNING

STATUTE LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 2010 /

LOI DE 2010 MODIFIANT DES LOIS

EN CE QUI CONCERNE L'APPRENTISSAGE

DES JEUNES ENFANTS À TEMPS PLEIN

The House met at 1030.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Good morning. Please remain standing for the Lord's Prayer, followed by the non-denominational prayer.

Prayers.

WEARING OF TEAM CANADA

HOCKEY JERSEY

Mr. Paul Miller: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: Due to the wonderful results yesterday for our Canadian athletes, I ask unanimous consent to be able to wear the Team Canada jersey in the House today for our national women's and men's teams that won the gold medals.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Agreed? Agreed.

Mr. Paul Miller: Thank you.

INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS

Hon. Laurel C. Broten: I'm pleased to welcome some very special guests to the members' gallery who are visiting us today in honour of Epilepsy Awareness Month. Their delegation is led by Margaret Maye, of the Epilepsy Cure Initiative, who has been a tireless advocate around epilepsy. Also here championing this important cause are various branches of Epilepsy Ontario, including Toronto, York, Durham and Halton-Peel, and most importantly, Margaret's son Thomas and her spouse, Gary Neumann, are here with her today.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): I'd like to take this opportunity on behalf of the member from Mississauga South to welcome members of the Probus Club of Mississauga South. There are 29 of them here at Queen's Park today. Welcome to Queen's Park.

JOE THORNTON AND JIM WAITE

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): I think all members want to congratulate Canada for its fine showing at the Olympics, and we're especially proud of the Ontario representatives.

I just want to take this opportunity to recognize Joe Thornton, from my hometown of St. Thomas, for his efforts in winning the gold medal for men's hockey, and Jim Waite, also from St. Thomas, who is the coach of the Canadian curling team.

ORAL QUESTIONS

HEALTH CARE

Mr. Tim Hudak: A question to the Acting Premier: What Dalton McGuinty says in his throne speeches simply cannot be trusted. On page 9 of the 2007 throne speech, Dalton McGuinty said that Ontario families will get the health care they need when they need it, but the number of Ontario patients you are sending to the United States for cancer and cardiac care has increased by a shocking 450%.

Acting Premier, why didn't you tell Ontario patients they would have to drive to the United States to get the care they need when they need it?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: Fewer Ontarians than ever have to do that because of the investments this government has made, investments that that member and his party voted against. Let me just remind him: We have funded 1.69 million new procedures, which have resulted in a 63% decrease in the angiography wait time, a 50% decrease in the wait time for angioplasty, a 67% decrease in the wait time for cataract surgery, a 56% decrease in the wait time for hip replacement, a 60% decrease in the wait time for knee replacement and a 48% reduction in the wait time for CT scans.

This government has more to do; I acknowledge that. We will continue to make the investments in health care that are vital to a vibrant and efficient system. I invite that member and his party to quit voting against them and tell us what they would do to improve them.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Mr. Tim Hudak: These are your own numbers: a startling 450% increase in the number of Ontario families going across the border for health care treatment.

On page 9 of your last throne speech, you said you would expand emergency rooms, but in fact, you've closed emergency rooms in communities like Fort Erie and Port Colborne, with more to come.

The number of Ontario families who have crossed the border for health treatment has grown so much that a new industry of Dalton McGuinty health brokers has been developed. If you don't want to wait in a line of 140,000 people for an MRI for 110 days, you can pay a Dalton McGuinty health broker $700 to get an MRI in Michigan tonight, and chances are he'll take you right to the front door.

Acting Premier, it could have been stated in your throne speech under "Health" or "Economic Development," but why did your throne speech not mention that you are going to rely on Dalton McGuinty US health brokers?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: This government has increased funding for hospitals by 42%, but we acknowledge that there are enormous challenges. In their SCFEA report today, they talk about holding expenses to last year's level. That speaks of a decrease to hospitals. That member and his party ought to tell us what their secret agenda is. When they say to cut expenditures, they're talking about health care. They're all over the map. One day they want to spend more, and the next day they want to cut more.

That member and his party have no plan; they have no idea how to get us back to balance, but they certainly have a record. They have a record of closing hospitals, of firing nurses, of insulting health care professionals, teachers and others. This government and its Premier have a plan; that party and that leader have no plan and no idea how to get back to balance. The people of Ontario know who they can trust: It's Dalton McGuinty.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Final supplementary.

Mr. Tim Hudak: The minister is probably well aware that EcuMedical is a Dalton McGuinty US health broker in your own riding of Windsor. Companies like EcuMedical–these new McGuinty health brokers—have taken some 12,000 Ontario patients and families across the border into the United States because they can't get the service in Dalton McGuinty's Ontario.

While the LHINs are fattening up in the bureaucracy, 12,000 Ontario families have been forced to use Dalton McGuinty health brokers to seek service in the United States—up a startling 450% since these guys took office. Even the Ombudsman said, "It's as if" the McGuinty Liberals "hand a dying cancer patient a Rubik's cube and they've got to figure it out themselves. It's a real cruel game." Of course, they're going to fire the Ombudsman.

If you can't keep your promises in the 2007 throne speech, why should we believe a word that you're going to say this coming Monday?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: The people of Ontario know they can trust Dalton McGuinty with their health care system.

Laughter.

Hon. Dwight Duncan: The member opposite laughs, but let's take a trip down memory lane. Let's go down memory lane and look at what he did to our province's health care system. If we did what—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Please continue.

Hon. Dwight Duncan: Let's look at the record. If we did what that member said, that is, hold the rate of spending in inflation in health care, we would have 10,000 fewer nurses. We don't agree with you, Mr. Hudak. We don't want 10,000 fewer nurses. It would mean 1,795 fewer doctors. We don't agree with that member. We believe in investing in health care. This government, this party, this leader have laid out a plan for health care that doesn't involve closing hospitals like he did—39 of them. It doesn't matter—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. New question—and I will remind members that we use the riding names.

Mr. Tim Hudak: Minister, I can't believe you said that people expect Dalton McGuinty to keep his word. Give me a break. What they can expect from Dalton McGuinty is for him to break his promises, to say one thing and to do another, and to promise not to increase taxes but then to hit Ontario families with two of the biggest tax increases in the history of the province, while running up the debt and sending some 450% more Ontario patients across the border to try to seek critical care. Clearly, what Dalton McGuinty says cannot be trusted.

RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

Mr. Tim Hudak: Back to the Deputy Premier: On page 6 of your previous throne speech, you said you would support innovation and create high-paying jobs through a new $165-million Ontario venture capital fund. Could you inform the House, in the last three years exactly how many entrepreneurs and start-up firms have actually received any cash from this fund?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: We have, through a variety of initiatives, invested not only in the forestry sector and the manufacturing sector, but in a variety of high-tech industries that are part of the growth industry.

There is no doubt that there have been challenges in the economy; we acknowledge that. Far too many jobs have been lost, as have been lost around the world.

This government has done things like investing in high-tech industry, like setting up Second Career, like making investments in our existing industries to keep them alive—

Hon. Gerry Phillips: Auto.

Hon. Dwight Duncan: —the auto sector, which that member and his party voted against.

There's no doubt that difficult choices have to be made. This leader, Premier McGuinty, has laid out a plan, and his government is implementing that. That leader, that party, have no plan, no idea how they'll get us back to balance and no idea about how the future of this economy can grow. That's why this party will continue to put forward the positive public policy initiatives that we have up until now.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Mr. Hudak: No surprise the minister did not say one word about his failed Ontario venture capital fund. The answer to my question is, despite the announcement three years ago, they have announced a total of one single investment, and to date no money has flowed to that company, so you have not created a single job yet. However, Liberal insiders, Bay Street bankers and lawyers are collecting millions of dollars in commissions and fees for managing your failed fund. As of October 2008, some $4 million had flowed to the bankers and lawyers, and not a single dime went to an entrepreneur or an innovator.

So I ask the Deputy Premier, were Liberal insiders, Bay Street backers and lawyers the jobs you were talking about in your throne speech?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: The Minister of Research and Innovation.

Hon. John Milloy: I'm very pleased to correct the record of the Leader of the Opposition in terms of the Ontario venture capital fund. To date, the OVCF fund manager, Northleaf Capital, has publicly announced three funding commitments and made two direct investments totalling almost $60 million. I'd like to share:

—up to $15 million in Georgian Partners growth fund I. Georgian Partners is an Ontario-based venture capital firm investing in companies in the information technology, aggregation and enterprise software firms;

—up to $20 million in EdgeStone Capital venture fund III. EdgeStone is an Ontario-based venture capital firm investing in early- and growth-stage Canadian information technology companies; and

—$2 million to I Love Rewards, a direct company co-investment.

If the leader would like, I can also talk about the Ontario—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. Final supplementary.

Mr. Tim Hudak: The only people benefiting from your failed venture capital fund are Liberal insiders, bankers and lawyers who have made millions of dollars in management fees from running your failed fund. You know, between 2000 and 2003, the Ontario PC government I was proud to be part of saw over $7 billion of venture capital investment that helped to create hundreds of thousands of jobs for hard-working Ontario families in our province. Since Dalton McGuinty came into office, that has dried up completely—to the back of the pack in this entire country.

So I ask the Deputy Premier, when you made your throne speech promise, did you intend for Ontario entrepreneurs and innovators to still be searching for venture capital while only Liberal insiders on Bay Street got fat and rich on those insider funds?

Hon. John Milloy: I'd like to talk about the emerging technology fund, which was set up with the support and the encouragement of those in the financial community. What it does is, it reaches out to venture capitalists and partners with them. We pre-approve them and they come forward with deals which we look at and partner with them.

I'd like to talk about Ecobee Inc., a Toronto-based company that helps homeowners conserve energy, save money and reduce their environmental impact with smart thermostats they can access from their home computers, smartphones or via any web browser. Ecobee is an award-winning company, and thanks to Ontario's emerging technologies fund they were able to raise $6.73 million venture capital financing.

Bering Media Inc.: Their investment will help expand their engineering and marketing teams. Bering Media's technology allows online ads to be targeted geographically, right down to the neighbourhood level that doesn't compromise privacy—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. New question.

HOSPITAL SERVICES

M me France Gélinas: Ma question est pour la ministre de la Santé et des Soins de longue durée. Across Ontario, people are seeing clinics closing, surgery cancelled and nurses laid off. The Queensway Carleton Hospital cancelled nine of their 14 surgeries last Friday. Their emergency room is backed up, and they are at 113% occupancy rate. What is the government plan to improve patient care at Queensway Carleton Hospital?

Hon. Deborah Matthews: The member opposite is talking about the things that hospitals are doing right across this province to get their spending under control. We have expanded hospital funding by 42% over the last six years. That kind of spending growth simply cannot continue. The hospitals are working as partners with government to look very closely at their budgets, to look at other opportunities in the health care system so that they can bring their spending under a reasonable rate of growth. But we are committed to maintaining the very highest quality of care for patients in this province.

We publicly report on important indicators of quality for patients. We will continue to do that. As we move forward, we will work in partnership with hospitals and others in the health care sector to ensure the highest possible quality of care for patients.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

M me France Gélinas: The government announced 9,000 new nursing positions. Yet, in the latest in a slew of nursing cuts, late last week the Ottawa Hospital announced they are cutting 190 nursing positions. What does the minister think these cuts will do to occupancy rates, emergency room backup, cancelled surgeries and quality care in general in the hospitals in the Ottawa region?

Hon. Deborah Matthews: As I said in the first question, we are working very closely with the hospitals through the LHINs, which have responsibility for the full spectrum of health care. It's critically important that we make the right investments to improve quality of care for patients.

We publicly report on several indicators of quality of care. We publicly report on how long it takes to get surgeries. We publicly report on infection rates. We're working very hard now to bring down the wait times in our emergency departments. Those to me are the indicators that are meaningful for the public. We can talk about how many dollars. We can talk about jobs. The issue is, are we delivering the highest possible quality of care to the public? The answer is yes.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

M me France Gélinas: The stories of long delays in emergency rooms, of occupancy overcrowding, of cancelled surgery, are being repeated in communities across this province.

Ontarians deserve better than this. They expect to see a solution from the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care that can ensure access to quality care across the system, not the stopgap, politically motivated measures that we have seen.

When will the people of Ottawa and communities across the province see a plan from this government to maintain access and to stop the loss of health care services across this province?

Hon. Deborah Matthews: I simply would urge the member opposite to look at the facts. We are bringing down wait times in emergency departments across the province. I would urge the member opposite, or the members of the public maybe, without having to go through that process, to go directly to the Ministry of Health website. You can check the hospital in your neighbourhood and you can track improvements in wait times over time.

We have gone from a system where we knew through anecdotal information that there were problems but we didn't actually have measures. We now measure, we publicly report and we are seeing improvements in those wait times. That is better health care for Ontarians.

PENSION PLANS

Mr. Paul Miller: My question is to the Acting Premier. According to a survey released on Friday, half of Canadians over 50 years old are not confident they'll be able to retire comfortably, and two thirds say the current pension system is inadequate. Where is the McGuinty government Liberal plan for a secure retirement for every Ontarian?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: We have laid out a series of reforms on the administration of our pension system, which is an important first step. We have called for a national summit on pension reform, which will begin with the Council of the Federation meeting this summer. We have dealt with the first part of a pension reform bill, which will be an important part of defined benefit plans going forward. But I concur with those, and this government concurs with those who are concerned around the adequacy of savings. It's less about pensions and more about post-retirement income, because less than 30% of us have a pension here in Ontario.

These are important issues. They require a thorough provincial and national dialogue. Ontario has been leading that. We will continue to do that. As we do that, we will make the changes necessary to help ensure a better future for all Ontarians.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Mr. Paul Miller: The minister knows that two thirds of Ontario families do not have a workplace pension. That's four million people who will be robbed of the security and dignity they deserve in the retirement years. That's simply not good enough.

The NDP has proposed an Ontario retirement plan to make sure all Ontarians who have worked hard their entire lives can retire with some dignity. When is this government going to stop defending a status quo that isn't working and take decisive action like implementing our Ontario retirement plan?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: The member opposite will know that in my first answer, I did acknowledge that very few of us actually have a pension. I will say this—and I did congratulate the NDP on putting out a proposal. That proposal has challenges to it, as, by the way, do any proposals you're looking at. There is no silver bullet to fix this challenge. It involves a variety of policy initiatives at the federal and provincial level, and it's more about post-retirement income than it is about pensions, because the member is right: Less than 30% of us have a pension.

We will continue to amend the Pension Benefits Act. We will continue to work with our colleagues across the country as we explore ways of helping to ensure that the enormous progress we've made in the last 40 years on the pension front continues for the next 40 years. I concur with the member: It's an enormous challenge. It requires a thorough debate both here in Ontario and across Canada, and I can assure you the government of Ontario will continue to be at the front of that debate.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Final supplementary.

Mr. Paul Miller: This government talks a lot about bold action. Apparently that means arrogantly ramming through policies that nobody wants or are just administrative while staying quiet on the things that matter most to us. Our Ontario retirement plan would provide people with $600 to $700 per month; it has been reviewed by your experts—your own experts—who say it's solid and exactly what Ontario needs.

Will this government support our plan that will provide four million Ontarians with the security and dignity they deserve in their retirement years, or will they carry on showing no leadership and leave two out of three people without a plan?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: In fact, the experts have raised some legitimate concerns around the plan they put forward.

Again, there is no silver bullet to this. In the last year, for instance, the NDP government said there were five plans that were too big to fail 12 years ago. All five of them failed, and we spent our time trying to address those. We did that. They didn't support us in that.

I think Ontarians understand the complexity of this, and I think they understand the importance of getting this right. Our pension and post-retirement system has taken some 40 years to evolve. It involved changes from a range of governments across jurisdictions.

There's no doubt that there's more to do. There's no doubt we have difficult choices ahead. This government will continue to lead on that file, both here in Ontario and across Canada, to ensure that our seniors have a better future.

RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

Mr. Peter Shurman: My question is also for the Acting Premier. Why did the total investment in Ontario venture capital funds fall from $1.5 billion in 2000 to just $88 million in 2008?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: To the Minister of Research and Innovation.

Hon. John Milloy: I've been very proud of the leadership our government has taken in terms of access to venture capital due to the downturn to the economy; it has been one part of the investment equation. The government has come to the table with two major funds. One is the Ontario venture capital fund. It was launched in 2008 as a fund of funds whereby investors pool their capital, investments are made in a range of venture capital and other private equity funds, and these underlying funds, in turn, make investments in companies.

We went out and partnered with the private sector in order to put together this fund of funds, and, as I shared with the Leader of the Opposition, right now we have publicly announced three fund commitments and made two direct investments totalling almost $60 million.

I'm pleased to say that the fund manager is currently conducting due diligence on a number of potential investments—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. Supplementary?

Mr. Peter Shurman: The minister really has to start listening to these questions.

Things have gotten worse since 2008. Reports for the first three quarters of 2009 reveal that Ontario has fallen even further, to just $29 million in investment for venture capital funds. Dalton McGuinty's initial plan to cancel Ontario PC tax credits is not the answer; it is hurting us. His next plan of reverse-Reagan investments and multi-billion dollar sweetheart deals with a foreign company isn't working either. Some $29 million in total is proof that homegrown investors and homegrown companies have given up.

Why did you scrap an Ontario PC plan that worked for McGuinty Liberal plans that don't?

Hon. John Milloy: As Minister of Research and Innovation, I have the privilege to meet with the investment community on a regular basis, and I hear nothing but praise from the venture capital community and from the investment community in our province for the two funds we put together: the fund of funds and the emerging technologies fund.

Let me share with the honourable member a quote from the National Post, a paper he probably enjoys reading. Rick Segal, founder and CEO of Fixmo, had this to say: "Canada is the best place on the planet to start a business.… The government programs available to entrepreneurs in Canada are amazing, and give us a competitive advantage...." He was speaking about the type of programming that has come forward: the Ontario emerging technologies fund and the Ontario venture capital fund, which right now, as I've shared, has announced a number of investments and is in the process of meeting with other potential investors as we move forward.

SOCIAL ASSISTANCE

Mr. Michael Prue: My question is for the Minister of Community and Social Services. Last week, the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal affirmed what we have known since your government took office: that our most vulnerable Ontarians still cannot put healthy food on their tables. The meagre special diet allowance has never supported an adequate, healthy diet for those who need it the most. It was made even worse after your so-called reforms. For example, people living with high blood pressure receive only one eighth the support they need for a healthy diet.

Will this minister confirm today that she intends to uphold the tribunal's ruling and give every needy citizen the resources they need to have a healthy diet, or do you intend to go off and appeal this too?

Hon. Madeleine Meilleur: It's a very good question, and thank you very much for asking this question. We have just received, yes, a decision from the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal with regard to the special diets. This issue is a complex issue, and, yes, the decision is about three special diet allowance test cases. We are reviewing this decision. It's a complex decision that could have a significant fiscal, policy and regulatory impact.

But something that I can say is this government has a priority to reduce poverty in Ontario. We have this strategy we are working on, and since we came to power, we gave an 11% increase in social assistance—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. Supplementary?

Mr. Michael Prue: It seems to me from the minister's words that she intends to reduce poverty on the backs of the poor. I am speaking on behalf of tens of thousands of Ontarians with health problems which can be managed by eating healthy foods on a daily basis. Each and every day they need to eat healthily. A small investment is what it will take to ensure that people won't become sicker while they depend on the very government that should be assisting them, not standing in their way. This is a no-brainer.

Will this government commit today to obey the ruling and help those people manage their health conditions by providing an adequate special diet allowance, or are you going to appeal it again?

Hon. Madeleine Meilleur: Fighting poverty is a priority for this government. I just want to remind the member of the opposite party that when we came into power, the budget for a special diet was around $6 million; today it's over $200 million.

We have received good advice from the Auditor General. We've received good advice about a special diet. We put forward a team to review it. We are going to review the decision and will make a decision later on if we are appealing it or not.

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

Mrs. Laura Albanese: My question is for the Minister of Labour. In my riding of York South—Weston, we have residents who work in the construction sector, on factory lines, others in retail and many responsible for administrative duties in offices. They are a vital part of Ontario's professional workforce and make a significant contribution to our province. Workers in many of these jobs are at risk of and develop repetitive strain injuries which happen because of the constant use and strain on the same body parts.

These types of injures may not be life-threatening, but they can be very painful and certainly do have a significant impact on a person's quality of life. Yesterday, February 28, marked the 11th annual International Repetitive Strain Injury Awareness Day.

Minister, can you please tell us what is being done to curb these types of injuries?

Hon. Peter Fonseca: I want to thank the member, and I want to thank her for her advocacy on behalf of her constituents. I am so pleased to announce in this House that we've added yet another resource to our arsenal in our fight against musculoskeletal disorders. The Ministry of Labour has launched a new interactive tool on our website on our Pains and Strains in the Workplace page. The tool features a musculoskeletal figure, and with a click on the various body parts of that figure, you can get information on the common types of MSDs and how to avoid them.

The member is right that these injures can cause a tremendous amount of pain and suffering for workers afflicted by MSDs. However, with the use of this tool and with precautions and by taking preventive measures, many of these—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. Supplementary?

Mrs. Laura Albanese: Thank you, Minister. These types of injuries often start as minor injuries, but they can quickly turn into something more serious. They are taking a tremendous human and financial toll on our workforce, and this is evident in the statistics. In 2008, 33,000 workers were affected, and 43% of all lost-time injuries involved these types of injuries. In Ontario it cost the economy more than $2 billion between 2003 and 2008. Can the minister please tell us what kinds of tools and resources his ministry has made available to employers and employees to help prevent these injuries?

Hon. Peter Fonseca: Again I thank the member for the question on MSD, musculoskeletal disorder. This tool that we have will help those workers to avoid MSDs. As well, we have an enforcement blitz that will be launched in the province to attack MSDs. This is part of our Safe at Work Ontario strategy, which focuses on enforcement, on compliance and on partnership.

Our government is committed to ensuring that workers in this province are protected from injuries and major health hazards while on the job, and we continue to work closely with our health and safety partners, with employers and workers, to prevent MSDs and other injuries in the workplace. Ontario is one of the safest places in the world to work; we want to keep it that way.

I thank the member for the question.

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

Ms. Lisa MacLeod: My question is for the Acting Premier. I listened to the first NDP question about the Queensway Carleton Hospital and the Ottawa Hospital and I was completely and utterly dissatisfied with the answer given by the Minister of Health. I want to know, on behalf of my residents, what Dalton McGuinty is going to do to recover the $1 billion wasted in the eHealth boondoggle so that it can be redirected to the Ottawa Hospital and the Queensway Carleton Hospital.

Hon. Dwight Duncan: To the Minister of Health.

Hon. Deborah Matthews: I actually welcome the question from this member because it gives me an opportunity to ask them to set the record straight. I have a press release here from the party opposite saying that they are going to freeze spending, that their plan is to freeze spending across the province. This is recent, by the way; this is from just a month ago. Earlier, we've heard that they want to cut spending on health care; now we're hearing that they want to increase spending. So I'm confused about the Tory math on this one. Is it a cut, is it a freeze or is it a spend?

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Ms. Lisa MacLeod: Her answer is a joke and it is an insult to the people of Ottawa West—Nepean, Nepean—Carleton and the entire city of Ottawa.

I can tell you something: Beth Graham, our candidate, wrote earlier today to Dalton McGuinty asking him to use every tool at his disposal, every tool in the Premier's office, to recover the money that your party wasted on eHealth. I realize this means that you're going to have to ask some very tough and uncomfortable questions of George Smitherman, Karli Farrow and John Ronson, who are part of your Liberal family, but the reality is that the money handed out in sweetheart deals at eHealth came at a cost to Ontario families, Ottawa families, the Ottawa Hospital and Queensway Carleton Hospital.

My hospitals are seeing cuts to nurses. They have seen cancellations in their surgeries. So I want to know from you, Minister, if you have the guts to stand up and tell us that you will go out to the Liberal family and get that money for Ontario families.

Hon. Deborah Matthews: Well, I certainly give the member opposite an A-plus for bluster.

This is a debate that we want to have in this province. We are working with the hospitals. We are working with the LHINs and the broader health care sector on a plan to bring hospital spending to a sustainable level. We are working hard and achieving that.

When it comes to the Ottawa Hospital, the member opposite might be interested to know that there are actually 30 nursing jobs online today at the Ottawa Hospital. We are continuing to improve health care. We have had this debate.

I would like the member opposite perhaps to explain this: This morning on CBC Radio in Ottawa there was a debate on health care. The Liberal candidate, Bob Chiarelli, was there; the NDP candidate was there. The Conservative candidate wasn't able to get there to have this debate that we need to have in this province.

WASTE DISPOSAL

Mr. Peter Tabuns: My question is for the Minister of the Environment. Midland area residents have been fighting to stop the construction of a dump on site 41. Experts from across Canada have shown that the dump threatens a world-renowned watershed. Simcoe council has halted construction, but the possibility lives on that this dump will open because the certificate of approval has not been revoked.

Why won't the minister act once and for all and protect the Georgian Bay watershed by revoking the outdated certificate of approval?

Hon. John Gerretsen: First of all, I thank the member for the question because it gives us once again an opportunity to state unequivocally that if the county of Simcoe were to ask us to basically revoke that certificate, we would do that. But they've applied for a certificate that we looked at at the time and over the last 20 years, and we feel that site 41, from a scientific viewpoint, is an appropriate site. However, if they—Simcoe county—don't want to go ahead with it, it's entirely up to them. It's basically a local decision.

They're the people who applied for the certificate and we approved the certificate using the best scientific information that's available. If they now want us to revoke that certificate, all they have to do is write us a letter asking for the revocation of that certificate, and we will comply with that.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Frankly, the site is not appropriate, and if this minister was exercising his responsibilities he would withdraw that certificate of approval.

There is a private member's bill, Bill 32, which calls for the withdrawal of the certificate of approval; it passed second reading. But just as the Liberal Peterson cabinet undermined democratic process by overturning the Environmental Review Tribunal's decision against the dump, the McGuinty government is killing the debate on dump 41 by proroguing the House and ending the discussion of Bill 32.

Why won't the government allow continued debate on Bill 32 and the future of dump site 41 by passing a motion to bring Bill 32 forward to the next session of the Legislature? Give us that answer.

Hon. John Gerretsen: Look, it is up to Simcoe county to basically decide as to what they want to do there. All we can do is look at all of the available science that has been made there over the last number years. If Simcoe council were to ask us for a revocation of that certificate, we would do so. Within the Ministry of the Environment, we're only concerned about three things: number one, to have the cleanest air possible in the province of Ontario; to have the cleanest water possible in the province of Ontario; and to have the cleanest land possible.

We are working on it on a day-to-day basis and we will continue to do so because environmental protection for the health and safety of Ontarians is paramount. We will continue to do that as time goes along.

GREENBELT

Mr. Joe Dickson: My question today is for the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. This past Sunday marked the fifth anniversary of the greenbelt, which protects 1.8 million acres of land set aside by our government. This is truly something to celebrate. On behalf of all greenbelt advocates and supporters, I rise today to express how pleased we are with the progress made so far in conserving Ontario's natural capital.

In my riding of Ajax—Pickering, residents enjoy the recreational and aesthetic beauty of the greenbelt, along with local fresh fruits provided by the greenbelt farmers.

Minister, the population in Ontario, especially in the greater Golden Horseshoe, is growing steadily, with four million new residents expected over the next two decades. As you know, the Greenbelt Act was created to work in unison with Places to Grow. Minister, can you explain what effect these two acts will have on the urban environment in the province of Ontario?

Hon. James J. Bradley: I thank the member very much for asking the question. The member for Ajax—Pickering is very knowledgeable in this matter. I want to say that at the time before the greenbelt was brought into effect, we had acres upon acres of prime farmland and environmentally sensitive areas being gobbled up through development.

Because of the vision that the Premier of this province had that was put into effect through two pieces of legislation, the greenbelt legislation and Places to Grow, the growth is managed in a much better way so that environmentally sensitive areas and, of course, agricultural land that was being paved over, are now protected throughout the greenbelt. I know our many friends in the House who are from agriculture know how valuable that is. This legislation allowed us to protect that, and it's renowned around the world.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Mr. Joe Dickson: Minister, it is clear that the hard work of your ministry has paid off and that residents of the greater Golden Horseshoe have been provided with a smart approach to managing growth and preserving our farmlands and natural heritage in this province that we call home. Greenbelt expansion is another sign of the government's commitment, one which I welcome warmly.

I understand a study is being released today by the Canadian Institute for Environmental Law and Policy comparing greenbelts worldwide. This study shows that Ontario's greenbelt ranks first for overall legal protection. This award reinforces that the present formula that this government is using has been working, but we need to look forward together and have a protective approach to improving the greenbelt for our children, the future of Ontario.

Minister, can you explain the next steps for the greenbelt?

Hon. James J. Bradley: First of all, I want to say that the institute, I note, says our greenbelt legislation is the strongest in the world for supporting laws and policies.

But I want to say to the member that my ministry, along with our partner ministries, are pleased to assist municipalities in considering growing the greenbelt. We won't act alone; any request to amend the greenbelt plan will be carefully considered with input from municipalities, the public, the Greenbelt Council and aboriginal communities. And there is, clearly, interest at the municipal level in growing the greenbelt.

Only last Friday I had the opportunity, along with the mayor of Toronto, to announce that Toronto is proposing to add public lands—the Don and Humber River Valleys—to the greenbelt. This is a fitting way to celebrate the fifth anniversary of the greenbelt.

I understand that Halton regional council will soon be considering whether they wish to propose adding lands in the area of the greenbelt. Municipalities are clearly jumping on board, and because—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. New question.

ANSWERS TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS

Mrs. Elizabeth Witmer: My question is for the Minister of Education. Your government says that it's important to be transparent and accountable; however, last year, 2009, I tabled 10 order paper questions to your ministry, and I've not received any responses yet. Now, with the House proroguing this Thursday, these questions, which seek information on topics such as bullying and special education needs, could go unanswered.

Minister, can you assure me that these 10 questions will be answered before the House prorogues on Thursday?

Hon. Leona Dombrowsky: I'm very happy to have the opportunity to say to the honourable member that we do take order paper questions very seriously.

The honourable member has talked about the importance of transparency; I also think it's important that we are accurate. So what I can say to the honourable member is that we are working on those, and we are going to do everything that we can to get the answers and make sure that we have all of the information that we need to provide the most accurate information to the member.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Mrs. Elizabeth Witmer: Mr. Speaker, again through you to the minister: That doesn't provide much comfort to the people in the province of Ontario, because they're starting to take a look at this government and seeing that, in reality, they're only paying lip service to transparency and accountability. In fact, last week, we saw one of the ministers trivialize the whole issue of transparency.

Minister, it has now been 90 days and the questions remain unanswered. They are important. They relate to bullying and special education needs, to name but a few. Will you provide answers by Thursday, before the House prorogues? Or else, as you know, they will be lost.

Hon. Leona Dombrowsky: I agree that we want to ensure that the people of Ontario have the very best, most accurate information available to them. And I have committed to the honourable member and to this Legislature that when we have that information, we will make it available.

Now, with respect to the procedural issue of prorogation, because we are proroguing on Thursday—

Hon. James J. Bradley: And coming back Monday.

Hon. Leona Dombrowsky: —and because we are coming back the next Monday, if those questions are lost on the paper, next week, the member can pose those questions again.

I commit that we will bring the same commitment to being accurate and accountable to the people of this province that we are bringing right now, today. That is what I'm able to say. We are working very hard to get the best answers for the honourable member. I've been on that side of the House; I know how important these questions—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. New question.

MINING INDUSTRY

Mr. Gilles Bisson: My question is to the Acting Premier. Premier, we learned last Friday that your government, with some $81 million of assistance, helped to save some 700 jobs in Essex at the Ford plant.

You will know that Xstrata has announced that 700 people are to lose their jobs in Timmins. When can we expect similar help?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: The government has made a range of investments over a number of programs. The program that the Ford money came out of was announced some years ago. A number of operations around the province have come to take advantage of assistance from this government, including many in the north.

The situation in Timmins is very difficult; I understand that. It is one that requires a full range of responses across governments, federally and provincially. The Premier spoke last week about the need to have a whole northern package in the upcoming budget and our desire to work with the north, not just in this particular circumstance, but in a range of circumstances that we find particularly challenging.

To the member opposite, and to the people of Timmins, we will continue to work with that community as we work through this difficult time. There are a range of things—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. Supplementary?

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Acting Premier, the situation in Timmins is this: Xstrata is making money with the refinery smelter. They're not losing money. The reason that they're picking up and moving and consolidating to one operation is because you're allowing them to do it.

The people of northern Ontario are not asking for a large handout. What we want is your government to be engaged with us in discussions with Xstrata to put the pressure on them that needs to be put for them to keep that plant open. Should it shut, it's 700 direct jobs in the city of Timmins and region and probably 3,000 jobs overall, not to mention the loss of energy sold to that place as the largest customer for Ontario Hydro, as well as what it means to the revenue of the province of Ontario.

So I say again, are you prepared to engage in discussions with Xstrata so they don't shut this place down come May 14?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: Our government has been very active in those discussions with the Minister of Northern Development, Mines and Forestry. This is a challenging circumstance. We will continue to work with the community. I remind the member opposite that we're now building the new Matagami waste water treatment plant, a $20-million investment; the Barbers Bay bridge, another $1.9 million; and a variety of school capital projects.

The challenges are real. I don't want to underestimate the importance of them. We will continue to work with the north, and we'll have more to say about these issues in the coming days. We look forward to continuing to build a stronger northern economy for all Ontarians.

TRANSPORTATION

Mr. Wayne Arthurs: My question is for the Minister of Transportation. Minister, my riding of Pickering—Scarborough East is a quickly growing group of vibrant communities. In fact, Pickering was identified as one of two urban growth centres in Durham region under the government's growth plan for the greater Golden Horseshoe.

My constituents rely on a variety of forms of travel to get to where they need to go. They use our network of roads and public transit to get to work, school and doctor's appointments or to visit family and friends, whether it's in Durham, the city of Toronto or other parts of the GTA.

Can the minister tell us what the government is doing to improve transit so my constituents and people across the region can get to where they need to go in the GTA as efficiently as possible?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I thank the member from Pickering—Scarborough East for the question. I think, in this House and beyond, we can all recognize that this is a critically important time to develop the next era of transportation in our most populous region in Ontario. That's why we've committed over $7.3 billion for transit, highway infrastructure, municipal roads and bridges and other municipal capital projects in the GTA, including the cities of Toronto and Hamilton and the regions of Halton, Peel, York and Durham.

We're also looking at the bigger picture in terms of developing the transportation network that the member spoke about. That's why we've committed $11.5 billion to the Move Ontario 2020 plan, which forms the foundation investment for transit projects identified by the Metrolinx regional transportation plan in the greater Toronto and Hamilton areas. Last year, in fact, the Premier announced that we're moving ahead with $9 billion for priority transit projects identified in the Metrolinx plan, including the Scarborough rapid transit line.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Mr. Wayne Arthurs: Thank you, Minister, for that particular response. I'm pleased to hear of the work the government and Metrolinx are doing to strengthen public transit in the region, particularly the Scarborough line, of importance to my constituents in Scarborough. I know many of my constituents rely on transit to get to downtown Toronto and other parts of the GTA for work each and every day. In fact, the GO train is becoming an increasingly popular option for riders in my communities. They can avoid sitting in gridlock and help the environment by reducing emissions.

As the GO train becomes an increasingly popular option for commuters, would the minister tell us what the government and GO Transit are planning in regard to the pressures for more riders on the network's trains?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: We know it's very important that GO make smart investments as ridership increases. In January 2009, GO added a new weekday eastbound train trip, operating an express from Union Station to Pickering GO station and making all the regular stops to Oshawa GO station. That means 1,400 more people will be riding public transit instead of driving their cars.

But beyond just the trains, there's also a need for those parking spaces so that people can get to the hub and then get on public transit. GO is working on expanding parking spaces at GO stations so we have enough spaces to accommodate all those new travellers. Last year, we made a $500-million commitment with the federal government for GO Transit revitalization, and with this funding GO was able to add 4,950 new parking spaces at stations like Aurora, Maple, Bronte, Rouge Hill and Unionville. Most recently, GO announced the opening of a four-level parking lot at the Whitby GO station. So—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. New question.

SKILLS TRAINING

Mr. John O'Toole: My question is to the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities. Dalton McGuinty's throne speech promises simply can't be trusted. The first point in your five-point economic plan from 2007 promised to invest in education and skills. You did this by investing in your program called Second Career. However, graduates in my riding, and I'm sure across Ontario, can't find jobs. What they are finding is an increased number of graduates competing for a limited number of jobs.

Minister, what percentage of students who enrol in the Second Career program have found jobs in the fields in which they have been trained?

Hon. John Milloy: I'm pleased to report to the House, notwithstanding the calls from the honourable member's party to scrap the program, that since its introduction we have welcomed over 26,000 people to Second Career.

The honourable member raises a very important point as to what's happening to people who are in the Second Career program following the completion of their training. I would point out to the honourable member that, as members are familiar with from questions and discussion here in the Legislature, the great bulk of the people who entered Second Career happened last fall, which means that the vast majority of Second Career students are currently pursuing their training opportunities. We are working very, very closely as a ministry to follow these students through their courses, and I'll be able to report to the House as they begin to graduate as to their—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. Supplementary?

Mr. John O'Toole: It's great that you've trained 26,000, Minister, but how many have found jobs? That's the question.

What are the graduates saying? I'm going to read a letter from one of my constituents, and I quote: "Since many of us were partially funded through this retraining, more monitoring should be done to make sure students have a chance to work in the field they studied in."

You said you have a plan. Ontarians enrolled in retraining should have some expectations of finding a job. Students need the best information and advice before they choose a career, along with help to enter the workforce. Minister, is it your plan that needs fixing, or how you have executed the plan?

Hon. John Milloy: Once again, I'm very proud that, despite the calls by the honourable member's party for the plan to be scrapped, we proceeded.

One of the key aspects of Second Career is that we make people go through a rather rigorous application process in which they must identify where there are potential job openings in their community and match them up with the training programs that they wish to pursue.

As I say, it's still a little bit early in the game to come forward with statistics, but let me tell the honourable member about Barbara, a 46-year-old mother of two who was laid off from her job at a call centre. She began her studies in December at a private business college, in an office administration professional diploma program. Barbara is employed now at a local chiropractic centre. She is thrilled to be employed and said Second Career was "an opportunity of a lifetime." Let me tell him about Robert, a 45-year-old London area general labourer. He was laid off from a job he had with a painting company in London. Through Second Career—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. New question.

LABOUR DISPUTE

Mr. Peter Tabuns: A question to the Minister of Finance: Some of the lowest-paid workers at the Woodbine Racetrack have been locked out and told to stay home. The company made an offer on Saturday at about 1:30 a.m., said it was the final offer, and then told the workers that if they didn't accept immediately, they would be locked out at 6 a.m.

Minister, provincially owned OLG is responsible for racing and gaming operations in Ontario. Will the minister get on the phone immediately with the Woodbine Entertainment Group and tell them that this kind of bullying has no place in industrial relations in Ontario?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: To the Minister of Labour.

Hon. Peter Fonseca: I understand that a final offer vote is being conducted today, so it would be inappropriate for any of us to make any comment about that vote. Let's allow that vote to take place, which is happening today.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Minister, most of these locked-out employees earn about $15 an hour or less, and some of them have been there for 25 years. Almost all of these employees work in the kitchen or as servers.

Woodbine recently got approval for 1,000 new slot machines and was very generous with your party, making the maximum donation in the two current by-elections.

Will the minister ask Woodbine Entertainment Group, who clearly like you, to stop bullying these loyal workers and make amends to them by paying their wages for the time they have been locked out?

Hon. Peter Fonseca: As I mentioned in the first question, there is a vote being conducted today, and it would be inappropriate for me to make comment on those proceedings. What I can say is that our mediators have been there assisting the parties all along, and they will continue to do so. We all know that a collective agreement, one reached by the parties, is the most stable, most productive agreement that we can have. We will continue to assist those parties with our mediation team at the Ministry of Labour.

But again, today there is a final vote offer that is being conducted. We will allow that to take place, and I can't comment further.

CONDOMINIUM RESERVE FUNDS

Mrs. Amrit Mangat: My question is for the Minister of Consumer Services. Minister, in my riding of Mississauga—Brampton South there are many condominium buildings. As such, my office receives inquiries from condo owners on various issues.

As you may know, condo buildings set aside a reserve fund that is used to pay for major repairs and replacements in the building. The Condominium Act, 1998, introduced a 10-year deadline for condominiums Registered before May 2001 to meet a reserve fund requirement. As the deadline approaches, some buildings have not been able to meet their reserve fund requirements. Minister, what can we offer condos that will not be able to meet the deadline?

Hon. Sophia Aggelonitis: Thank you to the member from Mississauga—Brampton South for her continued advocacy when it comes to condominiums.

I am delighted to tell the member and also the House that our government is giving condo corporations and owners more breathing room when it comes to the reserve fund requirements. This means that condominium corporations registered before 2001 will have an additional five years to ensure that their reserve funds are adequately funded. We're working with our sector partners. The government has determined that it will extend the reserve fund from the deadline of 10 years to 15 years, and this change will come into effect on July 1, 2010.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Mrs. Amrit Mangat: I'm glad to hear that the ministry is providing an extension to condominium boards to meet their reserve fund needs. In the context of the current economic climate, many sectors have been unable to reach their financial goals. Giving the boards an extension will allow them to adjust their strategies to raise the funds and meet their reserve fund requirements.

Can the minister tell this House what the extension means for condo owners, many of whom may fear that there will be an increase in the maintenance fees to meet the reserve fund requirement within the new deadline?

Hon. Sophia Aggelonitis: Thanks again to the member. This is really a significant step to respond to the needs of condominium boards. It will give them increased budget flexibility while protecting the essential rights of consumers. That's what this ministry is all about.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The time for question period has ended. There being no deferred votes, this House stands recessed until 1 p.m. this afternoon.

The House recessed from 1135 to 1300.

INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS

Mr. John O'Toole: I'd like to recognize Wojciech Dzięgiel, the vice-consul for the Republic of Poland, and his wife, Agnieszka, who are visiting us here today in the Ontario Legislature. Welcome.

Also, today there's a celebration occurring here at the Legislature for epilepsy awareness. I will be making a statement on that. I'd like to welcome Margaret Maye and Gary Neumann, who are here with us in the Legislature, as well as Mary Secco from London and Dianne McKenzie from my riding of Durham. Welcome. I'd encourage all members to attend the education and awareness session they're having in room 228.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

BECKY KELLAR

Mr. Toby Barrett: Congratulations to our Canadian Olympians. From Alexandre Bilodeau's gold medal at the outset to the overtime period between Canada and the US, we have so much to feel good about—and of course, the third straight Olympic gold medal win for our women's hockey team. Haldimand—Norfolk is especially proud, as Hagersville native Becky Kellar is the senior veteran on the team and is a member of the three-peat Canadian club as one of a handful of players who have represented Canada at all four Olympics since women's hockey debuted in 1998.

Kellar was just fresh out of university when Canada lost to the US 3-1 in the gold medal game in Nagano. Four years later, on the Americans' home soil in Salt Lake City, Kellar was instrumental in the 3-2 gold medal win. In Turin, Kellar and her teammates celebrated a 4-1 win over Sweden to win their second straight Olympic gold medal in 2006.

Recently, it was touching to see Becky's children join her on the ice after the game. Sadly for Kellar fans, this will be her last Olympics.

Congratulations to Becky Kellar. I look forward to seeing those players she has inspired fill her skates on Olympic ice someday.

Thank you to all the athletes for helping us believe in the Olympic spirit once again.

FRYDERYK CHOPIN

Mr. Rosario Marchese: I'm reading this statement on behalf of my colleague Cheri DiNovo from Parkdale—High Park. I want to welcome the vice-consul of Poland, Mr. DziÄ™giel, and many other members of the Polish community as I read this statement.

On March 1, 1810, the great composer Fryderyk Chopin was born to a Polish mother and a French father. Chopin was a child prodigy by the time he was six. Born near Warsaw, Chopin was inspired by Poland's lore and folk tunes. He lived in Poland until he was 19, when he was forced to flee after the failed uprising of 1830 against the Russian occupiers. Having settled in France, he soon became famous all over Europe as a distinguished composer, piano virtuoso and leading representative of the music of the Romantic period.

Chopin's music is rare, unique and tinged with a remarkable sense of beauty. He was an innovator whose work influenced composers of the French, German and Russian schools, and stimulated radical changes of the 20th-century sound language. He is a legend whose music enjoys universal appeal.

The great Polish poet Cyprian Kamil Norwid describes Chopin as "Warsawer by birth, Pole by heart and world citizen by his talent."

In recognition of Chopin's 200th birthday, Poland's Parliament has formally declared 2010 to be the year of Fryderyk Chopin. Chopin's birth is also being celebrated all over the world. Here in Canada, we celebrate his immortal music. The Canadian Chopin Festival 2010 continues at Jean Paul II Polish Cultural Centre, in Mississauga, Ontario, until March 7.

It's with great honour that we remember the legacy of Polish composer Fryderyk Chopin. Happy birthday, Mr. Chopin.

AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY

Mr. Bruce Crozier: Ontario produces more cars than any other state or province in North America. In fact, we're a world leader, and our government is working with our auto industry partners to keep this a strong sector.

Approximately 400,000 Ontarians are employed in the auto industry. Now we can add 757 more to that number. Our government is supporting the next phase of the transformation of the Ford Essex engine plant in Windsor, which is expected to create and retain up to 757 new jobs over the next five years.

The province will contribute up to $81.2 million towards the project, building on a $17-million provincial investment announced in March 2008. That helped reopen the plant. Ford plans to invest up to $736.4 million. That's almost a billion dollars right here in Ontario.

Our investment has allowed this plant to stay open and provide more jobs for Ontarians. We will continue to work with our auto sector partners to create jobs and protect the livelihoods of Ontarians working in this industry.

We know that we need to be part of a solution to help the Ontario auto industry through these difficult economic times. These 750 jobs are proof that our strategy is working.

PROVINCIAL DEFICIT

Mr. Norm Miller: On October 22, 2009, the McGuinty government announced its record-shattering $24.7-billion deficit, larger than the deficits of every other provincial and territorial government combined. Every hour, 24 hours a day, the McGuinty government spends $2.8 million more than it receives in revenue. At this current rate of spending, Dalton McGuinty is on course to double Ontario's debt by 2012-13.

For seven days, more than 140 groups made presentations to the Standing Committee on Finance and Economic Affairs. Dozens more made written submissions. The issue of deficit and debt reduction was a common theme among presenters at the pre-budget consultations this year. These groups included the Certified Management Accountants of Ontario, Ontario Chamber of Commerce, Warren Jestin of Scotiabank, and Canadian Independent Federation of Business, among others.

Gerry Macartney, CEO of the London Chamber of Commerce, commented, "Our members are chiefly concerned about the size of the debt, the size of the deficit and the lack of an articulated plan to eliminate that deficit."

A significant number of presenters commented on the broad themes of deficit reduction through strategic spending, job creation and economic growth via sound tax policies and thwarting excessive red tape and regulation.

The time has come for Dalton McGuinty to heed this advice and take action to implement meaningful policy changes that will propel Ontario from worst to first.

HEALTH CARE

Mr. Glen R. Murray: Our government has made significant strides in health care over the past six years. One of our key priorities is investing in our hospitals. Since 2003, we've increased hospital funding by 42%, raising it to $15.5 billion a year. We've also invested in reducing wait times in key surgeries. For example, the wait times for cancer surgeries have dropped by 17 days.

We know how important it is that Ontarians have access to primary care in their communities. That's why, for the first time in 40 years, throughout Canada we've opened a new medical school in northern Ontario. We've also increased medical school spaces and created family health teams to provide more complete local health care. As a result of those measures, almost 900,000 more Ontarians now have access to a family doctor. On top of that, we've hired 10,000 nurses and we're moving forward with nurse practitioner clinics to provide more points of access for quality care.

It is clear that our government has strengthened our public health care system considerably over the past six years. We've come a long way, and we're committed to making even more progress in the future.

EPILEPSY AWARENESS MONTH

Mr. John O'Toole: First of all, I seek unanimous consent from all members to wear a purple ribbon with respect to the epilepsy purple ribbon campaign.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Agreed? Agreed.

Mr. John O'Toole: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

March is Epilepsy Awareness Month. I would like to remind the House again of the epilepsy information session being held today in room 228 until 6 p.m.

Up to two in 100 students in Ontario have epilepsy and other neurological disorders. In Ontario alone there are 120,000 people with epilepsy. That's more than the number of people with multiple sclerosis, cerebral palsy, Parkinson's disease and muscular dystrophy combined.

Living with epilepsy brings many challenges. We hope you will join us on Purple Day, March 26, in showing your support by wearing something purple.

Dianne McKenzie, executive director of Epilepsy Durham, urges the House to learn more about how we can provide a more accommodating environment that gives people with epilepsy encouragement and hope. Dianne also informs me that Durham region receives no core funding from the province or from the United Way. I would ask the House to lend its support so that individuals in your community living with epilepsy know that they are not alone or ignored.

In a special way, I ask the Minister of Community and Social Services to ensure that those with epilepsy are not ignored when they're applying for ODSP. Try to support persons with special needs in your community, whoever they are. This is Epilepsy Awareness Month. Work with us, please.

TAXATION

Mr. Jeff Leal: Our government has introduced a tax reform package that does three important things for our province.

First of all, it cuts taxes for Ontarians. For example, 93% of Ontarians will receive a tax cut and 90,000 low-income earners will be removed from the tax rolls altogether. In addition to that, Ontarians will receive sales tax credits and property tax credits, and we have enhanced the Ontario senior homeowners' property tax grant.

Secondly, this tax package cuts taxes for businesses, reducing the corporate income tax rate and the small business rate and eliminating the capital tax. These reforms will make Ontario businesses stronger and more competitive.

Thirdly, these tax reforms will create almost 600,000 new jobs over the next 10 years. Ultimately, more jobs and strong businesses mean that we're able to support vital services, such as hospitals and schools, that we all rely on and that improve the quality of life for the people in our province.

These tax reforms are the foundation we need for a more prosperous Ontario and a brighter future for our children. Now is exactly the right time for a modern tax system that benefits Ontarians and businesses alike.

JOB CREATION

Mr. Kevin Daniel Flynn: Challenging economic times require governments to act. That's what our government is doing when it comes to creating jobs for Ontario citizens.

We're investing $34 billion over the next two years that's going to stimulate economic growth and help Ontario families. That includes an investment of $32.5 billion for the infrastructure we know is really needed, such as roads, public transit, energy and the retrofit for our public schools. That investment is expected to create and support more than 300,000 jobs for Ontarians.

On top of that, we're helping over 26,000 unemployed Ontarians to go back to school to train for a second career. This program prepares these workers to get back into the workforce.

Our green energy program is going to create 50,000 new Ontario jobs, producing clean energy like wind turbines and solar panels. Clean energy is an important economic opportunity for our province, and that's going to continue to grow and grow in the years to come.

These are just a few examples of how this government continues to move forward with a strong plan that helps families and businesses affected by the global economic crisis. We're taking action to make sure that Ontario is stronger, more competitive and has a prosperous future. We know that Ontarians support us as we continue to move forward in this regard. On the heels of the great news about the GDP in the last quarter of last year, I think this is exactly the strategy that this province needs.

EPILEPSY AWARENESS MONTH

Ms. Helena Jaczek: As we've already heard, today is epilepsy awareness day in Queen's Park, and March is in fact Epilepsy Awareness Month in Canada.

Many people mistakenly believe epilepsy is a disease or a psychological disorder. In fact, epilepsy is a neurological disorder. It causes seizures as a result of sudden bursts of electrical energy in the brain. In about 60% to 75% of cases there is no known cause of why people develop this disorder. It is estimated that between 120,000 and 245,000 people in Ontario live with a seizure disorder, and while there are treatments, there is no known cure.

What can help is raising awareness about epilepsy and the needs of those who live with it. This month, and especially on international epilepsy awareness day on March 26, I hope that all of the members of this Legislature will join that effort and wear a purple ribbon to help raise awareness.

I would like to thank all of the hard-working, dedicated and caring volunteers, advocates and medical professionals who work with Ontarians who suffer from epilepsy. I applaud their efforts and encourage anyone wanting more information on epilepsy to visit the website of Epilepsy Ontario.

PETITIONS

DOCTOR SHORTAGE

Mr. John O'Toole: I'd like to read my petition from constituents in the riding of Durham. It reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the McGuinty government is conducting a review of the province's underserviced area program," often referred to as UAP, "that may result in numerous communities across rural and small-town Ontario losing financial incentives to recruit and retain much-needed doctors; and

"Whereas financial incentives to attract and keep doctors are essential to providing quality front-line health care services, particularly in small communities; and

"Whereas people across Ontario have been forced to pay Dalton McGuinty's now-forgotten health tax since 2004, expecting health care services to be improved rather than cut; and

"Whereas taxpayers deserve good value for their hard-earned money that goes into health care, unlike the wasteful and abusive spending under the McGuinty Liberals' watch at eHealth Ontario;

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

"That the McGuinty government not reduce or eliminate financial incentives rural communities and small towns need" to attract and retain much-needed doctors.

I'm pleased to sign and support this in support of my community in Durham.

MIDDLE CHILDHOOD PROGRAMS

Mr. Michael Prue: I have a petition that reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Ontario government has taken an important step in its decision to implement full-day kindergarten; and

"Whereas children between the ages of six and 12 years continue to suffer from a lack of accessible, quality programs; and

"Whereas unlike youth and children in their early years, more than one million children six to 12 years old across Ontario are being left behind because of a lack of dedicated funding for accessible, quality middle childhood programs; and

"Whereas failure to increase middle childhood programming threatens a child's safety, education, and social development as they prepare to face the challenges of the approaching teen years; and

"Whereas implementing effective middle childhood programs increases self-esteem, improves school performance, and enhances quality of life for both children and their families; and

"Whereas Charles Pascal, in his 2009 report With Our Best Future in Mind, provides a framework and strategy for implementing a provincial structure for middle childhood programs across Ontario; and

"Whereas investing in middle childhood programs is part of Ontario's economic stimulus strategy;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to invest now in children six to 12 years old across Ontario and implement the recommendations made in the With Our Best Future in Mind report."

I'm in agreement and would sign my signature thereto and send it down with page Max.

POWER PLANT

Mr. Kevin Daniel Flynn: I've got a petition signed by some residents from east Oakville that says:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the province of Ontario ... has selected a location for a gas-fired electrical generating power station within three kilometres of 16 schools and more than 11,000 homes; and

"Whereas the Oakville-Clarkson airshed is already one of the most polluted in Canada; and

"Whereas no independent environmental assessment has been completed for this proposed building location; and

"Whereas Ontario has experienced a significant reduction in demand for electrical power; and

"Whereas a recent accident at a power plant in Connecticut demonstrated the dangers that nearby residents face;

"We, the undersigned, petition the government of Ontario to immediately rescind the existing plan to build a power plant at or near the current planned location on lands owned by the Ford Motor Co. on Royal Windsor Drive in Oakville and initiate a complete review of area power needs and potential building sites, including environmental assessments and a realistic assessment of required danger zone buffer areas."

I agree with this and will sign it.

TAXATION

Mr. Jerry J. Ouellette: I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas Dalton McGuinty said he wouldn't raise taxes in the 2003 election, but in 2004 he brought in the health tax, the biggest tax hike in Ontario's history; and

"Whereas Dalton McGuinty will increase taxes yet again with his new 13% combined sales tax, at a time when families and businesses can least afford it; and

"Whereas Dalton McGuinty's new 13% sales tax will increase the cost of goods and services that families and businesses buy every day, such as: coffee, newspapers and magazines; gas at the pumps; home heating oil and electricity; postage stamps; haircuts; dry cleaning; home renovations; real estate transactions; veterinary care; and arena ice and soccer field rentals;

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

"That the Dalton McGuinty government wake up to Ontario's current economic reality and stop raising taxes, once and for all, on Ontario's hard-working families and businesses."

I affix my name in full support.

CLAYTON BROWN PUBLIC SCHOOL

Mr. Gilles Bisson: I have a petition here signed by a number of parents and various citizens from the town of Hearst, and it reads as follows:

"Elementary students at this school have the opportunity to benefit from the atmosphere and secondary students should be provided the same benefit; and

"The conversion of Clayton Brown Public School to a JK-to-12 would provide secondary students with an opportunity to enjoy the climate, as well as providing them with the chance to learn in an environment where administrative control of the buildings lies with their own principal;

"This would guarantee their organization's decision would be made with their best interests at heart."

I sign the petition and submit it to my friend Christopher.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Mr. Bob Delaney: I have a petition addressed to the Ontario Legislative Assembly. It has been signed by a number of people in my riding. I especially want to recognize Bart Wassmansdorf and Prakash Bansod of Meadowvale, wish a happy 70th birthday to Hans Hoeppler of Lisgar and thank them all for signing the petition. It reads as follows:

"Whereas wait times for access to surgical procedures in the western GTA served by the Mississauga Halton LHIN are growing despite the ongoing capital project activity at the hospitals within the Mississauga Halton LHIN boundaries; and

"Whereas 'day surgery' procedures could better be performed in an off-site facility. An ambulatory surgery centre would greatly increase the ability of surgeons to perform more procedures, reduce wait times for patients and free up operating theatre space in hospitals for more complex procedures that may require post-operative intensive care unit support and a longer length of stay in hospital;

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

"That the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care allocate funds in its 2009-10 capital budget to begin planning and construction of an ambulatory surgery centre located in western Mississauga to serve the Mississauga-Halton area and enable greater access to 'day surgery' procedures that comprise about four fifths of all surgical procedures performed."

I'm very pleased to sign and support this petition and to ask page Brady to carry it for me.

POWER PLANT

Mr. Ted Chudleigh: I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas the province of Ontario, through the Ontario Energy Board, has selected a location for a gas-fired electrical generating power station within three kilometres of 16 schools and more than 11,000 homes; and

"Whereas the Oakville-Clarkson airshed is already one of the most polluted in Canada; and

"Whereas no independent environmental assessment has been completed for this proposed building location; and

"Whereas Ontario has experienced a significant reduction in demand for electrical power; and

"Whereas a recent accident at a power plant in Connecticut demonstrated the dangers that nearby residents face;

"We, the undersigned, petition the government of Ontario to immediately rescind the existing plan to build a power plant at or near the current planned location on lands owned by the Ford Motor Co. on Royal Windsor Drive in Oakville and initiate a complete review of area power needs and potential building sites, including environmental assessments and a realistic assessment of required danger zone buffer areas."

I'm pleased to sign this petition and pass it to page Colin to take to the table.

TAXATION

Mr. Jerry J. Ouellette: I've had this petition sent in from individuals in Campbellford and Warkworth, and it reads:

"Whereas the hard-working residents of Ontario do not want the new harmonized sales tax (HST) that will raise the cost of goods and services they use every day; and

"Whereas the 13% blended sales tax will cause everyone to pay more for, to name just a few, gasoline for their cars, heat, telephone, cable and Internet services for their homes, house sales over $400,000, fast food under $4, electricity, newspapers, magazines, stamps, theatre admissions, footwear less than $30, home renovations, gym fees, audio books for the blind, funeral services, snowplowing, air-conditioning repairs, commercial property rentals, real estate commissions, dry cleaning, car washes, manicures, Energy Star appliances, vet bills, bus fares, golf fees, arena ice rentals, moving vans, grass cutting, furnace repairs, domestic air travel, train fares, tobacco, bicycles and legal services; and

"Whereas the blended sales tax will affect everyone in the province: seniors, students, families and low-income Ontarians;

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

"That the McGuinty Liberal government not increase taxes and that the McGuinty Liberal government not bring into effect the harmonized sales tax/value-added tax/blended sales tax/any combination of the provincial retail sales tax with the GST for Ontario consumers."

I affix my name in full support.

TAXATION

Mr. John O'Toole: I'm going to be reading one here from the member from Sarnia—Lambton, who is urging me to read this petition. It reads as follows:

"Whereas Premier Dalton McGuinty is increasing taxes yet again with his new 13% combined sales tax, at a time when families and businesses can least afford it;

"Whereas by 2010, Dalton McGuinty's new tax will increase the cost of goods and services" that families and businesses buy and use every day. Just a few examples are as follows—a long list: "coffee, newspapers and magazines; gas for the car, home heating oil and electricity; haircuts, dry cleaning and personal grooming; home renovations and home services; veterinary care and pet care; legal services, the sale of resale homes, and funeral arrangements," and the list goes on.

"Whereas Dalton McGuinty promised he wouldn't raise taxes in the 2003 election. However, in 2004, he brought in the" dreaded "health tax, which costs up to $900 per individual. And now he is raising our taxes again;

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

"That Dalton McGuinty's government wake up to Ontario's current economic reality and stop raising taxes on Ontario's hard-working families and businesses."

I'm pleased to sign and support this and hand it to Brady, one of the new pages here.

TAXATION

Mr. Robert Bailey: I'd like to present a petition as well. This is to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas Premier Dalton McGuinty is increasing taxes yet again with his new 13% combined sales tax," at a time when families can ill afford it, and businesses can least afford it as well;

"Whereas by 2010, Dalton McGuinty's new tax will increase the cost of goods and services that families and businesses buy every day." A few examples—just a few—include "gas for the car, home heating oil and electricity; haircuts, dry cleaning and personal grooming; home renovations and home services; veterinary care and pet care; legal services, the sale of resale homes and funeral arrangements;

"Whereas Dalton McGuinty promised he wouldn't raise taxes in the 2003 election. However, in 2004, he brought in the" dreaded "health tax, which costs upwards of $600 to $900 per individual. And now he is raising our taxes again;

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

"That the Dalton McGuinty government wake up to Ontario's current economic reality and stop raising taxes on Ontario's hard-working families and businesses."

I agree with this petition and I'll affix my name to it and send it with Max.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

IPPERWASH PROVINCIAL PARK

Hon. Linda Jeffrey: I move that the Legislative Assembly of Ontario recognizes the May 2009 Ipperwash Provincial Park transfer process agreement between the Chippewas of Kettle and Stony Point First Nation and Her Majesty the Queen in right of Ontario, and endorses the proposed transfer of the land and revocation of the part of Ontario regulation 316/07 that sets aside the area of Ipperwash Provincial Park as a provincial park of Ontario, pursuant to subsection 9(4) of the Provincial Parks and Conservation Reserves Act, 2006.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Ms. Jeffrey has moved government notice of motion number 173. Debate?

Hon. Linda Jeffrey: I appreciate the chance to address the Legislature today and speak to this historic motion. I'm also pleased to be joined on this important occasion by my colleagues the members from Peterborough and Sarnia-Kent-Lambton. Each of their contributions should be recognized today, and I'm pleased they are here to speak to the motion.

Today we are here to debate a unique motion of historical importance. I recognize that this is an extraordinary measure and would like to share with the members of this Legislature how this motion came to be before us today. The release of the report of the Ipperwash inquiry in May 2007 was a significant milestone. This report has served as the road map for the McGuinty government partnership with First Nations and Metis to improve the quality of life for aboriginal communities in Ontario.

Today we are looking to take another important step forward. One of the 100 recommendations of the report of the Ipperwash inquiry was that the province of Ontario transfer Ipperwash Provincial Park to the Chippewas of Kettle and Stony Point First Nation. In December 2007, our Premier announced that the province intended to make that transfer. Since that time, we have been working hard to deliver on that commitment. In May 2009, then Minister of Aboriginal Affairs Brad Duguid signed a transfer agreement with Chief Elizabeth Cloud. That agreement set out the next steps for the transfer of the parkland.

As a ministry, we've co-operated with Kettle and Stony Point First Nation, local communities and the federal government to make sure that the transfer is executed properly. At the same time, I believe we have been able to build the strong relationship necessary to move forward. I want to recognize and acknowledge all the hard work many dedicated public servants have done to get us to this point. I also want to acknowledge the many Ontario Parks staff who have worked at Ipperwash park over the years.

It is important to note that it is the First Nation's desire to have the land transferred to Canada under the addition to reserve policy. The federal government has the constitutional authority to transfer land to an existing reserve; the provincial government does not.

Ipperwash Provincial Park was the fourth provincial park to be established in Ontario's park system. The park itself covers a total area of about 56 hectares. One provision of the Provincial Parks and Conservation Reserves Act is that the disposition of an area that is 1% of the protected area or 50 hectares or more must be reported to the Legislative Assembly, tabled and endorsed by the assembly. Our proposal for Ipperwash falls under that provision. That is the purpose of the government's motion here today.

The members may be interested to know that this is the first time that my ministry has ever made this kind of request since the act came into effect in 2007. The act provides that this matter come before the Legislature because the intent of the legislation was to ensure that it was not easy to deregulate a park. But there is precedent for making changes of this nature.

Under previous parks and protected areas legislation, parks have been deregulated for transfer to Canada for the benefit of First Nations. Such was the case for Sand Point First Nation, near the community of Nipigon. As well, parkland was deregulated to benefit the Big Grassy and Onigaming First Nation on the east side of Lake of the Woods.

That being said, however, the deregulation of a park is not a decision that we take lightly. The case of Ipperwash is extraordinary. We are doing our part to help right an historic wrong. At the end of this process, the Chippewas of Kettle and Stony Point First Nation will be able to use the property to benefit from the economic development opportunities, employment and revenue generation. Our goal is to help the community thrive and continue to improve the local quality of life. My ministry will continue to provide advice and work with the First Nation to help the community develop long-term planning goals for Ipperwash park.

I should also point out that this transfer is another step in the healing process and will ultimately contribute to a better quality of life for the First Nation. The government remains committed to making this a reality.

Economic development opportunities for the First Nation will also, over the long term, contribute to the local economy and to area municipalities. Along with the economic benefits, there will be chances for relationship building and co-operation between aboriginal, non-aboriginal people and the related communities.

Ontario is the home to parks that are world-renowned, and Ipperwash Park is one of those jewels in one of the world's biggest and best parks systems. Our parks will continue to enjoy over 10 million visits each and every year, and these Ontario landmarks will continue to provide amazing recreational opportunities while also protecting our significant natural and cultural heritage.

Our parks are an even more important feature this year as we mark the International Year of Biodiversity.

Deregulating Ipperwash park is the right thing to do for the Chippewas of Kettle and Stony Point First Nation. It's the right thing to do as a province in our efforts to contribute to the necessary healing, reconciliation, and ultimately to building a better future for all Ontarians.

I urge the members of this Legislature to support this important proposal.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Further debate?

Mr. Ted Arnott: I rise to speak on behalf of the official opposition to today's government resolution that reads as follows: "That the Legislative Assembly of Ontario recognizes the May 2009 Ipperwash Provincial Park transfer process agreement between the Chippewas of Kettle and Stony Point First Nation and Her Majesty the Queen in right of Ontario, and endorses the proposed transfer of the land and revocation of the part of Ontario regulation 316/07 that sets aside the area of Ipperwash Provincial Park as a provincial park of Ontario, pursuant to subsection 9(4) of the Provincial Parks and Conservation Reserves Act, 2006."

This motion was first tabled in this House last week. In fact, it first appeared in our orders and notices last Thursday. Given the fact that our caucus meets on Tuesdays, we have not had the opportunity to discuss it, nor to be formally briefed on it by ministry staff. One would have thought that the government would have been interested and willing to give all parties in this House these basic legislative courtesies.

Amongst other responsibilities, I serve as our party's critic to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs. I am honoured to have this role. To begin, I understand that this motion is required to carry out the government's plan to transfer Ipperwash Provincial Park to the Chippewas of Kettle and Stony Point. Our party is not going to challenge or take issue with this specific motion today, or more broadly, the government's decision to transfer the park in this instance. The motion is simply the logical extension of a policy that the government has already announced.

In this case, it was reported in the National Post in December 2007, based on an announcement by the then-aboriginal affairs minister, Michael Bryant. Further, we understand that this motion is a technical requirement set out in subsection 9(4) of the Provincial Parks and Conservation Reserves Act, 2006.

On this side of the House, we recognize that each outstanding aboriginal land claim is unique and that each set of circumstances is unique. Therefore, the approach of government must take this into account, considering and evaluating each claim on its own individual merits. I want to stress this point to ensure that it is clearly understood by all in this House.

With so many considerations and with such complexity of the issues involved, the pace at which progress is made can often be slow—in some cases, exceedingly slow. With respect to the particular issues Commissioner Linden outlined in the Ipperwash inquiry in his report, the government has a great deal of work to do. My colleague the member for Parry Sound—Muskoka pointed out in his remarks in June of last year that at that time most of the 100 recommendations in Justice Linden's report had yet to be acted upon.

In this instance, having made the announcement in December 2007 that Ipperwash would be transferred, the government took until today, more than 26 months later, for this motion to come forward. This is not meant as a criticism, but merely as a factual observation, for we know that patience in these matters is a virtue, as are tolerance, honesty and understanding.

The government has been clear in its intention to proceed with the transfer. The process, I think we would all agree, must be transparent and must be done right. Upon learning of the government's intention to proceed today with this motion, I was skeptical, I think quite justifiably, of its timing and, by extension, of its motives. This government has demonstrated a pattern of raising diversionary issues as a way to deflect attention from its lackadaisical response to our economic challenges.

On its one apparently significant so-called emergency debate on the economy back in 2008, the government still has not yet bothered to bring it to a vote. In fact, it appears they have forgotten about that so-called emergency debate.

To be clear, I understand that the government's motion today is necessary in order to carry out its policy with respect to the transfer of Ipperwash. We don't dispute that today. It is, however, highly unfortunate that this government has taken such an irresponsible course with the province's finances, such that we find ourselves with a nearly $25-billion deficit without the means to respond to the social and economic challenges facing Ontario's aboriginal communities. For example, the Chippewas of Kettle and Stony Point want to make a significant contribution to Ontario's economy and society.

They have done so in the past, and will do even more in the future with the right support from the government of Ontario.

I want to mention a few facts about this community. It has, I understand, 1,000 members who live on the reserve and another 900 who live off-reserve. It is part of a much larger nation of nearly 78,000 throughout North America. No doubt, they have felt the economic downturn as acutely as anyone. Without a doubt, in many cases our First Nations peoples have endured some of the worst poverty in the province, and the current economic downturn serves only to worsen their circumstances.

Our First Nations are saying that the best way to improve their lives is to create significant and lasting economic opportunities in which they can participate. They need jobs, they need better health care services, they need improved education opportunities. We support those things, and we believe they should be the government's focus.

To conclude, the official opposition will not be proposing amendments to this resolution, nor will we impede its passage in this House today. We extend our best wishes to the Chippewas of Kettle and Stony Point First Nation and look forward to a shared future of hope and opportunity.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Further debate?

Mr. Gilles Bisson: I'm going to take some time on this, because I think a few things need to be said in regard to the Ipperwash inquiry and what came of it.

First of all, I want to say up front that obviously we're going to support the motion. It was one of the recommendations that came out of the Ipperwash inquiry and, as such, I think has the support of all the parties in this Legislature—I'd be very surprised to see anybody vote against it—and certainly has the support of First Nations as one of the things that needs to be done in order to deal with the fallout from what happened, unfortunately, at Ipperwash park. I want to spend my time and talk about what this means and what still needs to be done, and that will be the thrust of what I have to say today.

First of all, as I say, we're in support. We think this is a good step forward. It is something that was recommended in the Ipperwash inquiry, as I said, but I think a couple of questions have to be asked.

First, I was really surprised when I got a copy of this motion on Thursday. I decided to call Chief Angus Toulouse and Chief Cloud and Murray Klippenstein, who is the lawyer who acted on behalf of the George family, expecting to get some feedback from them that they knew about this and what their comments were, because I knew they were going to be in favour. I just wanted to know: Was there anything I should know about it that I was missing? Nobody knew about it.

I thought, "Isn't that weird?" Isn't it strange that the very people the government is trying to speak to didn't even know this was being brought to the Legislature?

I thought, "Either I'm not reading this motion right and there's something in there that I've missed and that they must be trying to sneak through, or there's a communications problem within the government." Or there might be a third reason: This is more of the same that we've seen from the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs, where he's looking for things to say about First Nations that are positive and being seen as doing positive things while not doing a heck of a lot.

I think it falls into the last category, with all respect to my good friend Madam Jeffrey on the other side, who's the Minister of Natural Resources.

You have to ask yourself—this is a good recommendation, but there are a few things that have to go with it—if we deregulate the park, as will be done as a result of this motion, where is the federal government when it comes to creation of the reserve land? I think that's a really fair question; that's the thing we need to know. Has the provincial government engaged in discussions with the federal government to make sure that, once that part of Ipperwash Provincial Park is deregulated and allowed to become a reserve again, has the discussion happened with the federal government?

It was a little bit telling today, when the minister was being asked in scrums after question period, that those conversations have yet to take place in a meaningful way. I would imagine there must have been some discussion, but there hasn't been any commitment from the federal government and any kind of push from the provincial government to get the government on the federal side to move on this.

The other part of it is, once it's deregulated, who is going to deal with the cleanup costs at the old military base? That's a pretty simple question. There are some environmental issues on the old military base that is part of these lands. What commitment do we have from the federal government that they will actually take the responsibility for footing the bill when it comes to doing the cleanup?

I have some experience with the federal government in dealing with cleanups, because we had the old radar bases—the DEW line bases—that were basically in my riding. We had radar bases at Moosonee, Fort Albany and Winisk, and in Howard's riding up at Fort Severn and various points where they had repeaters. It was a whole environmental disaster having to do with the equipment the American and Canadian military left on those bases when they withdrew and shut down the radar bases on the James Bay coast. Here's what happened.

We were trying to get it cleaned up, because the First Nations had these eyesores inside their communities, and the first one to come up for cleanup, other than Moosonee, was Fort Albany. I remember having a discussion then—I think Mr. Ouellette was the minister on the Conservative side of the House, if I remember correctly.

We were having discussions with the minister and the ministry, and we finally decided as a province and said, "If we wait for the federal government to foot the bill to clean up Fort Albany, we're going to wait a long time and it's still going to be an environmental disaster." The government of the day said, "Listen, clean the site and send the bill to the federal government." What that did was force the federal government to the table to deal not only with the cost of the Fort Albany cleanup, but it also forced the federal government to come to the table and engage in discussions with the province about how we were going to clean up the other sites, because there were other sites to be cleaned up.

It was a bit of a risk on the part of the province, because the feds could have said, "You guys went ahead without our authorization, so you're stuck with the bill." But we recognized, on the provincial side, that if we waited for the feds to do anything, we'd be waiting for a long time. As it relates to Ipperwash Provincial Park, I think we need to be prepared to move on the cleanup in some kind of way that forces the feds to the table, even if that means we have to start doing some of that ourselves. But again, there's no indication, as a result of this particular motion, who's going to deal with the cleanup at the Ipperwash military base that has been closed for some time.

The other issue is that of treaty rights in regard to how it affects this particular motion. There are discussions that have to ensue between the federal and provincial governments and the First Nations to deal with the treaty issues that fall out of this. Again, what commitment do we have from the provincial government that they're actually going to deal with that? But more importantly, where the heck is the federal government on this? I don't want to engage in a discussion—because I know the Liberals love it. Mr. McGuinty—any time that we can shift the responsibility to the feds, it's something they love to do.

The point is, we need to put some pressure on the federal government. I would think, at the very least, we should have some kind of indication at this point today, prior to debate, where the federal government is on converting those lands to reserve, dealing with treaty rights and dealing with the cleanup on the old military base. If we at least knew the answers, then we could make some decisions here in Ontario about how we proceed once we deregulate that park in order to allow it to become a reserve land. What are we prepared to do, as a province, in order to make those things happen?

Those are all questions that are not being answered.

Like I said, the whole issue of this coming up for debate today, on Monday, and the people who are most affected haven't been contacted, leads me to believe that this is more of a communications problem on their side, but more importantly, this is more of an opportunity for the government to say, "Look at all the great things we're doing when it comes to First Nations in this province." I just want to take this opportunity to say, well, this is a great thing, but what about all of the other recommendations that came out of the Ipperwash inquiry?

In 2007, the Honourable Sidney B. Linden, the commissioner, came out with his report. The report had a number of recommendations in it, and I just want to go through some of those recommendations that have yet to be acted on since 2007, and that are, I would argue, equally if not more important not only to the Kettle and Stony Point people but to all First Nations people in this province.

If you look at what has been recommended, there are a whole number of recommendations in the Ipperwash inquiry, the first being, "The Treaty Commission of Ontario should be established in a provincial statute as an independent agency reporting directly to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario." What that means, simply put, is that the Legislature should pass legislation that enacts a piece of law that allows a treaty commission to be set up and that that treaty commission report back, just as our Environmental Commissioner and other commissioners do, directly back to the Legislature. Has that been done?

I haven't seen the legislation. I haven't seen a draft of the legislation. I haven't even heard a rumour about the legislation. So one of the most important recommendations that the Ipperwash inquiry gave was the creation of this treaty commission, and nowhere is there any indication that the treaty commission is actually something the government is going to bring forward any time soon.

So why do you cherry-pick and decide to take this piece of the Ipperwash inquiry and not take the other? I think it's a question of commitment. I think the provincial government wants to be seen as being positive toward First Nations issues and wants to be able to communicate to the public through the media, "Look at the great things we're doing to take our responsibilities as a provincial government vis-à-vis our First Nations." But when it comes to actually taking concrete steps, the government is a little bit slower, if not missing in action.

The other recommendation that flows out of the treaty commission recommendation is, "The governments of Ontario, Canada, and First Nations should jointly select the head of the Treaty Commission of Ontario." Well, we haven't even got the legislation, so we know we haven't got to that.

But there was an understanding and an acknowledgment on the part of the Ipperwash inquiry that the treaty commission, once established, should have a head and that head should be somebody that everybody agrees on—not just the federal or provincial governments appointing their friend or their political operative to be the head of the commission, but somebody that First Nations, the feds and the provincial government could live with.

It goes on to say, "The Treaty Commission of Ontario should be given a four-part, strategic mandate," and that mandate is that the Treaty Commission of Ontario "should be given the authority to assist governments and First Nations, independently and impartially, in developing and applying a wide range of tools and processes to clarify and settle issues in an expeditious and co-operative way."

We still have, after all of these years, a whole raft of unresolved treaties. Where are we at trying to get those resolved? It's certainly not to the advantage of First Nations that these treaties sit out there, yet to be negotiated and resolved, and I would argue that it's certainly not to the advantage of the provincial government, because the province doesn't benefit by having this in limbo. Certainly, the residents in the area don't gain by not having this resolved one way or another.

The treaty commission was all about making sure that we're able to advance and expedite, in a way that would work for the First Nations, the crown and the public, a resolution to long-standing treaties, and we've yet to move on any of the recommendations that deal with that.

The other part of their four-part strategic plan was that "the Treaty Commission of Ontario should be given the mandate to improve the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of the land claims process in Ontario" and "establish and publish benchmarks for processing claims" and have "dispute resolution, binding as well as non-binding, when the benchmarks are not met."

Simply put, the commission, along with the others who are involved—First Nations and others—should be able to set a benchmark and say, "Treaty whatever of this particular piece of land is currently at this stage of the process. Let's set, as a benchmark, the following things that need—not the following things that need to happen, but by when we expect to have this resolved." So you say, "Okay, we'll give this a time frame of 16 months, 18 months or 24 months, and here are the things that need to happen within that time period to get their resolution.

But if no resolution is sought, we have some mechanisms to resolve disputes." In some cases, they'd be binding arbitration and, in some cases, they would not be, depending on the circumstance. Why has that recommendation not been acted on? We've strictly dealt with, at this point, the issue of the Ipperwash park.

The third part of the Ipperwash inquiry in regard to the benchmarks was that "the Treaty Commission of Ontario should be given the mandate to make the claims process accountable and transparent to all Ontarians." I think, man, is that important for everybody—for First Nations and non-First Nations people. We need to have a transparency of how this works, what it means, how it's going to be resolved in the end and what the resolution should be.

First Nations people obviously need to know because unlike our communities, they operate very differently, in the sense that decisions aren't made at the band council unless the community has said, "Yes, you can go ahead and do it." It's not like a municipality. In a municipal structure, mayor and council make a decision. They have a vote at the table, and we trust that our elected officials will make the right decision. If we don't like it, every four years we turf them out and we get new ones.

In the aboriginal community, we've imposed on them a European method of governing where we have this thing called a band council. A band council works something like a municipality but, to First Nations, it's very alien to the way they actually do business, because the way that they've traditionally done business and the way they still do is that there has to be some discussion with the community and sufficient time for people to get their heads around it.

Then families—because it is family politics on reserve big time—and individuals have to come to terms with what is being proposed by the leaders of the community or whoever it might be—the provincial or federal governments—and then a decision is made at the community level.

The process there is, you need to make sure that the community has an opportunity to have its say. That's why transparency and recommendation number 3 of transparency are so important: because First Nations, by tradition, operate very differently from us. I can give you examples of De Beers.

When De Beers negotiated their impact benefit agreement with the community of Attawapiskat, the community that's closest to the mine and most affected, it took three to four years by the time the discussion completed its process in the community and people came to terms with the very issues around environment, compensation, employment and business opportunities, till finally there was a consensus in the community and a referendum was taken at 85% in favour of the agreement that De Beers had negotiated with the First Nation. It takes longer, but that's the way they do business.

There has to be a community consensus for them to move forward.

Transparency for First Nations is important in the sense that it respects the cultural differences and the political differences about how they operate, but on the non-aboriginal side, it's just as important. Look at what's going in Caledonia. I'm not going to pronounce this, that or the other on Caledonia, but the issue is, clearly there needs to be a process where it is very transparent for those people who are affected by whatever decision is made, because they're the neighbours, they're the people living in proximity to the community where the decision is being made about whatever affects the First Nation.

It's not that we need to have the approval of fellow citizens and adjoining communities—because sometimes approval may never be gained, or approval would be given—but the point is, it's not about getting approval; it's about making sure the public understands what this is all about. Also, what the provincial and federal governments are doing has to be transparent for people to have sufficient comfort and understanding to accept decisions that are made.

The fourth point that was made on that recommendation is that the Treaty Commission of Ontario "should be given a broad mandate to undertake public education about treaties, treaty relationships, and land claims in Ontario." The Treaty Commission of Ontario "should be given the specific authority to develop programs about treaty history designed to be part of the Ontario school curriculum."

So I think this recommendation of having the treaty commission set some recommendations as to what should go into the school curriculum is key. Ontarians know very little about First Nations, and I know that from my experience growing up in the city of Timmins, where I didn't know a heck of a lot about First Nations until much later in life when I got to know a lot more as I became elected as a provincial member of Parliament. I've got to tell you, it was an eye-opener, and I still learn every day.

I've got to tell you this story, because I'm just thinking of it now. It's a bit of a humorous story, but I think it makes the point. A good friend of mine, Gilbert Cheechoo—some of you might have dealt with him before; he was an economic development officer at the time, and I believe he's now the coordinator for the package that was settled between Moose Cree and De Beers. I remember him telling me a story that is actually pretty typical and pretty funny. We were talking about this very issue, and he said, "What did you know about First Nations as you were growing up?" I said, "Not a lot.

The only thing I learned was by watching Saturday morning matinees." He said, "Oh, we used to love those too." I said, "Really? Why would you kids in Moose Factory be watching a Saturday morning matinee about cowboys and Indians?" He said, "We played cowboys and Indians all the time." I said, "Gee, I feel kind of bad, because I used to play the cowboy." He said, "Well, so did I." I said, "Why would you be the cowboy?" He said, "They were spaghetti westerns. Those were bad Indians." What a sense of humour.

But it says a lot about our First Nations, about forgive and forget and seeing us for what we are and our foibles and all. I pass that story on, because I always thought it was quite an amusing story, but very true.

So I just say this recommendation on the part of the commission to instill in the education system, by a change of curriculum, what are First Nations, who are they, what do they do, what are their values, what are their aspirations—I think is really important to insert in the curriculum all across Ontario, so that we as citizens become much more knowledgeable about what First Nations face, so that we can together try to find a solution. I think that's one of the key recommendations.

One of the other recommendations in the Ipperwash inquiry is, "The provincial and federal governments should commit sufficient resources to the TCO to enable it to achieve its objectives." I think that goes without saying: If you don't fund it properly, it's not going to succeed. Why has that not been acted on?

"The provincial government should commit sufficient funds to enable the Ontario land claims process to resolve claims within an acceptable period." Again, it's quite something if you were to put the Treaty Commission of Ontario together, but you also have to have a commitment to settle those land claims, which means there will be lands exchanging hands and there will also be some compensation, in some cases, associated with that. We need to be prepared for that and commit that we're prepared to do what's needed.

Another recommendation that has not been acted upon: "The provincial government and the TCO should work together to develop a business and financial plan for the Ontario land claims process. The objective would be to estimate the resources needed to resolve claims and to meet reasonable benchmarks during the land claims process," as said earlier.

"The federal government should co-operate fully with the provincial government and First Nations in Ontario to establish the Treaty Commission of Ontario and promote its effectiveness." On this point, I have to say a couple of things. The federal government should actually be involved in First Nations issues? What a novel thought. Wow.

I'll say it here in the Legislature, and I'll say it outside, where I can be sued: If the Department of Indian Affairs and the federal government actually took on their responsibility to deal adequately with the needs, aspirations and issues faced by our First Nations, we would have made a pretty big step up to this point. Instead, what do we have in our communities? Howard Hampton, my good friend and colleague, represents a number—how many First Nations, 40-odd?

Mr. Howard Hampton: It's 55.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: There are 55 First Nations in his riding. I have quite a few less than that. Mr. Gravelle has a few in his; Mr. Brown, Madame Gélinas. If you go into some of these reserves, especially reserves in the far north that Howard and I represent, you're looking at some pretty difficult situations. You have families of 25 people in a house, which is not uncommon. How do you, as a child of five or 10, study and excel in school if you're living in a house with 20 or 25 people, where you're actually "hot bedding" the beds?

Some people sleep in the day and some people sleep at night because there are not enough beds in the house to go around. Why? Because neither the federal nor provincial government provides the funding needed to build an adequate amount of housing for those communities.

If there's one place in Canada where there is a huge rise in population, it's within First Nations communities. I think something like 60% of the residents on First Nations are under age 30. Think about that—60%. So we've had a huge increase in population in First Nations, but we have not kept up with the amount of housing that was originally given to those communities when they formed reserves some 30, 40 or 50 years ago.

Remember that reserves in our communities haven't been around for all that long. There were places where First Nations would congregate and would come at particular times of the year to do exchanges and trading with the Hudson's Bay Co. and others, but the actual reserve system didn't start until fairly recently. If you look on the James Bay coast, the communities of Fort Albany and Kashechewan were all formed within this last century. It wasn't until the 1930s, 1940s and, really, the 1950s, that they started building anything there.

They signed the treaty in 1904 or 1905, somewhere around there, and then we forgot about them for 50 years and didn't do anything. Then 50 years later the federal government said, "Oh, let'