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

June 24, 1992

35th Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

The House met at 1333.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

HIGHWAY SAFETY

Mr Frank Miclash (Kenora): My statement is directed to the Minister of Transportation. Minister, only last week I spoke to you regarding the dangerous situation on the east end of the Kenora bypass. This conversation followed three serious accidents, in one of which a young man lost his life.

Well, the news from Kenora at 10:05 this morning was not good: the same corner, another accident. Two people from Saskatchewan were injured and are at this moment in the Lake of the Woods District Hospital.

There was a commitment made to the people of Kenora on September 15, 1989, almost three years ago, that: "The new east connection will begin immediately following the completion of the bypass. It will consist of an interchange using the existing highway as the main road and having bypass traffic use ramps to access the bypass."

Minister, the people in my riding are growing increasingly impatient. As people are killed or injured on this corner, you continuously drag your feet. How many more accidents will it take before we see the equipment on site to get the project under way? We need action not eloquence, and we need it immediately.

HERSHEY CANADA YOUTH TRACK AND FIELD MEET

Mr Leo Jordan (Lanark-Renfrew): Smiths Falls, home of Hershey Canada, recently hosted the second annual Hershey Canada youth track and field meet for over 300 students in Lanark-Renfrew.

The man originally responsible was Donald P. Cohen, founder of the Hershey youth program. He has organized a national track and field program as the way to promote friendship, participation and sportsmanship through physical activity. The main idea is not to participate to win but rather to win through participation.

The track meet is for youth between the ages of nine and 14. Sprints, long distances, the standing long jump and the softball throw are some of the events competed in. A regular pair of running shoes is all an enthusiastic youth really needs. Dr Cohen's encouragement of fitness is at a level that doesn't stress fancy uniforms but rather the importance of dedication and hard work.

To the many people from Hershey Canada, from president Rick Myers to Jim Sheridan of Smiths Falls, and all the communities of Lanark-Renfrew, I commend their dedication and personal efforts towards such a worthy cause, the future of our children.

LABOUR DISPUTE

Mr Tony Martin (Sault Ste Marie): Today I would like to share with my colleagues information about a very serious labour dispute concerning the Sault Star, the local daily newspaper in my riding. On Friday, June 19, 65 employees from Local 746 of the Communications Workers of America were locked out. Subsequently, the Sault Star hired replacement workers to fill in while the lockout continues.

This lockout and the hiring of replacement workers is an excellent example of why we should focus on labour relations reform in Ontario. If the proposed amendments to the Ontario Labour Relations Act were already in place such an incident would never have occurred.

The Sault Star lockout is an extremely serious and contentious matter. It will last indefinitely as long as the company maintains these replacement workers on its payroll. A lockout does not lead to a speedy or a satisfactory labour resolution.

In this generation these offensive tactics are a step backwards for labour relations. We should be focusing on progressive attitudes and procedures where management and labour associations are concerned. With these critical changes to the OLRA, incidents such as the Sault Star lockout will be left in the Dark Ages where they belong.

MINISTRY OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

Mr Robert Chiarelli (Ottawa West): Yesterday afternoon I received a brown envelope from a concerned employee of the Ministry of the Attorney General. The envelope contained a new organization chart for the director of communications with the following notation:

"Even though there is much protest against the rising court fees and there seems to be no hiring of new crown attorneys, the Attorney General's office has given a director of communications, Anji Husain, permission to hire five new middle managers."

These new employees' responsibilities include media and question period analysis.

At a time of restraint when women will be forced into legal clinics, when lawyers are being asked to throw more dollars into the legal aid pot, when court fees are raised to taxation levels, what do we see? We see the Attorney General, the minister of inertia, calling on new spin doctors to create the impression of action where none exists.

The process started on June 9 with a news release stating, "Ministry announces major review of legal aid as court system faces massive financial problems." Yet the details of not one new initiative were actually confirmed. We see words like "examining," "exploring," "developing."

This minister needs spin doctors to make an illusion of action out of inertia.

LABOUR LEGISLATION

Mr David Tilson (Dufferin-Peel): I would like to share with the members of this Legislature what the people of Dufferin-Peel think about the NDP government changes to the Labour Relations Act.

I have received over 600 letters and countless telephone calls from concerned citizens within Dufferin-Peel and beyond who are terrified that these new labour laws will unfairly tilt the balance of power. No one believes there's anything in this legislation that will create jobs. Ninety-five per cent of the people who completed surveys felt that the government should deal with the economy and job creation. No one believes that labour law reform should be this government's top priority.

People are scared. They think this new legislation will hurt our already struggling economy. They fear for their jobs. They fear for their families' jobs. They fear for their friends' jobs. They fear what this government will do next to crush our once proud province.

This government preaches about its great consultative process. When will they start listening to the people who are concerned about its priorities. The people of my riding and the province have spoken. Above all else they want a strong economy and they want jobs.

This government must listen to the people of this province. Unless this government starts facing the real problems our constituents have to deal with, the NDP will continue to make Ontario an economic dinosaur in the 21st century.

REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF SUDBURY

Ms Sharon Murdock (Sudbury): Most people when they think of Sudbury unfortunately still think of the time a number of years ago when we were the practice grounds for the American astronauts. They couldn't be further from the truth.

Twenty years ago, because of past forestry and mining activities and such natural events as forest fires, approximately 10,000 hectares of land surrounding Sudbury was laid barren. Today, in 1992, the regional municipality of Sudbury has won two more awards for its regional land reclamation program. We won the 1992 United Nations Local Government Honours Award, which was presented at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro this month. Second, we won the United States 1992 Chevron Conservation Award presented in Washington, DC. I should point out that we were competing with 214 other municipalities throughout the world for the international award.

Through a massive regional land reclamation project, 3,000 hectares of the most damaged land has been revegetated. It's been a $15-million project employing 3,200 people from a wide variety of government grants as well as private sector contributions.

I'm sure members of the House will join me in congratulating the regional municipality of Sudbury on the two awards it has won, the tremendous achievement it has claimed and the environmental naturalization of the Sudbury area. As well, I invite you all to come and visit us and see how green we are.

CROSS-BORDER SHOPPING

Mr Michael A. Brown (Algoma-Manitoulin): The increase in Canadian consumer purchases in the US has led to declines in retail sales in Ontario, especially in our border communities. Cross-border shopping has a negative impact on our economy as valuable consumer dollars leave our province and go towards helping the American economy. Last year Canadians made some 59 million trips to the US. An estimated $2-billion to $3-billion worth of goods was purchased in the US by Ontario residents.

A group in northwestern Ontario, the Thunder Bay Chamber of Commerce citizens out-shopping committee, has embarked on a crusade to keep those Canadian dollars at home where they will create jobs and a stronger economy. The group is lobbying both the federal and provincial governments to proclaim July 4 as Shop Canada Day. Just last Friday, the federal House of Commons unanimously voted to proclaim Shop Canada Day. As well, the group is selling sweatshirts that read "Shop Canada -- It Makes a Difference."

My honourable colleague the leader of the official opposition and member for Fort William and I would like to encourage the Ontario Legislature to also proclaim Saturday, July 4, as Shop Canada Day.

MINISTRY OF NATURAL RESOURCES POLICIES

Mr Allan K. McLean (Simcoe East): My statement is directed to the Minister of Natural Resources. It has to do with the statement he made the other day with regard to zebra mussels and the preventive attitude he is taking towards them.

Some time ago, we had the opportunity in estimates to deal with this very important issue and at that time we indicated the importance of prevention. Since that time, zebra mussels have entered Lake Simcoe and many small lakes in Ontario. I would have thought if the ministry had taken some initiative two years ago, there would have been a lot of preventive measures taken in our small lakes in Ontario.

The other part of what I want to say is the fact that nurseries are closing in Ontario and fewer trees are going to be planted. I've been getting a great deal of correspondence from the people in Midhurst and area with regard to the closing of the Midhurst nursery. The indication I have is that Midhurst nursery is one of the most productive and efficient operations in Ontario. Mr Minister, you can look forward to many petitions and letters from people in that area with regard to that very issue, and I hope that by the end of 1992-93 you will have enough information that you will reverse your decision and not close that nursery at Midhurst.

INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS

Mr Jim Wiseman (Durham West): I rise today to honour my colleagues on the local council in the town of Pickering. I do so because I feel it's important for politicians from all levels of government to recognize their fellow politicians. It is important because, despite our political differences, we are all in the business for one reason: to serve the community.

Last week I was honoured to be invited to meet with this council in a public forum. Although my commitments in the Legislature made this meeting difficult to schedule, I was able at the last minute to appear in the council chambers and they received me graciously and warmly. I was happy that council gave me the opportunity to address them but, more important, to do so in front of the constituents we all serve. I believe this mere gesture alone was an important message to send to the community -- that is, that not all politicians are out to discredit one another.

There is no question that the line that divides local and provincial jurisdiction is a fine one. It is important that we work together to ensure that the people of our community are receiving the best representation possible. After last Wednesday night, the people of Pickering can feel good about that.

Whether the issue is development of environmentally sensitive areas or the siting of landfill sites, it is important that the lines of communication between the province and the municipality are open. After all, it is only through communication, negotiation and resolution that people are well served.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

PROTECTION OF IN-CARE RESIDENTS

Hon Elaine Ziemba (Minister of Citizenship and Minister Responsible for Human Rights, Disability Issues, Seniors' Issues and Race Relations): Today it is my pleasure to table the report of the Commission of Inquiry into Unregulated Residential Accommodation. As the members will recall, Professor Ernie Lightman was appointed within 24 hours of the coroner's inquest into the death of Joseph Kendall at Cedar Glen in Orillia. Dr Lightman, an economist by training, is a professor of social policy at the University of Toronto and has published widely in both academic and popular journals.

The commissioner consulted extensively by travelling to seven communities across the province. He visited a variety of rest, boarding and retirement homes, met with residents, interest groups and members of the public, and reviewed 230 written submissions. The consultation process was thorough, open and well organized.

After analysing the issues that were raised, the commissioner produced the comprehensive 340-page report entitled A Community of Interests. This report includes 148 recommendations.

Research estimates that 47,500 potentially vulnerable adults live in unregulated accommodation in Ontario. Most of these residents are senior citizens or persons with psychiatric histories or developmental disabilities. These individuals are some of the most vulnerable people in our society. This government is committed to protecting their rights and their dignity.

My colleagues and I look forward to carefully reviewing Dr Lightman's report. I would like to acknowledge that Dr Lightman is in the studio today, along with his wife Leah Cohen and their daughter Naomi. Thank you very much, Ernie.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): Stop the clock, please. I understand the statement the minister just made was not distributed to the opposition. I'm sure there's been an oversight. If the minister could attend to it as quickly as possible, by the time we reach response time the members will have had an appropriate amount of time to prepare for that.

Start the clock.

CHILD CARE SERVICES

Hon Marion Boyd (Minister of Community and Social Services): I am pleased to announce today that the Ministry of Community and Social Services will provide $110.5 million in Jobs Ontario Capital over the next two years to very significantly expand and improve the social service infrastructure in this province. This funding represents more than 120 renovation and construction projects, creating employment equivalent to an average of one year for about 1,500 Ontarians.

Funding for these projects is new and is part of Jobs Ontario Capital, a five-year, $2.3-billion fund announced by my colleague the Treasurer in the 1992 budget. This fund will support economic restructuring and promote community and social progress. Because helping Ontarians to get back to work is such a high priority of this provincial government, the project is being fast-tracked to create jobs on an immediate basis.

Most of the capital funding I am announcing today -- about $97 million -- will be used to build new non-profit child care centres and to renovate and expand existing non-profit child care centres. As a result, Ontarians will benefit in the short term from the employment this construction creates, and also in the long term with more child care spaces available to working parents. Of course, in addition, the staff working in these community-based centres will also swell the workforce.

Mr Speaker, $77 million of this new child care capital funding will directly support my ministry's previous commitment to fund up to 20,000 new child care fee subsidies over the next three years. Those fee subsidies are part of the Jobs Ontario Training fund. The training fund is creating work and training opportunities for people on social assistance and people who are no longer eligible for unemployment insurance benefits. My ministry is helping to make sure that people who want to participate in the program have access to child care.

Other projects being funded with the dollars I'm announcing today will provide community care for elderly people and people with physical and developmental disabilities as part of the long-term care initiative being led by my colleague the Minister of Health. Funding will also be provided for renovation or construction of facilities providing service to victims of wife assault, to children's services and to projects for young offenders.

The specific projects receiving funding will be announced over the next few months. In many of these projects we have partners in the communities who will be contributing funding, and we look forward to the opportunity to work closely with them. In fact, when provincial funding is combined with municipal and other contributions the total value of the projects I'm announcing today exceeds $118 million. Clearly this is an excellent example of governments and communities working together to create jobs and improve the quality of life for all residents of this province.

I had the pleasure this morning of announcing one of these projects in the St Lawrence neighbourhood of downtown Toronto. In that location, funding from the provincial government and the city of Toronto will combine to build a child care centre to provide families in the area with badly needed services.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): The Minister of Municipal Affairs.

Hon David S. Cooke (Minister of Municipal Affairs): Mr Speaker, before I start, the House leader for the official opposition asked that there be an additional two minutes in reply for each of the opposition parties, so that when they reply it would be seven minutes for each opposition party by unanimous consent.

The Speaker: Agreed? Agreed.

WETLANDS

Hon David S. Cooke (Minister of Municipal Affairs): I am pleased to introduce today a wetlands policy statement under

section 3 of the Planning Act that will give municipalities strong direction on the protection of provincially significant wetlands and will encourage them to protect other wetlands.

The policy states that no development should be permitted in southern Ontario in provincially significant wetlands. In the northern boreal region, no development should be permitted unless there is an environmental impact statement that shows there will be no loss of wetland functions either directly or indirectly.

Wetlands maintain and improve water quality, protect shorelines from erosion, aid in flood control, furnish fish and wildlife habitat and bring substantial social and economic benefits, such as outdoor recreational and tourism-related activities. More than any other habitat, wetlands contribute to the ecological diversity of the landscape. They accommodate fish, wildlife and plant species, some of which are rare, threatened or endangered.

Wetlands south of the Canadian Shield have been disappearing rapidly as a result of pressure from various kinds of development. It is estimated that more than 75% of the original wetlands in southern Ontario have already been lost. While we have an abundance of wetlands in northern Ontario, this does not compensate for the loss of those wetlands south of the Canadian Shield. Furthermore, the government also views the conservation of northern wetlands as vital to the long-term environmental, social and economic health of the province.

There has been extensive consultation in the development of the wetlands policy statement. Individuals, interest groups and professional organizations across the province who are concerned about the escalating loss of wetlands reviewed drafts of the policy in 1989 and again in 1991 before submitting their comments. The policy has been clarified and strengthened to meet many of the concerns and suggestions expressed by this wide cross-section of the Ontario public.

The wetlands policy comes into effect June 27, the day it appears in the Ontario Gazette. It will be jointly administered by my ministry and the Ministry of Natural Resources.

While making a public statement in a wetland this morning my colleague the Minister of Natural Resources indicated that over the next few months our ministries will consult other ministries and interest groups to develop wetlands implementation guidelines. The guidelines will assist planning jurisdictions such as municipalities and planning boards in implementing the policy statement. Those guidelines will be issued in the fall.

The wetlands policy statement is but one part of a comprehensive government program to protect wetlands in all areas of the province. This policy will complement other existing programs, policies and legislation.

PUBLIC HOUSING / LOGEMENTS PUBLICS

Hon Evelyn Gigantes (Minister of Housing): I'm pleased to tell the members of the House about a new planning process to improve the quality of life for people living in public housing communities across Ontario.

Plus de 200 000 personnes vivent dans les logements publics -- soit environ la population de Thunder Bay, Kingston et Barrie réunie. Ce processus de planification est conçu pour aider les gens qui vivent et travaillent dans les logements publics à trouver des solutions à quelques-uns des problèmes de longue date dans leur communauté.

Today I'm releasing a document called Planning Together, which outlines key issues identified by public housing tenants and gives direction to local housing authorities to help them work with tenants and community service providers to find community-based solutions.

These issues, which have been known for a long time, are tenant selection and transfers, discrimination, racism, harassment, property management, safety and security and receiving access to community services.

A fundamental problem underlying these issues is a lack of tenant participation. Right now, public housing tenants have no consistent or official role in the management of their communities. We think tenants should have a say in the way their communities are run.

That's why the Ontario Housing Corp, the board that oversees public housing in Ontario, is asking each of the 56 local housing authorities to form a local planning committee. These committees will be made up of tenants, housing authority staff and housing board members and community service providers.

The committees' mandate is to reach out within the public housing community to develop a local action plan, and I'm confident that these efforts will produce practical, community-based answers.

Les communautés se sont attaquées à ces problèmes de façons diverses et les solutions novatrices qu'elles ont trouvées constituent une grande

partie du processus de Planifier ensemble. Nous savons que nous pouvons apprendre du passé et de ce que d'autres ont essayé.

An advisory group of tenants, housing authority staff and community service providers have worked very hard on developing this process. I'd like to acknowledge and thank the members, who join us in the gallery today, for their contributions. Among those who are able to join us today are Doris Dauphin, Joanne Lefortune and Evelyn Shore, who are tenants, Mary Garrett, who's a community agency representative, and Rolly Sauve, who is a housing authority representative. Thank you very much for your hard work and your commitment to the planning process together. I hope this process will strengthen the voices of public housing tenants.

In turn, I want to let people know we are committed to making local housing authorities, the Ontario Housing Corp and the Ministry of Housing more accountable to tenants. As we begin this local planning process to create stronger and healthier communities, I'd like to invite all my colleagues, regardless of party affiliation, to encourage public housing tenants in their ridings to participate.

RESPONSES

WETLANDS

Mr Michael A. Brown (Algoma-Manitoulin): I wish to reply to the statement by the Minister of Municipal Affairs concerning wetlands. We on this side of course are happy that the government is finally moving on the wetlands policy. Over one year ago in this Legislature I urged the minister to move on this and to get on with it. But we are suspicious that on the day the environmental groups gave the NDP a D for its environmental performance we are finally seeing something about wetlands.

I tell you, on this side we're a little concerned that the municipalities may not be given the tools to implement this policy, and we would like to urge the minister to assure the House that the municipalities will not only be consulted but will be given the tools they need to carry out this important policy.

We are also concerned that the Sewell commission may be superseding this whole statement, so from that regard we think it's about time they moved. We want to see the results.

PROTECTION OF IN-CARE RESIDENTS

Mrs Joan M. Fawcett (Northumberland): I'd like to make a few remarks on the Lightman report today. My congratulations go out to Dr Lightman for the most extensive and informative report on rest and retirement homes in Ontario. The fastest-growing segment of our population, seniors, has been subjected to housing accommodation that is far less than satisfactory for far too long.

Dr Lightman has indicated that we as a society have adopted an attitude towards our most vulnerable citizens, those with developmental disabilities, psychiatric histories and seniors of: out of sight, out of mind. The warehousing of these individuals is no longer acceptable. We must recognize their basic needs of quality of care and reasonable rates for the places they call home.

I was encouraged by Dr Lightman's suggestion that we not overregulate the physical facilities and thus create another government-funded institution. What we must do is recognize the rights of the individuals in these facilities and ensure a quality of life for them.

Please, Minister, don't let this report be a dust collector. I urge the government to act now, before one more atrocity is committed to the most vulnerable individuals.

Ms Dianne Poole (Eglinton): I too would like to commend Dr Lightman for his commission's report today. There are a number of positive things in there, including a bill of rights. However, one thing that gives me and our caucus great concern is the fact that Dr Lightman does not encourage a separate piece of legislation to cover the rest and retirement industry. For instance, their recommendation is that these rest and retirement residents would come under both the Landlord and Tenant Act and the Rent Control Act.

This brings its own set of problems because, for instance, under the Landlord and Tenant Act, a landlord is required to give 24 hours of written notice before entering the tenant's unit. This is simply not practical and in fact is dangerous in the case of the residents of rest and retirement homes because quite often they would need their medication and they would need checkups, and the operators could not do this if they are restricted by the Landlord and Tenant Act.

I urge the Minister of Housing and the minister responsible for seniors' issues to look at one piece of legislation to govern rest and retirement homes so they can be specifically addressed.

PUBLIC HOUSING

Ms Dianne Poole (Eglinton): I would like very briefly to reply to the Minister of Housing on her announcement on the public housing efforts to improve the quality of life for tenants. This announcement is very welcome, particularly the

section that says they are going to ensure tenant participation. I urge the minister and the government to take some of the money they've been pouring into the non-profit and co-op sectors and start spending it on the crumbling infrastructure of Ontario Housing Corp stock. It desperately needs it, and unless you're going to do that, the rest of it is camouflage.

CHILD CARE SERVICES

Mrs Yvonne O'Neill (Ottawa-Rideau): I'd like to respond to the announcement of the Minister of Community and Social Services on the capital announcement. As usual, this is a reannouncement. In fact, we don't even know what it's a reannouncement of because we've had 20,000 child care spaces over three years announced twice: $77 million. We've had an announcement of $10 million to replace the commercial day care centres that will close rather than convert, an announcement made as late and as long ago as last December. No one knows whether these things are totally included or they make up the total.

The other questions that are asked about this announcement: Are all these dollars going to be directed to licensed child care centres? Very many people in the community want to know that. Are they directed to formal as well as informal settings? And, the big question of the day, will the municipal partners pick up these components of the child care system? We understand maybe not. As usual, then, the announcement leaves many more questions than answers.

There are many people in this announcement. There are the elderly and disabled. May I say, I think this is a token allocation to people who have been waiting a long, long time. We have almost $100 million for child care centres and we have $7 million for community residential alternatives for two very needy groups -- the aged and the disabled. They get less than 10%.

The other groups that are mentioned are the victims of violence and those who serve in children's services and the young offenders. We all know they have real needs.

But there is a very major crack in today's announcement. This government made a great flourish when it made the jobs for youth announcement on June 5, but in today's announcement we see not one mention of youth. We see not one long-term strategy for the youth of this province. They have other needs besides jobs. The youths I'm talking about are the youths who are homeless in this province. In fact, there are 6,000 in this city at this very moment. There is not one dollar directed to a youth centre or a youth shelter, and they are really, most of them, in very makeshift settings. There are real needs here.

They are truly community based. There are many success stories and they are done in spite of this government's efforts. This government yields to the ad hockery process when it deals with youth.

PUBLIC HOUSING

Mrs Margaret Marland (Mississauga South): I'd like to respond to the Minister of Housing's statement. I indicate to the minister that I would have been happy to attend if I had been invited earlier than 4 o'clock yesterday afternoon. I couldn't change my

schedule at the last minute to attend.

In essence, this statement is based totally on the wrong premise. The very fact that in the press release the minister refers to healthier public housing communities says it all. We do not need public housing communities. We need to have assistance for people who require housing, who have the basic need for that housing, which is unaffordable and unattainable for them. To put them in segregated, concentrated communities is totally wrong. It makes those people live with a stigma. This report from the Ministry of Housing announces the problems.

It talks about vandalism, youth gangs, alcohol and drug abuse, anti-social behaviour, break and enter, child abuse, weapons. It also talks about name-calling, graffiti and physical violence.

Those are the words from the Minister of Housing. The Minister of Housing's solution is to build more of these -- more concentrated, segregated social housing.

The solution our party supports is yes, to look after the people who need help, without question, but to give them a direct shelter subsidy allowance, give them the money so they can choose where they live, that they don't have to live in a social housing complex with all these problems identified by the minister, so they can choose to live in the communities they've always lived in and can have access to the same kinds of buildings people who don't need subsidized housing need.

The way that is achieved is by treating everybody like a human being with the dignity they deserve. The dignity people who require assisted housing need is the dignity to choose where they live so they're not living in these concentrated, segregated communities with the associated problems -- problems that are clearly identified in this report.

When this minister is identifying the problems and saying that we're going to build more and more of these communities, why is she adding to the existing problem by creating more of these communities? Give the people who need help the direct shelter subsidy allowance and let them choose where they wish to live.

CHILD CARE SERVICES

Mr Cameron Jackson (Burlington South): I would like to first respond to the Minister of Community and Social Services in her continuing pursuit of putting the private day care operators out of business and displacing the children who are being served in those centres and the parents who have, at least until recently, had the free choice in this province to put their children in these centres.

First of all, any expenditure in this Legislature which creates meaningful jobs is a worthy project and worthy of support. But what is implicit in this minister's announcement today is that in spite of 250 private day care centres which have closed in the last three years, many of which are still sitting idly, all conforming to the proper zoning, all available and ready and wanting children to go in them, this minister is going to build the same facilities across the street. Now there's real good NDP management.

You are so choked up on your own ideology that you won't even allow the bricks and mortar to have a memory of the private sector as it relates to private day care centres; $100 million dollars for day care expansion when you know that there are thousands of vacant spaces sitting out there ready for you to put those children and those subsidies in.

PROTECTION OF IN-CARE RESIDENTS

Mr Cameron Jackson (Burlington South): Now I'd like to change the tone of my voice and thank Mr Lightman for his outstanding report. It's 150 recommendations. It represents a body of extensive research which will help guide all parties in this House. However, what is of concern to me, having attended the press conference this morning, is that there are no costs, no guidelines and, we can only surmise, no commitment from this government.

Bob Rae started saying in 1982 that the golden years of seniors are in jeopardy unless we move quickly to give them a bill of rights, until vulnerable adults are given a bill of rights. He reiterated it in 1986 and in 1989, yet the minister came to a press conference today and said: "I have to read the report. We need time to study it."

The truth is that what this government will move on quickly is putting all these regulated homes under rent control. I have news for you. The death of Joseph Kendall could not have been avoided by putting these facilities under rent control, yet we're going to put them now under the Landlord and Tenant Act.

Dr Lightman says we should have a system to fast-track evictions of these residents because they could be causing disturbances with other tenants. They could be causing disturbances because we are housing an increased number of psychiatric patients who are being moved out of institutions and placed in communities without any planning on the part of this government to ensure that they have housing. These people cannot move into the rhetoric of a government; they need accommodation.

Nowhere in this report does it deal with and nowhere has the government confirmed its commitment to an abuse registry so that these seniors and other vulnerable adults can be moved out of these residences and put into emergency shelter. Nowhere is there a reference to those emergency shelters and a commitment to really ensuring the safety of the Joseph Kendalls of this province.

RESIGNATION OF COMMITTEE MEMBER

Mr Gregory S. Sorbara (York Centre): Today I submit my resignation from membership on the standing committee on public accounts and on the standing committee on estimates.

By way of explanation, there were numerous reports in the media yesterday to the effect that the three parties had reached agreement on new rules for this House. That statement is patently incorrect. What has happened is that there has been what I believe to be a rather humiliating surrender to the government. The only justification for that surrender I can submit to you, sir, is that when the power of the state has a gun at your head, it is a rather imposing experience.

If I just might, I am all the more saddened by this time in the House because these new rules are being brought forward by a party that has participated, over the past 30 years in this House, with eminent politicians like Dalton Camp, Farquhar Oliver, Jim Renwick, Elie Martel, Bob Nixon and Mike Breaugh to create a more independent and a more relevant Legislature. The current government is determined, in its new Ontario, to have all the power to itself. I simply say that the people of Ontario should take the appropriate caution.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): To the member for York Centre, he may note that for any member who wishes to resign from any particular committee, it's not necessary for that member to announce that resignation in the House. However, I do appreciate the fact that he has informed the House and understand the concerns that he has expressed very clearly.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. The member for Prescott and Russell has the floor. The very patient member for Prescott and Russell is waiting for an opportunity to gain the floor. I would be pleased to recognize him if his colleagues would allow me to do so.

Mr Jean Poirier (Prescott and Russell): Mr Speaker, may I seek unanimous consent to talk about Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day?

The Speaker: Do we have unanimous agreement? Agreed.

SAINT-JEAN-BAPTISTE DAY / FÊTE DE LA SAINT JEAN-BAPTISTE

M. Jean Poirier (Prescott et Russell) : Comme vous le savez, aujourd'hui, le 24 juin, c'est la journée de la Saint Jean-Baptiste, et contrairement à certaines des rumeurs, ce n'est pas seulement la journée des Québécois et des Québécoises mais c'est également leur fête.

À

titre de Franco-Ontarien j'ai un souhait à faire tout haut.

Merci, Monsieur le Président.

M. Noble Villeneuve (S-D-G & Grenville-Est) : I want to address the same subject as my colleague the member for Prescott and Russell. As one whose ancestors have been here since 1666, I certainly reinforce the sayings of my colleague.

C'est le 24 juin, la Saint Jean-Baptiste.

Au nom de mon parti, je souhaite à tous nos francophones canadiens, qu'ils demeurent au Yukon, au Nouveau Brunswick, en Colombie-Britannique, ici en Ontario ou n'importe où dans notre beau pays, bonne fête à l'occasion de la Saint-Jean.

Qu'est-ce que l'avenir réserve pour la francophonie canadienne? J'ai l'espoir que la dualité linguistique continuera d'être une caractéristique du Canada. Nous devons évoluer pour demeurer compétitifs dans un marché mondial. Les Canadiens doivent faire l'effort pour conserver et même renforcer la dualité linguistique. Sinon, nous aurons perdu un de nos atouts tout particuliers à nous ici, les Canadiens.

En plus, le Canada continue à poursuivre une richesse multiculturelle et une diversité d'héritage. C'est ce qui nous donne tout spécialement une identité culturelle, sans compter nos trois groupes d'origine dont nos autochtones, nos francophones et nos anglophones. Je crois que c'est ce qui nous unit en tant que Canadiens.

Bon anniversaire et bonne Saint Jean-Baptiste à tous et chacun.

Cette année c'est doublement important, puisque nous commémorons et célébrons aussi le 125e anniversaire du Canada. Aujourd'hui, ce 24 juin 1992, les célébrations auront lieu partout au Canada, mais plus particulièrement en Ontario, à Ottawa, notre capitale, cette ville superbe où on attend comme à tous les ans plus de 500,000 participants venus non seulement de l'Ontario, mais de partout au Canada, et de quelques états des États-Unis aussi, pour nous aider dans la collectivité à célébrer ce jour mémorable.

Ici à Toronto, au forum de la Place Ontario, vous pourrez assister ce soir à une représentation donnée par six artistes franco-ontariens, un spectacle formidable, Monsieur le Président. On vous invite à y participer, ainsi qu'à Sudbury, à Hearst, à Kingston, à London -- des défilés, des soirées, des feux de joie ont été organisés partout en province.

Je vous rappelle aussi que notre gouvernement s'est engagé non seulement à reconnaître cette réalité de nos 543,000 Franco-Ontariens, mais aussi à vous assurer que dans l'avenir, les services qui ont été acquis vont continuer de l'être. On remonte la pente. En ce jour de la Saint-Jean, nous en sommes fort reconnaissants.

My friends, Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day is indeed a special occasion not only for francophones but for everyone to celebrate. I wish to echo the sentiments of my friends Mr Villeneuve, Mr Poirier and others as well. We have so much to be thankful for. I only wish that sometimes we would stop and look at ourselves the way other people look at us. I am the luckiest person in the world, but it was easy, for I was born in Canada.

Bonne Saint Jean-Baptiste.

Hon Bob Rae (Premier and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I wonder if I could ask the indulgence of the House to add a couple of words, given the significance of this day in our sister province of Quebec and of the situation in which we now find ourselves.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): Agreed.

Hon Mr Rae: If that's agreeable to the House, Mr Speaker, I promise I will be very short.

In addition to celebrating a day which is of great importance to the 500,000 francophones who live in our province and who have made such an enormous contribution to our life as a community for literally hundreds of years, I think it is worth perhaps recalling on this day, which is a day of great emotion and significance in our sister province of Quebec, that we say directly to the people of Quebec we want to build a Canada with you.

Our whole understanding of Canada must include Quebec, it does include Quebec and we celebrate Quebec's life in the country as a very positive part of our national life and certainly as a very important part of our definition and understanding of Canada. We are going to be doing everything we can to create a process of constitutional reform which will allow us to have one country and which will allow the country to remain united. Ontario remains very deeply committed to that policy and that practice of inclusion and of building a partnership with all of our sister provinces, including the province of Quebec.

Monsieur le Président, je veux dire tout simplement, non seulement à nos concitoyens francophones de la province d'Ontario, une communauté d'un demi-million de personnes qui a contribué beaucoup à la vie publique, à la vie nationale et à la vie provinciale, mais aussi à nos concitoyens dans la province du Québec, en cette journée si importante et historique et émotionnelle pour tous les Québécois, que nous ici en Ontario, dans la province-soeur et fraternelle de la province du Québec, voulons toujours créer un Canada uni. Nous allons travailler pour renforcer les valeurs canadiennes que nous partageons.

Surtout en ces mois, en ces jours et en ces semaines si importantes, nous allons travailler de concert comme Ontariens et comme Canadiens avec le gouvernement et avec la population québécoise pour créer un Canada plus fort et plus uni. Merci beaucoup, Monsieur le Président.

Mr Cameron Jackson (Burlington South): Mr Speaker, might I have unanimous consent to briefly say some words on behalf of the life of Paul Michael Semple?

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): Agreed? Agreed.

PAUL SEMPLE

Mr Cameron Jackson (Burlington South): I rise on behalf of all members in the House today to commemorate a hero. Paul Michael Semple, a Ryerson photography student with a promising career, had everything to live for. On Monday of this week, Paul joined his friends in responding to a call for help in the streets of Toronto. As he rushed in the direction of the screams he heard, he saw a woman who had been assaulted and struck over the head by a gang of four youths. Paul immediately hurried to her assistance and in the ensuing struggle was fatally stabbed. Paul was pronounced dead upon arrival at Toronto Western Hospital.

According to his friends, Paul was a good-natured student. "The kind of guy who wore his heart on his sleeve," is what the Toronto Sun said this morning. He was extremely compassionate. Paul's death was senseless, but today we honour Paul as Toronto's great hero who made the supreme sacrifice of his life in the act of aiding an assaulted woman and her child. On behalf of all members of this House I extend our sincerest condolences to Paul's family and friends. Those wishing to do so may make a donation to the Paul Semple memorial fund at the office of development and alumnae at Ryerson Polytechnical Institute, 350 Victoria Street, Toronto.

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): I'd like to join with the member for Burlington in paying tribute to Paul Semple for this act of courage which I think every member of this House commemorates today as we speak of this unfortunate incident.

We ask very often that people in our society not simply allow incidents of this kind to pass, not simply look the other way. There is a parable in the Bible that talks about those who would walk on the other side of the road and ignore someone in trouble. We have an example of a person this week who has in fact ended up giving his own life to defend others, a person who was prepared to get involved in assisting another.

There are people in our society who are particularly vulnerable to assault. Unfortunately that group of people is a growing segment of the population: those who are now subject to this kind of assault. But this gentleman obviously saw people who were in some trouble. He could have turned the other way. He could have sought help in a different way, and perhaps it would have been too late in that instance. But he decided to take it upon himself to intervene where many would be tempted to turn the other way. Unfortunately, in this case he has paid with his life.

Those who have perpetrated this crime no doubt will be sought by the police and hopefully brought to justice. But what is important in our society, I believe from this instance, is that it will send perhaps the wrong signal. It'll send a signal out there that if people are prepared to become involved in an incident of this kind, if they are prepared to go to the aid of a fellow woman or man or child, they could be placing themselves in a position of vulnerability, even a position where death might be near.

It is our hope that people don't draw that conclusion from this instance, and the best we can do, I suppose, because there is anger in many of us -- I certainly have personal anger at seeing this circumstance coming about here in Ontario and our country, anywhere in the world -- but also there is a feeling of loss of an individual who cared so much about others.

I watched, as I'm sure all members of the Legislature did who were able to watch a newscast, the people who knew this gentleman, who had worked with him, who had had him as a student and spoke very highly of the fact that this person did care about others. Certainly I'm sure the sympathy of everyone in this Legislature and the appreciation of everyone in this Legislature goes out to him and his family.

Hon Elaine Ziemba (Minister of Citizenship and Minister Responsible for Human Rights, Disability Issues, Seniors' Issues and Race Relations): I too would like to rise, on behalf of the government, to express our condolences to the family and to his friends. Although I had not met this young man personally, he did live in my riding of High Park-Swansea.

I think what we should be reminding ourselves is that there are individuals in our society who are willing to go out -- risk their lives -- to assist and to help other individuals. He went out in the middle of the night when he heard the screams of a woman, and he wanted to come to her assistance. We often forget that people will be good neighbours, will try to assist and will try to help. Instead, we always hear about the individuals who do wrong.

This young man, as my colleagues have stated, was a person who had high potential, who would have made a very good adult in finishing his career. We are all very deeply shocked and deeply regret the loss of this needless death, and we certainly wish things in our society were not so that they would bring about an incident of such.

However, we must remember that people must continue to try to be good neighbours, try to be good citizens, and I think this individual shows all of us that we must continue to strive for those goals.

I wish the family well and I know all of my colleagues on this side of the House extend our condolences to his family and to his friends and to all of his colleagues. I hope we can reflect on this incident to make sure that we can continue to strive to make a society that would not require such a needless death.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): The kind and thoughtful remarks by the member for Burlington South, the member for St Catharines and the member for High Park-Swansea will be forwarded to the family of Mr Paul Semple.

ORAL QUESTIONS

AIR QUALITY

Mrs Lyn McLeod (Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the Premier. The Premier might be interested in knowing, before I place my question, since we have been pressing him to answer a number of questions on the environment, that this particular question in fact was intended for the Minister of the Environment and in her absence I shall have to direct it to the Premier.

The Premier I'm sure is well aware that it has been almost two full years since the clean air program was initiated. The aim of this program was to revise the outdated regulation 308 of the Environmental Protection Act of this province dealing with air pollution. This particular program was the result of an extensive government and public review that dated back to 1985.

According to the economic analyses that were undertaken on the proposals, benefits would emerge not only for the environment but for the economy, and the proposals and the new regulations would remove uncertainty from those planning in the industrial sector and would provide for growth in the environmental protection industry of the province.

There was a six-month consultation proposed on the draft regulations. That six-month period expired a full year and a half ago. We have seen nothing of the draft regulations since then, and I would ask the Premier if he can tell us what the status of this particular draft proposal is. Where does it stand now?

Hon Bob Rae (Premier and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I can only tell the honourable member that, as far as I'm aware, this matter is still being reviewed by the minister. The minister has been very much engaged on a number of fronts. The clean air front is certainly one of them, and I'm sure she will be coming forward with proposals for cabinet discussion and for public discussion, but that's as much as I can tell the honourable member about where matters now stand.

Mrs McLeod: When the Premier uses words like "considering" and "discussing" it raises our continuing concern about a lot of words and no action at all.

I was perhaps particularly concerned with an announcement that was made by the Minister of the Environment and the Attorney General of the province a little bit earlier this month when that announcement focused solely on reporting the number of convicted environmental offenders in Ontario for 1991. It seems to me that while the Minister of the Environment has occupied her time establishing a brand-new reporting service on environmental polluters, she has simply failed to take any positive and proactive steps to work with industry to actually achieve sound environmental management.

I would ask the Premier why this government fails to actually follow through on work that had already been done, specifically on the clean air program. Why has it taken a year and a half for us to see any result at all? Why is there no action contemplated? Is there any kind of alternative program, or is there simply no action at all?

Hon Mr Rae: Perhaps the member is now discovering why I refer many of these questions to the Minister of the Environment. But I would say to the honourable member that when she says no action is being contemplated, I think she reads too much into my first answer.

What I said was that this was an area which the minister is still obviously very actively reviewing within her ministry. To the best of my recollection there's been no recent cabinet discussion on this question, though I can assure her that there has been very active cabinet discussion on a number of other environmental issues which the minister has been very actively engaged in promoting and on which I think that quite soon we are going to be able to report some very considerable progress.

Mrs McLeod: I think on this issue, as on other environmental issues that we've been directing towards the Premier in the past weeks, he would prefer to have the questions referred to the Minister of the Environment so that he does not have to explain the complete lack of action of his government or in fact the complete retreat from environmental promises which his government, under his leadership, has made in the past. This is yet another of those issues in which the record of promises has been broken completely.

I would refer to what now seems to be a totally discarded Agenda for People, but I'll refer to it anyway, in which the NDP said it would overhaul the air pollution laws. Then in the June 19, 1990, document, also apparently discarded, Greening the Party, Greening the Province, there was a promise to speed up air pollution regulations by completing current programs more expeditiously than is planned.

Now, two full years later, on a program that was already essentially in place, the only action this government has taken on the issue of air pollution has been the announcement asking the federal government to ban a list of 21 toxic chemicals, many of which are currently not used, some of which were banned already by the previous government or are within the jurisdiction of the province to unilaterally ban itself.

The indecisiveness and the inaction of the Minister of the Environment and this government on these environmental issues are having dramatic impacts on both the environment and the economy of this province, and I would ask when this Premier, this minister, this government are going to stop talking about what they plan to do while they retreat from all their past commitments. Specifically, when is this government going to begin to take some positive and some proactive steps to protect the air quality of this province?

Hon Mr Rae: The answer to that is: Soon. But I would say to the honourable member that I think much of her rhetoric is a little excessive, given the record of the minister, given what she has done and given the clear commitments that have been made. I think we saw yesterday with respect to a number of issues that the criticism of the minister that I've heard is that she's taken action and it's action with which some people disagree. I don't think this minister could ever be accused of inaction. This is a minister who has acted.

She has taken tough decisions that were left on the back burner by previous governments for years on end. She's acted well, she's acted effectively, and I'm proud to have her as our Minister of the Environment.

Mrs McLeod: The only rhetoric on environmental issues is in the continued non-answers of this government, whether through the Premier or the minister.

TRANSFER PAYMENTS TO MUNICIPALITIES

Mrs Lyn McLeod (Leader of the Opposition): I would turn now to the smoke and mirrors of the budget and another set of critical issues. The budget was delivered a full two months ago, but still hundreds of thousands of people in this province remain unemployed. Hundreds of economic renewal projects, many of them related to municipal infrastructure, particularly municipal sewer and water infrastructure, remain mired in a bureaucratic maze and millions of dollars for economic renewal remain unallocated.

On Monday, fully four months late, the Minister of the Environment finally announced that just 30 municipalities would receive money this year for sewer and water capital projects. At least twice that many are actually ready to put shovels in the ground on these projects. Across Ontario, communities like Moose Creek and the town of Roxborough are ready with important developments, but they stagnate because this government's budget for municipal water and sewer projects has either been chopped or is simply being dribbled out a little bit at a time.

Can the Premier explain why his government is helping just 30 municipalities with these extremely important sewer and water capital infrastructure projects? Is it because this is indeed all the money there is for these capital projects, or is it because his government just can't get organized to get the projects approved?

Hon Bob Rae (Premier and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I find it ironic that the member would choose a week in which we announced several environmental projects across the province, in which we've announced tens of millions of dollars of public expenditure to proceed this year to say there are more projects we could have funded. By definition, there will always be more projects to fund than there is money. That's a reality which the member, when she was a minister, knew full well, though the economic circumstances when she was in office were completely different from the circumstances in which we find ourselves.

Our capital budget is large; our capital budget is substantial. It's the highest in Canada in terms of all the provincial governments. It's a very substantial budget in terms of where we're at. I can tell the honourable member that we are doing whatever we can to respond to municipal needs as effectively as we can.

It's very easy -- and Lord knows, we all know how easy it is -- to stand up and say: "Just spend more money. Here's a project that wants approval. There's another one over there." We have approved dozens of projects, funds are going across the province and the member knows full well that the major criticism we received from her group last year was that we were spending too much, not that we were spending too little.

Mrs McLeod: My questions are very specifically related to the announcements this government is making. That's why I've chosen this time. The purpose of these questions is to expose some of the smoke and mirrors of the budget announcements that are being made. I would remind the Premier of a budget that trumpeted all the job creation that his Jobs Ontario Capital funds and Jobs Ontario Training funds were going to bring about. We are questioning the priorities and the management of this government to actually be able to do more than just announce and reannounce the same programs over and over again. We want to see where the real job creation is. We want to see where the priorities are.

In my supplementary, I take the Premier to another announcement that has just been made within the hour. That was the announcement of the Minister of Community and Social Services of $110 million in capital for child care spaces -- undoubtedly needed child care spaces -- but the minister has only actually announced one specific project. She speaks of future announcements that are going to be made and the partnerships with communities that are going to make these projects possible.

We keep hearing over and over again that this particular partnership has already broken down, that municipalities cannot afford to support even their existing child care spaces. I remind the Premier that these are the same hard-pressed municipalities that can't afford to carry out those capital infrastructure projects their communities need. In many communities that reality is causing child care to pay a price.

I would ask the Premier what assurance he can give us that municipalities will in fact be willing partners in these new projects, or is this last capital fund announcement just more smoke and mirrors?

Hon Mr Rae: In response to the Leader of the Opposition, I can say to her that we understand the fiscal position of the municipalities. In many cases their position is as difficult as ours, though I must say in many instances, if we look at their overall borrowing ability, many of them are doing better than the province in relative terms. That happens to be a financial reality.

The member is ignoring the fact that the province announced in the last budget the creation of 20,000 new subsidized child care spaces. Those subsidized spaces will be fully funded by the provincial government.

Mrs McLeod: I was not ignoring that fact at all. I was taking the Premier back to the reality of the pressures that municipalities are facing with existing child care spaces.

Let me try one more focus on the government's budget, which is now, as of next week, at the end of its first quarter. One of the other major job-creation projects announced in that budget was the Jobs Ontario Capital and Training funds. This was the fund in which the government was to set aside $176 million to train people currently unemployed. So far the only announcement has been this week's announcement of 271 jobs in Guelph. The problem we know this government is finding is that the agencies that are to do the training simply can't participate in the program.

To do the training, they first have to commit to finding jobs for the people they will train. Because of the desperate situation every community across this province is facing economically, there are simply no jobs for those people.

I would ask the Premier what assurance he can give us that there are going to be anywhere near the 10,000 jobs that were promised to be created through the Jobs Ontario Training program. We ask over and over again, where are we going to find the jobs created that are needed for people today?

Mr Ian G. Scott (St George-St David): That's 9,700 to go.

Hon Mr Rae: The member for St George-St David, whose contributions to the debate are always worth listening to, says we have --

Mr Scott: Well, why don't you answer the question?

Hon Mr Rae: Perhaps you'll just permit me to answer. He says we have 9,700 to go. I would say to him that we know we have many more announcements with respect to the Jobs Ontario Training fund, and we know full well that there are a lot of people out there who are willing partners and who want to be partners with us in the training initiatives. We saw that in the youth announcements which I made in cooperation with the chairman of the Bank of Montreal, Mr Matthew Barrett. He was there with us with respect to the youth employment announcement. We've had more buy-in and more participation from the private sector than ever before.

The honourable member has also failed to mention the 1,000 pre-employment spaces we've created, and the extensions we're doing of apprenticeship programs and the kind of money we're putting into those programs. I would only say to the honourable member that we are determined to move ahead on all these fronts, on the Jobs Ontario funds: the jobs training fund and the jobs youth fund. We're moving in each of these directions, and we're moving substantially with the assistance and participation of the private sector, of voluntary groups, of non-profit groups and everyone else and it's going very well.

It's not going as well as the Liberal Party would like, but in our view it's going as well as possible, given the very tough circumstances we inherited from that same Liberal Party which was in government during the fat years.

RACE RELATIONS

Mr Michael D. Harris (Nipissing): My question is to the Premier and regards what has been viewed as a most inflammatory comment made at the NDP convention by the member for St Andrew-St Patrick. When asked about identifying blacks for a youth employment program, she responded by saying, "No one seems to have a problem identifying us when they want to shoot us." Premier, do you condone Ms Akande's comments?

Hon Bob Rae (Premier and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I can only say that the member for St Andrew-St Patrick -- and I don't know all the context of the remarks she made -- is somebody who's serving the province extremely well. She's worked very hard on the youth employment program and has worked very effectively on that plan. She's somebody who I think is well known for being outspoken and very direct. I would say that in terms of the contribution the honourable member for St Andrew-St Patrick has made to this province and to the whole question of improving the condition of people of all backgrounds and races in this province, Ms Akande has my support.

Mr Harris: Premier, yesterday I asked the Solicitor General about Ms Akande's statement, because the Metropolitan Toronto Police Association had condemned her remarks as grossly irresponsible.

The Solicitor General, the top cop in the province, in spite of the fact that the Metropolitan Toronto Police Association had issued a press release earlier, said he was not aware of the comments that were made or of their context. I find that, in and of itself, shocking.

Premier, would you not agree that if you're truly serious about improving race relations -- and I believe you are -- that Ms Akande should apologize to the police in this province?

Hon Mr Rae: It's my sense --

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): Order, the member for York Centre.

Hon Mr Rae: It's my sense, from everything I've seen, that when you look at the overall context of the comment, I would say to the honourable member that there was no mention by Ms Akande of the police in any way, no mention of the police at all.

Mr Harris: Mr Premier, it is in view of the overall context of what's happening and of the role you've assigned her that makes it so important.

When you announced your task force on racism, Ms Akande shared the stage with you. Her role as parliamentary assistant was to address the problems of racism in our province.

Premier, far from helping the situation, Ms Akande's remarks have only fuelled the fires, and in my view and in the view of most Ontarians and anybody I have talked to, she only has two options: She can admit that she made a mistake and apologize, or if she stands behind these inflammatory, derisive remarks and is not prepared to withdraw them, she should admit that she is not the appropriate person to act on behalf of the Premier in the task you have given her, and she should resign. Premier, if she's not going to apologize, will you ask her to resign?

Hon Mr Rae: If you look at the contribution the member for St Andrew-St Patrick has made with regard to the youth employment effort and the work she's done in that area, I think it's important to reflect on that when you think about the contribution she's made.

Mr Ian G. Scott (St George-St David): This is what you said about Shelley Martel. Get real.

Mr Robert W. Runciman (Leeds-Grenville): If you can accept a liar in your cabinet, I guess you can accept that.

The Speaker: Order.

Mr Harris: There are a lot of people in this province, Premier, who really don't understand at all what's going on.

The Speaker: Would the leader of the third party resume his seat, please. The member for Leeds-Grenville, what was heard was an unparliamentary remark. It is not helpful and it's certainly not parliamentary language to say in the House that another member is a liar. I would ask the member to withdraw the remark.

Mr Runciman: Mr Speaker, even though it's accurate, following your advice, I will withdraw it.

RETAIL STORE HOURS

Mr Michael D. Harris (Nipissing): My second question is to the Attorney General. Mr Attorney General, you have given, and directed your office to give, local merchant Paul Magder an ultimatum: either pay $1 million in fines before his appeal is heard or close on Sunday while the rest of the province is free to open. Can you explain to me, Mr Attorney General, why officials from your office are insisting that Mr Magder's be the only store in the whole province that must close on Sunday before you will drop that request for the $1 million in fines before his appeal is finally finalized?

Hon Howard Hampton (Attorney General): In view of the fact that this issue is currently before the court, I am reluctant to comment on it. But I will say this: There are a number of issues, including a contempt issue, which are currently before the court. The court will deal with that contempt issue as it feels appropriate. It would be most inappropriate for me to express an opinion on that issue at this point in time. I think the leader of the third party knows that.

Mr Harris: Surely you would agree with me -- and nobody's disputing the fact that Mr Magder apparently broke the law, however ridiculous and unfair that law was for him and his business and in his circumstances -- that he is legally entitled to ask for an appeal, which is what he is doing. I suggest to you that you have unfairly prejudged his case by demanding he pay $1 million in fines before the Supreme Court has finally passed judgement on this whole affair.

Attorney General, you have admitted, I think, that your government and the old Sunday closing law were unfair. What I don't understand is why you have directed your officials to insist, as a condition of dropping the demand for the payment of the fines, that Mr Magder do something you've told everybody else in the province they don't have to do; that is, close on Sunday.

Hon Mr Hampton: I can confirm that apparently there is something near $1 million in unpaid fines. That is the subject of a contempt hearing before the senior courts in Ontario. The court has been conducting hearings into that matter. I can confirm that is part of the matter before the court at this time and I feel it would be appropriate to let the courts of Ontario handle this issue.

Mr Harris: Yesterday, Mr Attorney General, you dropped Sunday opening charges against music store owner Marty Herzog. Yet you continue to harass Mr Magder, who has long been a thorn in the side of the Ontario government, for a period when three different parties have been in power. Given that insisting on bankrupting Paul Magder appears to most in this province to be nothing other than petty revenge, would you not agree that today you drop your silly condition of telling Mr Magder he cannot open his store on Sunday when everybody else can as a condition of not having to pay the $1 million in fines?

Hon Mr Hampton: I expect that at some time in the near future courts in Ontario will have an opportunity to rule on this matter. I believe it should be left in the courts' hands at this time.

RACE RELATIONS

Mr Sean G. Conway (Renfrew North): My question is to the Premier. Can the Premier help me and the people of Ontario understand what his parliamentary assistant, Ms Akande, intended when she said in Hamilton last weekend that no one seems to have a problem identifying the black community "when they want to shoot us"?

Hon Bob Rae (Premier and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I wasn't there when the remarks were made. I'm not aware of the question that was asked or the context of the answer. All I can say is that in everything Ms Akande, the member for St Andrew-St Patrick, has done -- if you reflect on the words of the Lewis report, it talked about the fear and concern that's present in the black community, and I think that's the context in which perhaps her words should be understood.

Mr Conway: It is because I have the Premier's parliamentary assistant's words before my very eyes that I re-ask the question. Can the Premier help me and the people of Ontario understand what his parliamentary assistant meant or intended when she said last weekend in Hamilton that "No one seems to have a problem in identifying us" -- namely the black community -- "when they want to shoot us"?

Hon Mr Rae: I don't think I can add further to the first answer I gave the honourable member.

LABOUR LEGISLATION

Mr Noble Villeneuve (S-D-G & East Grenville): The Minister of Labour is now in possession of a report from the task force on agriculture-labour relations. The task force represented both producers and workers in the agricultural industry, and it told you that agricultural labour relations had to come under a separate act, that agriculture was very much different from most other sectors. After meeting with the agricultural groups, why is it still your ministry's position that you want to keep all your options open and especially the option of regulating agriculture under the Ontario Labour Relations Act?

Hon Bob Mackenzie (Minister of Labour): The member should know that the report will be available to all members of the House I think probably either Friday or Monday, and it seems to me that he might wait to see what recommendations we actually make as a result of the report.

Mr Villeneuve: Mr Minister, you have to realize that it's your responsibility to the people out in Ontario's rural community and not to Ontario's labour leaders such as Bob White and other very special interest groups that your government seems to cater to quite a lot. Farmers don't need the added insecurity of Bill 40 hanging over their heads during a growing season.

What they need is assurance from the Minister of Labour that all references to agriculture will be removed from your present Bill 40 and that the right to organize will be recognized in a separate agriculture-labour relations act, along with the prohibition of lockouts and strikes. Would you not today, Mr Minister, assure our rural community that there will be special legislation and Bill 40 will have nothing to do with agriculture?

Hon Mr Mackenzie: I have a strong feeling that most of the rural community already has some assurance that they've had a good hearing and that their thoughts and views and recommendations have been listened to by this government.

LABOUR FORCE DEVELOPMENT BOARDS

Mr Pat Hayes (Essex-Kent): My question is to the Minister of Colleges and Universities regarding the geographic boundaries of the local labour force development board in Essex and Kent counties. According to the report, the city of Windsor, Essex county, Kent county, Chatham and southern Lambton will comprise one local board. Kent county council and Chatham city council are concerned about the potential inequities this could cause for Kent-Lambton area residents, especially considering the greater number and diversity of the industries in Essex and Windsor.

There is also some fear that the needs of Kent and southern Lambton would be dwarfed because of the greater number of apprentice training positions available in Essex county and Windsor.

As representatives of both Essex and Kent counties, along with my colleague Mr Hope, the member for Chatham-Kent, we do see some of the merits in these points. So I ask the minister, could the county of Kent, the city of Chatham and the southern Lambton area be grouped together to form a separate local labour force development board?

Hon Richard Allen (Minister of Colleges and Universities and Minister of Skills Development): First of all, I should say that the local board consultation that was held by two separate travelling panels ended its work at the end of May, has been working on its report back to the ministry and will be completing that report very soon. That report will then go before the first Ontario Training and Adjustment Board structure for consideration later this summer or in September. But in the first instance --

Mr Gerry Phillips (Scarborough-Agincourt): Where is the legislation?

Hon Mr Allen: That's coming in due time. It's all on course; it's all on track. The question he asks, however, pertaining to Kent county, which I must say the member for Chatham-Kent has brought before me on many occasions, does raise the question of the number of boards and their boundaries.

We have indicated very clearly throughout the consultation that it's going to be very difficult to move beyond the number of 22 boards we have, that it will not be easy to reduce the scale and size of given boards, and that with regard to the concerns that individual regions have, we will work out balanced labour market policies that will address all of the different components in each labour market area, regardless of its size or strength vis-à-vis other groups and components.

Mr Hayes: I must say to the minister that I'm not totally pleased about the answer, but if an additional board isn't possible, is the minister flexible enough to consider changing the geographic boundaries within which the board operates?

Hon Mr Allen: The question as to the boundaries is one I've answered on many occasions. These were boundaries drawn to talk to, but they're also boundaries that are not cast in stone and it is possible to look at variations of them in order to adapt to what might well be better labour market areas than the ones that are presently defined.

RACE RELATIONS

Mr Sean G. Conway (Renfrew North): I have another question for the Premier. Mr Premier, if you have nothing to say to me, the Legislature and the people of Ontario about the conduct of your parliamentary assistant in respect of her statements at Hamilton, what do you suppose that says about your leadership on a matter and issue that is one of extreme sensitivity to the people of Ontario at the present moment?

Hon Bob Rae (Premier and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I have tried to provide effective leadership on the question of relations between all the people in the province over the time that I have been Premier and before that time. It may be a leadership that the member for Renfrew North doesn't agree with or doesn't like, but I've tried to do so in terms of the appointment of the Lewis commission, in terms of the actions we've taken, in terms of the efforts we've made with respect to youth employment and other issues. When you look at the overall record of the government, or my record as leader of the government, I think you'll find that my leadership has been there very clearly.

Mr Conway: Mr Premier, your parliamentary assistant said in this province a few days ago, "No one seems to have a problem in identifying the black community when they want to shoot us." To date you have taken no action. You will not say whether you think that is inappropriate for your parliamentary assistant.

Do you not think, Mr Premier, as the leader of the government, that you have a first-order obligation, consistent with the high standards that were articulated in your November 1990 throne speech about integrity in government, to stand in your place as Premier of Ontario and say that what your parliamentary assistant said in Hamilton last weekend was inappropriate and unacceptable and that she should, as a matter of honour, on her own behalf and on behalf of her government offer an apology to the people of Ontario for those remarks?

Hon Mr Rae: I will only say to the honourable member that when I consider the overall contribution the honourable member from St Andrew-St Patrick has made, when I consider the fear and the anguish that I think she has expressed over her life and over her career, when I think of the contribution she has made, that's the record I consider in responding to the comments that were made by the honourable member.

Mr W. Donald Cousens (Markham): On Monday I had this question of the Premier. It's certainly given the Premier an opportunity to meet with the member for St Andrew-St Patrick to find out the total context of the comments she made that have alarmed many, many people. I'm concerned that it has not alarmed the Premier more, but I wonder if the Premier could make a commitment that he will meet with the member for St Andrew-St Patrick to follow this up further and come back to the House with a full report. If you're not prepared to do that, why have you not already made that short effort of talking to your parliamentary assistant to understand fully the context in which she made these statements?

Hon Mr Rae: I meet often with the member for St Andrew-St Patrick. I haven't happened to have had a conversation with her since the convention. I am sure that opportunity will arise.

Mr Cousens: Inasmuch as this is very much an issue of importance to the House and to the people of the province, would the Premier make a commitment that he would meet with the member for St Andrew-St Patrick on this particular issue and report back to the House tomorrow on his action and on his understanding of what she said and what she thought it meant and possibly corrective action on his part that could lead to what our leader has suggested, either an apology or a resignation from this member in that particular capacity.

Hon Mr Rae: I'm sure that opportunity will arise.

Mr Conway: My question is again to the Premier on this matter. I want to say, Mr Premier, that I know something of the work that's been done by the member for St Andrew-St Patrick and I appreciate her efforts on behalf of her constituents both in St Andrew-St Patrick and elsewhere. Having said that, Mr Premier, she's your parliamentary assistant. She's working within the guidelines established by your government, guidelines that expressly call for that which will increase respect for government, guidelines that call for a reduction of cynicism and guidelines that seek to curtail arrogance and the abuse of power.

Mr Premier, let me repeat. Your parliamentary assistant said at Hamilton last weekend, "No one seems to have a problem in identifying the black community when they want to shoot us." Ordinary Ontarians are wondering and are asking what was intended by those remarks made by your parliamentary assistant and dealing with the very sensitive question of race relations. Do you not think that, as a minimum, you should ask your parliamentary assistant to apologize for those remarks, having regard to your own guidelines of November 1990?

Hon Mr Rae: Mr Speaker, I would say to the honourable member that of course I will talk to the honourable member and to others about exactly what it is she said and what it is she meant. But I would say to the honourable member that one also has to consider the context of the debate in which this was said --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): Order. The honourable member for Renfrew North.

Mr Conway: Let me say that I know the Premier is a smart and honourable man. I know as well that the member for St Andrew-St Patrick is a good and decent and concerned, public-spirited individual. I accept that, and we understand generally speaking the context in which these remarks were made.

Does the Premier not understand, given the context, given that we're talking about race relations in Toronto and in Ontario in the spring and summer of 1992, that it is altogether inappropriate and completely inconsistent with the Premier's own guidelines for anyone, any of us, most especially the Premier's own parliamentary assistant, to say what the honourable member for St Andrew-St Patrick said in Hamilton last weekend? Surely the time is now, on a matter of principle, for the Premier to stand up and say: "It was wrong. It was inappropriate. On behalf of my government, I apologize." Will he now do that?

Hon Mr Rae: Before I do anything, I will certainly want to talk to the member for St Andrew-St Patrick and to others. But I would say to the honourable member, let us reflect as well on what Mr Lewis talked about in his report in terms of the fear and the anguish that exist in the black community -- if I may say so, a fear and an anguish that have been described not just by the member for St Andrew-St Patrick, but by many, many other people inside the black community and outside the black community. I think we have to be sensitive to that as well, and I see that as part of my job as Premier as well.

The Speaker: New question? The leader of the third party.

Mr Michael D. Harris (Nipissing): To the Premier: This very question was put to you two days ago by the member for Markham -- two days ago. Yesterday this question was raised in your absence by myself to the Solicitor General. Today, three days later, you are telling this House you haven't had a chance to think about it, to look at it, to talk to your parliamentary assistant.

Now, Mr Premier, the issue goes beyond your parliamentary assistant. Condoning these remarks for three days now makes them your remarks, makes them yours as the Premier on behalf of the government. Now, three days after this has been raised by the parliamentary assistant, speaking on your behalf as your parliamentary assistant, and confirmed in the media by Ms Akande that the "they" she was talking about was the police -- in case you're having difficulty with the context, Ms Akande confirmed in the media yesterday that the "they" she was referring to was the police -- will you now as Premier apologize to every police officer in Ontario?

Hon Mr Rae: I will undertake to do what I said I would do in response to other questions that have been asked on this. I will obviously discuss the context of the remark and what it is that Ms Akande said, and then I will report back to the House.

Mr Harris: Mr Premier, this was the answer we got on Monday. Now two more days have gone by with absolutely no action, with no comment from your parliamentary assistant, with no comment from the Solicitor General, the top cop, who says he didn't even know about the remarks even though the police association issued its press release earlier. We find that hard to believe. Now today, Mr Premier, you say you'll look at it.

Would you not agree with me, Premier, that your government's, yours, your parliamentary assistant's and the Solicitor General's silence on this matter is in fact condoning the comments and condoning the statements? Would you not agree that no one is going to be perceived as able to bring parties together and no one is going to be perceived as being able to provide a sound and reasonable voice if not only are they not part of the solution but indeed their rhetoric is part of the problem?

Will you deal with that, Mr Premier, in issuing your apology now, the apology of the Solicitor General for suggesting to us yesterday he'd never heard of it and the apology or the resignation of the parliamentary assistant?

Hon Mr Rae: I will do what I undertook to do in answer to previous questions.

PROPOSED HIGHWAY

Mr Jim Wiseman (Durham West): I have a question for the Minister of Transportation.

Interjections.

Hon Gilles Pouliot (Minister of Transportation): I'm trying to hear the question.

Mr Ian G. Scott (St George-St David): He wants a road to his dump. That's what he wants.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): Order. Would the member take his seat. The member for Durham West.

Mr Wiseman: I have to chuckle because for the first time in a long time the member for St George-St David has actually come very close to the question. It has to do with a road. It has to do with the building of Highway 407 and its relationship to M6, which is a landfill site on the boundary of Pickering and Markham.

It seems that the Interim Waste Authority has sought to locate a landfill site on what can only be referred to as the preferred site for the 407. I would like to ask the Minister of Transportation what communications the Ministry of Transportation has had with the IWA with respect to this road.

As well, it should also be known that the 407 is planned to go through the middle of one of the sites north of Whitevale. I would also like the minister to respond to that in context as well.

Hon Mr Pouliot: Terribly complex indeed, but most insightful. The member for Durham West follows this important dossier really on a daily basis. Yes, the Ministry of Transportation, in its relationship with interim waste management, recognized the possibility for overlap.

The Interim Waste Authority is an arm's-length agency presently conducting a six-stage study. What we want to make sure of here is that there is no overlapping and that the environmental concerns are well taken into consideration each and every step of the way, and yet allow Transportation to proceed with this important project.

Mr Wiseman: A few weeks ago I rose in this House to talk about what I branded the Liberal road -- it started nowhere, went nowhere, had no direction -- the Taunton-Steeles connection. Not only is it a Liberal road that has no direction -- no end and no direction -- it seems that in order to give it some kind of meaning they were going to connect the Taunton-Steeles connection with Whites Road and the building of Whites Road would be right through the middle of another landfill site to the south of Whitevale. I'd also like to have the minister's comments on that, given that there is an environmental assessment completed on that road.

Hon Mr Pouliot: The member for Durham West is right on. There has to be a beginning, a middle and an end to each project. Taxpayers in the province of Ontario cannot be asked to be patient endlessly. They want to see a shovel in the ground. We're almost there. The site selection -- there are two sites here -- will take place by 1993. It will allow the important link of Durham West with Metropolitan Toronto. I find the question very insightful. Stick with us, we're almost there. You will see shovels in the ground, real work being done under this administration.

RACE RELATIONS

Mr Sean G. Conway (Renfrew North): I have a question for the Premier: Some 20 months ago in your first speech from the throne you, in very eloquent phrases, reminded the province that your government's first challenge was to earn the trust and the respect of the people of Ontario, that your government's integrity would be measured by the way this government is run and your relations with the people you serve. "Our task is to guard against institutional arrogance and the abuse of power wherever they exist."

You went on, I thought quite helpfully, to observe that when the Rae government makes mistakes, it will admit them. Mr Premier, I understand the difficulty and the delicacy of this situation, but how --

Hon Evelyn Gigantes (Minister of Housing): You are really so sensitive.

Mr Conway: I'm being very, very honest with my friends opposite. To have a parliamentary assistant to the Premier say what Ms Akande said for whatever reason, under whatever pressure in Hamilton last weekend is, I submit, a clear breach of the Premier's own self-described standard of conduct that's contained and outlined in that speech from the throne.

Does the Premier not agree that the time is now to admit that his parliamentary assistant made a mistake and that he is prepared to give the public an explanation and an apology for that mistake?

Hon Bob Rae (Premier and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I listened very carefully to the member's question. I would only say to him, I'm not sure what I can add to what I've said before. That is to say that obviously we all are aware of the fact that the things that people say can have a different impact on different people and can be taken in different ways by different people. We also understand the importance of that in what it is that people say.

I also think one also has to have some appreciation, as I've said before, of the words that are contained in the Lewis report and elsewhere of the sense of very, very deep concern that exists in the black community and elsewhere which has been expressed by a great many people with respect to their situations. I would say to the honourable member that obviously we'll all reflect on what's happened. I'll reflect on what's happened. No one in this House has a monopoly on any particular set of issues or set of concerns. I certainly have come to understand and learn that.

I would say to the honourable member that obviously I will listen and reflect on what he's had to say and what others have had to say. That's exactly what I now intend to do.

Mr Conway: We're not talking about any person on the street who might have had an opinion on these subjects; we are talking about the parliamentary assistant to the Premier of Ontario who said these words -- let me say again -- "No one seems to have a problem in identifying the black community in this province when they want to shoot us." That wasn't an ordinary, regular person on the street; that was the Premier's parliamentary assistant. He doesn't seem to understand that there is a difference.

His own standards of conduct, so eloquently offered here some months ago, recognize that and give to the Premier a leadership responsibility in enforcing that conduct for ministers and parliamentary assistants.

Will the Premier give me the assurance that tomorrow, in this House, he will stand and make a statement to the assembly and to the people outside this chamber as to what was intended when the parliamentary assistant to the Premier made those comments and what, if anything, the Premier of Ontario is going to do about it?

Hon Mr Rae: I will obviously take into account what the honourable member has had to say. An issue which has taken up as much of this period of questions as this issue has is one to which we will all respond.

The Speaker: New question the member for Dufferin-Peel.

Mr David Tilson (Dufferin-Peel): We've spent all this time trying to improve the integrity of this place. I hope the Premier will review what he has said today because tomorrow we'll be back at it, I can assure you.

CHARITABLE GAMING

Mr David Tilson (Dufferin-Peel): My question is to the minister responsible for native affairs. Mr Minister, your government has recognized the aboriginals' right to self-government. Now it would appear you intend to allow reserves, not the province of Ontario, to regulate the operation of charitable gaming. I refer to statements that have been made specifically with respect to the Gaming Services Act which we are debating today. My question to the minister is, what assurances can the minister give the people of Ontario that the gaming practices on native lands will be regulated the same as on non-native lands?

Hon Bud Wildman (Minister Responsible for Native Affairs): The member has raised a very important question and one that I'm sure he will understand I have to be careful in responding to. As you will know, there is a case being tried involving a Shawanaga first nation at this point.

However, I would point out to him, without commenting on that case, that we have in Ontario, in a statement of political relationship that was signed by the Premier, myself and the chiefs, and in our discussions at the constitutional table, recognized the inherent right of self-government for aboriginal people. That means we in this province, and I guess if the constitutional passage goes through, we across Canada -- the federal government and other provincial governments -- will have to deal with aboriginal governments on a government-to-government basis.

That means in recognizing the inherent right, we will have to negotiate arrangements for how that right will be implemented, which laws will apply when and under which jurisdictions.

I can't give a more specific answer than to say that the implementation of the inherent right is a matter for negotiation over a period of time prior to its being judiciable before the courts.

Mr Tilson: It at least seems to have been said that the Gaming Services Act isn't going to apply to reserves. Those statements have been made. You've made some statements. I realize there are continual negotiations, but we need for you to be clearer on this subject, notwithstanding that you're entering into these negotiations. We need to know what other pieces of provincial legislation are going to be exempt under the natives' right to self-government -- the Highway Traffic Act?

Hon Mr Wildman: I don't think the member heard my first answer. If you deal on a government-to-government basis and you recognize self-government, then --

Mr Tilson: I heard your first answer. It bothers me.

Hon Mr Wildman: I don't know. The member says he's bothered by that. I would say the member should be aware that all members of the legislative committee of this House on the Constitution unanimously endorsed the concept of the recognition of the inherent right to self-government. That entails with it, inevitably, the negotiation of the transfer of jurisdictions from one government to the other and the negotiation of an orderly implementation and transition to determine which laws will apply in which cases and in which jurisdictions.

That is not an answer I can spell out right now and it is an answer that all aboriginal leaders and leaders of the provinces and the federal government are attempting to grapple with at the constitutional table. It's not a matter that can be put forward in two minutes and 45 seconds in this House. I don't think the member is really serious in putting this question before this House.

ARTS AND CULTURAL FUNDING

Mr Will Ferguson (Kitchener): My question is to the Minister of Culture and Communications. Madam Minister, you might be aware that a number of months ago the clay and glass gallery in the city of Waterloo held a ground-breaking ceremony in order to construct a new world-premier facility. It's the first gallery of its kind. Recently the gallery has run into severe economic financial difficulties, and as a result the city of Waterloo council was approached as late as last week in order to secure some additional funding so that the gallery could continue to build and hopefully have an opening date set soon.

I want to say to the minister that there are a number of construction workers who depend on this facility being completed for their livelihood at the moment.

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): Is that the question you are asking? You said you would ask a different question.

Mr Ferguson: I understand that the member for St Catharines has a little bit of difficulty recognizing that or understanding that. Could the minister advise me whether there will be any capital funds flowing from the minister to assist the completion of the gallery?

Hon Karen Haslam (Minister of Culture and Communications): I must tell the member that there are many galleries, there are many museums, there are many facilities that are in a bit of financial difficulty. It's not unusual in a time of recession that many individual facilities find themselves in this position. However, the money just isn't very prolific in my ministry right now for major capital programs. There are many applications already into my field offices. Some have been into my field offices since 1989.

I would like to suggest to the member and any other members who have these galleries that would like to have capital money to go through the process. They should contact local offices -- in this particular case one of my field offices is located in Kitchener -- and the field services staff would be more than willing to discuss their needs and their concerns and put in an application, should it be necessary.

Mr Bradley: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I'm willing to seek unanimous consent of the House to allow the member for Kitchener to ask the question that he said on Friday, June 19, he was going to ask in the House. It says "MPP Blasts Firefighter Hiring Plan." He said he was going to ask a question in the House about that. If he wishes, I'm willing to have unanimous consent.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): Is there unanimous consent for the member for Kitchener to ask a question? Afraid not.

MOTIONS

COMMITTEE SITTINGS

Mr Cooke moved that, notwithstanding the order of the House approving the dates of committee meetings during the session, the standing committee on regulations and private bills be authorized to meet following routine proceedings today for the purpose of considering Bill Pr50 and that the standing order requiring five days' notice be waived.

Motion agreed to.

PETITIONS

REVENUE FROM GAMING

Mr Ted Arnott (Wellington): I have a petition which has approximately 75 signatures on it, people from Guelph township, Puslinch township, Uxbridge, Peterborough, Mount Albert, Harriston, Clifford and Mount Forest, and it reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the NDP government is considering legalizing casinos and video lottery terminals in the province of Ontario; and

"Whereas there is great public concern about the negative impact that will result from the above-mentioned implementations;

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

"That the government stop looking to casinos and video lottery terminals as a 'quick-fix' solution to its fiscal problems and concentrate instead on eliminating wasteful government spending."

I have affixed my name to this petition.

HOSPITAL SERVICES

Mr Donald Abel (Wentworth North): I have a petition that is signed by approximately 3,000 members from the Hamilton-Wentworth area and it reads as follows:

"We, the undersigned, do hereby request the Minister of Health for the province of Ontario to restore the service provided by Chedoke Hospital in the city of Hamilton to the level enjoyed by the community prior to 1978."

I attach my name hereto.

TRAILER PARK RESIDENTS

Mr Donald Abel (Wentworth North): This petition is signed by a little over 2,000 members, again from the Hamilton-Wentworth area, and it reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the operations of Courtcliffe Park year-round trailer park in Carlisle, Ontario, have fallen under receivership through no fault of the residents; and

"Whereas the receivership company has petitioned the courts to have all operations of the year-round park wind down and have all 400 tenants evicted as of July 1, 1992; and

"Whereas all investigations show that relocation options are inadequate and investment in the park's viability is less of a burden on the social services system than full closure of the park;

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

"Make available financial assistance through the Ministry of Housing or any other ministry that may be of assistance; provide the means to allow the residents to continue to be self-sufficient and continue to contribute to the community; allow residents to retain affordable housing by assisting to make operations viable at Courtcliffe Park; initiate a provincial inquiry into the circumstances leading to this crisis, resulting in a provincially regulated mobile home industry."

Again, I hereto attach my name.

LABOUR LEGISLATION

Mr Steven Offer (Mississauga North): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas investment and job creation are essential for Ontario's economic recovery,

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

"To instruct the Minister of Labour to table the results of independent empirical studies of the impact that amendments to the Labour Relations Act will have on investment and jobs before proceeding with those amendments."

These petitions have been signed by individuals of Phillips Cables, the Toronto Construction Association, the Mississauga Construction Association, Albany International Canada Inc, Allpriser Ltd, Canada's Plumbing and Heating Price Guide, and G&W Electric Ltd. I have signed my name to these petitions.

SCHOOL CURRICULUM

Mr Leo Jordan (Lanark-Renfrew): To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Ministry of Education is planning to amalgamate certain art-related courses at the year one secondary school level into one course in a proposed program called the Transition Years; and

"Whereas we, the undersigned residents of Ontario, including secondary school students of the aforementioned courses, feel that this decision is unacceptable on the grounds that it eliminates the in-depth study of the affected courses; and

"Whereas we understand that the aforementioned decision was taken in recognition of the difficulties faced by some students during their transition from elementary to secondary school, but reaffirm that this plan is the incorrect one; and

"Whereas we believe that this decision jeopardizes the value of all the above programs to future students in the first year and later years of secondary school;

"We petition Her Majesty's Legislative Assembly:

"That the Ministry of Education reconsider the aforementioned decision so that first-year secondary school students in Ontario may continue to enjoy the level of instruction that they receive in the affected art-related courses for many years to come."

CONSTITUTIONAL REFORM

Mr Paul Wessenger (Simcoe Centre): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas we, as citizens of the province of Ontario, believe the constitution of any genuinely democratic society truly belongs to its people and that our views on any changes to Canada's Constitution must be heard and final approval of such changes must be given by the citizens of Ontario;

"Whereas up to this time there has been very limited opportunity for input from grass-roots Ontarians,

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

"We request of you who administer the affairs of the province to make available every opportunity for the people to see and understand fully what the new Constitution, and/or any amendments thereto, will mean to each of us, and then will make provision for a final 'say' by the people of Ontario by way of a binding referendum."

LANDFILL SITE

Mr Paul Wessenger (Simcoe Centre): I have a further petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas the Innisfil landfill site is situated on an aquifer of which the water is distributed through an underground system of rivers and springs, and at the base of the dump are the headwaters of Lover's Creek, which meanders through the natural countryside and eventually deposits its waters into Lake Simcoe; and

"Whereas the Innisfil landfill site is situated on a parcel of 50 acres of land of which 15 acres are natural wetlands; and

"Whereas there are signed affidavits to state the Ministry of the Environment directed soils laden with oils and gas to be disposed of at the site; and

"Whereas from the period from 1969 until 1990 there has been little if any monitoring of what has been dumped into the site,

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

"To close the Innisfil landfill site and have the site brought back to as natural a state as possible."

MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES

Mr Ron Eddy (Brant-Haldimand): I have a petition signed by 48 residents of Middlesex county petitioning the Legislature to "reject the arbitrator's report for the greater London area in its entirety, condemn the arbitration process to resolve municipal boundary issues as being patently an undemocratic process and reject the recommendation of a massive annexation of land by the city of London."

I have affixed my signature as required.

HYDRO PROJECT

Mr Ernie L. Eves (Parry Sound): I have a petition signed by 1,495 constituents and summer residents.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas it is the intention of Ontario Hydro to erect a new hydro transmission line (Sudbury to Toronto reinforcement project) in part along a proposed new transmission line corridor in the lands between the French and Magnetawan rivers of central Ontario;

"Whereas the proposed routes for the new Hydro transmission corridor would:

"(

a) cross the Loring Deer Yard, the largest winter concentration complex for white-tailed deer in the province of Ontario, and (

b) cross the Parry Sound wildlands in addition to the existing corridor, and that these areas are of unique biological interest and figure prominently in the current and future tourism potential of the area,

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

"We request, in view of the impact the proposed routes would have on the ecology and economy of the lands between the French and Magnetawan rivers, that Ontario Hydro expand the use of the existing transmission line corridor for the new hydro transmission line of the Sudbury to Toronto reinforcement project."

I have affixed my signature thereto.

CONSTITUTIONAL REFORM

Mr Brad Ward (Brantford): I have a petition signed by 53 residents. The petition is formulated by the Citizens Initiatives and Referendum Committee and it reads:

"Whereas we, as citizens of the province of Ontario, believe the constitution of any genuine democratic society truly belongs to its people and that our views on any changes to Canada's Constitution must be heard and final approval of such changes must be given by the citizens of Ontario;

"Whereas up to this time there has been very limited opportunity for input from grass-roots Ontarians,

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

"We request of you who administer the affairs of this province to make available every opportunity for the people to see and understand fully what the new Constitution, and/or any amendments thereto, will mean to each of us, and then make provision for a final 'say' by the people of Ontario by way of a binding referendum."

LANDFILL SITES

Mr Charles Beer (York North): I have here six petitions signed by approximately 200 people, and they read as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly:

"Whereas the official plan of the township of King states that 'the township of King has traditionally been a rural municipality within the region of York,' and that 'the township possesses a significant amount of land which has historically been, and remains, devoted primarily to agriculture,' and

"Whereas this document also states that 'agriculture is an important land-based activity within the township,'

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

"We oppose the provincial government's proposal to take prime agricultural land in King township and turn it into Metro and York region's megadump."

I have signed this in support.

DRIVERS' LICENCES

Mr David Tilson (Dufferin-Peel): I have a petition with 52 signatures from constituents in my riding of Dufferin-Peel. It's addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the recent death and injury of five youths within the riding of Dufferin-Peel has deeply disturbed the residents; and

"Whereas these deaths might have been prevented if legislation concerning graduated licensing had been in place; and

"Whereas we would like to prevent further deaths and injuries to our new drivers and young people;

"We would like to petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to:

"Bring forward legislation to introduce graduated licences within the province of Ontario."

I have affixed my signature to this petition.

PESTICIDES

Mr Mike Cooper (Kitchener-Wilmot): I have a petition, and it's to the Honourable the Lieutenant Governor and the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"We, the undersigned, beg leave to petition the Parliament of Ontario as follows:

"We feel that the urban cosmetic use of synthetic pesticides and fertilizers is unnecessary since viable alternatives exist. Pesticides are being registered, marketed and used with inadequate, incomplete, obsolete and invalid testing. No pesticide has been proven absolutely safe. Pesticides have been linked to a number of serious health problems in terms of both acute and chronic toxicity. Many people are vulnerable to these effects, including children, the elderly and the environmentally sensitive.

Pesticides and fertilizer nitrates contaminate surface water and groundwater and have been linked to a number of serious adverse effects on the environment. The manufacturing of some pesticides and fertilizers contributes to global warming. Pesticides adversely affect a wide variety of non-target beneficial organisms. Insects, fungi and weeds are becoming increasingly resistant to pesticides.

"Therefore, we request the House eliminate the use of synthetic pesticides for cosmetic reasons in urban areas of Ontario immediately or by 1993 at the very latest."

LANDFILL SITES

Mr W. Donald Cousens (Markham): This is to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Interim Waste Authority has released a list of 19 proposed sites in the region of York as possible candidates for landfill, two of which are in the riding of Markham;

"Whereas the decision to prohibit the regions of the greater Toronto area from searching for landfill sites beyond their boundaries is contrary to the intent of the Environmental Assessment Act,

section 5(3);

"And

whereas the government has promised each person in Ontario the right to a full environmental assessment, including the right to a review of all options as it pertains to waste disposal in Ontario,

"We, the undersigned" -- some 250 people, residents of that area -- "protest and petition the Legislature of Ontario as follows:

"That the Legislature of Ontario repeal Bill 143 in its entirety and allow a more democratic process for the consideration of future options for the disposal of greater Toronto area waste, particularly the consideration of disposal sites beyond the boundaries of the greater Toronto area, where a 'willing host' community exists who is interested in developing new disposal systems for the greater Toronto area waste."

I have affixed my name to this petition and hope the government understands the importance of it.

LABOUR LEGISLATION

Mr Gary Carr (Oakville South): To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas independent and non-partisan economic studies have concluded that the proposed changes to Ontario labour legislation will increase job losses; and

"Whereas they will cause a decline in investment in Ontario; and

"Whereas they will seriously undermine the recovery and the maintenance of a sound economic environment in the province,

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

"That the Ontario government declare a moratorium on any proposed changes to the labour legislation in the best interests of the people of Ontario."

REVENUE FROM GAMING

Mr David Tilson (Dufferin-Peel): I have a petition of eight names from residents in my riding. It's addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the amateur sports teams and charitable organizations across Ontario derive their financial support from the proceeds of bingos and various Monte Carlo nights; and

"Whereas the NDP government is planning on legalizing casinos and other forms of gambling; and

"Whereas this action will render it increasingly more difficult for amateur sports teams and charitable organizations to raise funds to support amateur sports and charities; and

"Whereas the volunteers who operate these facilities are not looking for handouts and seek only to raise funds to support their amateur sports teams and charitable organizations,

"We, the undersigned, respectfully petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to ensure that the government maintains the ability of these amateur sports teams and organizations to continue to raise needed support money through bingos and various Monte Carlo nights."

I've affixed my signature to this petition.

FRENCH-LANGUAGE SERVICES

Mr Leo Jordan (Lanark-Renfrew): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas the province of Ontario is experiencing a severe economic recession;

"Whereas the placement of bilingual signs on Ontario's highways without consultation and at a cost of more than $4 million represents a blatant misdirection of taxpayers' dollars, which should be used to address the current pressing economic and employment needs of Ontario citizens;

"Whereas citizens of Ontario are increasingly being denied essential services, such as medical treatment, for lack of funding;

"Whereas Bill 8, the French Language Services Act, does not mandate bilingual highway signs, leaving

interpretation to the discretion of the Ontario Transportation minister who, as the minister responsible for francophone affairs, is empowered to grant exemptions under the act,

"We, the undersigned, do petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to resolve that the Ontario Transportation minister's directive to replace existing highway signs in Ontario with bilingual signs at a cost to taxpayers of more than $4 million be revoked immediately."

That is signed by over 100 from the riding of Lanark-Renfrew. I affix my signature.

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

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

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): Pursuant to standing order 104(g)(11), the report is deemed to be adopted by the House.

STANDING COMMITTEE ON REGULATIONS AND PRIVATE BILLS

Mr White from the standing committee on regulations and private bills presented the committee's report and moved its adoption.

The committee begs to report the following bills without amendment:

Bill Pr17,

An Act respecting the City of North Bay.

Bill Pr30,

An Act to revive The Sher-Bassin Group Inc.

Bill Pr41,

An Act to revive Port Elgin Sportsmen's Club.

Bill Pr43,

An Act respecting the City of Toronto.

The committee begs to report the following bill, as amended:

Bill Pr32,

An Act respecting the City of North Bay and the Township of East Ferris.

Motion agreed to.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

DISTRICT OF PARRY SOUND LOCAL GOVERNMENT AMENDMENT ACT, 1992 / LOI DE 1992 MODIFIANT LA LOI RELATIVE AU GOUVERNEMENT LOCAL DANS LE DISTRICT DE PARRY SOUND

Mr Cooke moved first reading of Bill 77,

An Act to amend the District of Parry Sound Local Government Act, 1979 / Loi modifiant la loi intitulée The District of Parry Sound Local Government Act, 1979.

Motion agreed to.

Hon David S. Cooke (Minister of Municipal Affairs): I believe there's a unanimous consent that I move second reading of the bill.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): That may be awkward in that we are in a portion allotted for introduction of bills. I have no way of knowing if there are other bills which need to be introduced. I'm wondering if the minister could stand that down for a moment.

Hon Mr Cooke: Sure.

TOWNSHIP OF UXBRIDGE ACT, 1992

Mr O'Connor moved first reading of Bill Pr56,

An Act respecting the Township of Uxbridge.

Motion agreed to.

LIVESTOCK, POULTRY AND HONEY BEE DAMAGE COMPENSATION ACT, 1992 / LOI DE 1992 SUR L'INDEMNISATION EN CAS DE DOMMAGES CAUSÉS AU BÉTAIL, À LA VOLAILLE ET AUX ABEILLES

Mr Buchanan moved first reading of Bill 78,

An Act to provide Compensa