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

April 27, 2005

38th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2005-Apr-27 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Wednesday 27 April 2005 Mercredi 27 avril 2005

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

COMMUNITY PROJECTS IN

NORTH BAY

TOBACCO GROWERS

MUNICIPAL FINANCES

FAMILY HEALTH TEAMS

DAIRY AND POULTRY FARMERS

FIRE IN COBOURG

DAIRY AND POULTRY FARMERS

CANADA-ONTARIO MUNICIPAL RURAL INFRASTRUCTURE FUND

CHILDREN'S SERVICES

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

COMITÉ PERMANENT DE LA JUSTICE /

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

JUSTICE POLICY

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

GOOD GOVERNMENT ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005

SUR LA SAINE GESTION PUBLIQUE

APPRENTICESHIP AND CERTIFICATION AMENDMENT ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR L'APPRENTISSAGE ET LA RECONNAISSANCE PROFESSIONNELLE

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

BEEF RESEARCH FACILITY

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

VISITORS

ORAL QUESTIONS

MUNICIPAL FINANCES

CHILDREN'S SERVICES

MUNICIPAL FINANCES

AUTISM TREATMENT

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

ANAPHYLACTIC SHOCK

NATIONAL CHILD BENEFIT SUPPLEMENT

FILM CLASSIFICATION

COURT SECURITY

CHILD CARE

FOREST INDUSTRY

PETITIONS

FREDERICK BANTING HOMESTEAD

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

HALTON RECYCLING PLANT

REGIONAL CENTRES FOR THE

DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

HEALTH CARE SERVICES

REGIONAL CENTRES FOR THE DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

ANTI-SMOKING LEGISLATION

HEALTH CARE SERVICES

SCHOOL CLOSURES

HEALTH CARE SERVICES

ANTI-SMOKING LEGISLATION

REGIONAL CENTRES FOR

THE DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

OPPOSITION DAY

CHILDREN'S SERVICES

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

COMMUNITY PROJECTS IN

NORTH BAY

Ms. Monique M. Smith (Nipissing): I rise today to tell members of this House of the banner month that the residents of Nipissing have had. The

month of April has been unprecedented.

Two weeks ago, on what one North Bay nurse has referred to as that "wonderful Thursday," we saw the long-awaited announcement of a $218-million construction

project which will bring at least 400 construction jobs to our riding -- a huge addition to our region that will be an essential infrastructure component. This is an enormous initiative and it was

a banner day.

The very next day, North Bay was privileged to be one of the 55 communities across the province chosen to develop a cutting-edge initiative to attract health

care professionals to our riding.

Last Wednesday, our community was chosen as one of six pilot project sites for the JobsNow program, which will assist in a real and tangible way those who have

been receiving welfare for more than 12 months.

On Friday, the Minister of Natural Resources announced support for our conservation authority, and $330,000 for source water protection.

And just this last Monday, Minister Gerretsen visited North Bay, together with federal Minister Comuzzi, to bring more good news to our community. My federal

counterpart, Anthony Rota, and I announced that the city was receiving $15 million from each of the federal and provincial levels of government for our water filtration plant. Together with the $4

million our government already committed to this project through the northern Ontario heritage fund, the province's investment is nearly $20 million for this very important $45-million project that

will commence construction this fall.

The McGuinty government is building strong communities. North Bay is proud to be one of those communities, and I am proud to support the good people of North

Bay.

TOBACCO GROWERS

Mr. Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): Tobacco Farmers in Crisis have a plan that includes both short-term and long-term assistance to

tobacco-growing families and their communities. This plan, in my view, is much more fair and dignified than those that have been offered up by both this government and the federal government.

Why can't the members opposite see that preserving a tobacco program that controls supply, maintains minimum prices, places production permits in the hands of

growers and includes health and safety protection would be in the best interests of both farmers and the general public?

Tobacco farmers, as we know, produce a legal product. They grow tobacco to supply the market, not to encourage smoking amongst adults. They are guided by strict

government regulations. When this government puts Ontario's farmers out of business, who will regulate offshore tobacco? What will be the content of Canadian cigarettes? I ask the members opposite,

do you realize that offshore tobacco would create a significant public health consequence for people in this province?

If the members opposite would take the time to listen to tobacco farmers, you might realize that this government does not have all the answers. These folks do

share many of your goals. It's time for government to listen, to continue to listen. I do recognize farmers in the gallery today.

MUNICIPAL FINANCES

Ms. Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): On April 14, Greater Sudbury city council considered the impact of the government's municipal partnership fund

on our community. The fund replaces the community reinvestment fund, created by the former government when it became clear that the download of ambulances, public transit, social assistance, child

care, public housing etc. was not revenue-neutral.

The new grant will be an increase of about $500,000 over the CRF funding received in 2004. However, the funding is based on a 2002 CRF reconciliation. There is

an existing shortfall between the 2002 reconciliation and what was actually budgeted by council in subsequent budgets. So in 2005, the city will actually receive about $2.7 million less than was

budgeted by council. That shortfall, now and in the future, is a cause for major concern.

This government has been silent on the matter of transitional assistance for communities that will face a funding shortfall in the out years from now until 2008.

Council noted on April 14, "[T]he city will be facing 2006 grant funding in an amount less than budgeted for 2005. This is a major concern to the city as it will put increased pressure on future

municipal levies and tax rates."

City council passed a resolution calling on the McGuinty government to provide transitional funding for the years 2005-08, to phase in funding shortfalls faced

by communities in those years. Our community should not have to bear the ongoing burden of costs for services which were never revenue-neutral. I call on the Minister of Finance to tell

municipalities like the city of Greater Sudbury that there will be transitional funding in the out years so that the costs will truly be revenue-neutral.

FAMILY HEALTH TEAMS

Mr. Pat Hoy (Chatham-Kent Essex): The McGuinty government is keeping its promise to improve access to health care in Ontario. I'm pleased that

approval of three family health teams for Chatham-Kent Essex has been granted. They are the Tilbury and district family health team action group, the Chatham-Kent family health team and the

Leamington and area family health team.

Family health teams are the signature piece of our government's comprehensive plan to improve health care in Ontario. They are exactly what communities need to

both attract and retain doctors. Doctors, nurses, nurse practitioners, physiotherapists, midwives, pharmacists and other health care professionals will work as a team to ensure that the residents

of Chatham-Kent Essex receive the very best care, day and night, and closer to home.

There are many individuals to thank across the riding, from Leamington to Chatham. Tilbury in particular has waited for 12 years for this announcement. I would

like to thank two very special individuals, Karen Smith and Katie Taylor, co-chairs of the Tilbury and district family health team action group, for their persistence and hard work. They never,

ever gave up.

Family health teams are a huge step on the road that is taking Ontario to a better health care system, a system that helps keep people healthier and delivers

quality care to them when they need it and that will be there for generations to come.

DAIRY AND POULTRY FARMERS

Mr. Ernie Hardeman (Oxford): It's my pleasure to rise in the House today to acknowledge and welcome the dairy and chicken farmers of Ontario,

known as FarmGate5, who are sitting in the gallery today.

The dairy and poultry boards got together and formed FarmGate5 so they could promote the positive contribution their farms make to the economy of Ontario. Their

role is to bring together all people and organizations that believe in a strong agricultural sector and a prosperous food industry in this province.

The famous five of FarmGate5 include the Dairy Farmers of Ontario, the Chicken Farmers of Ontario, the Ontario Egg Producers, the Ontario Turkey Producers'

Marketing Board and the Ontario Broiler Hatching Egg and Chick Commission.

It is important to note that the dairy and poultry farmers account for one third of the total farm cash receipts in Ontario. There are approximately 7,000 dairy

and poultry farmers in this province, and last year they produced over $2.5 billion worth of goods.

Since its launch in September at the International Plowing Match, over 7,500 Ontarians have signed the FarmGate5 supporter form. Of those who signed, I'm pleased

to say that almost 50 MPPs have also signed in support of the FarmGate5 agenda, and I'm proud to say that I'm one of those. By building this grassroots network of support, FarmGate5 has been able

to demonstrate that many Ontarians, on and off the farm, rely on and expect a strong dairy and poultry sector.

As MPP for my riding of Oxford, which we all know is the dairy capital of Canada, I would encourage my colleagues to join FarmGate5 for a reception in room 230

at 4 p.m. today. I'd also like to acknowledge the presence of the tobacco farmers in our gallery today. I'd like to thank you for the opportunity to make this statement in the House today.

FIRE IN COBOURG

Mr. Lou Rinaldi (Northumberland): I rise today to inform my colleagues of a massive fire which on Monday, April 25, 2005, engulfed Horizon

Plastics, a plastics manufacturing company in the town of Cobourg in my riding. While this fire proved to be an extraordinary test for the people of my riding, not to mention the 300 employees of

Horizon Plastics, public and private officials alike handled the situation in a diligent and courageous fashion. Indeed, while Cobourg's fire captain described the challenge as one of the biggest

fires his force has battled in decades, firefighters courageously conquered this inferno.

I'm certain the members of this House will join me as I applaud the tremendous competence and boundless bravery of the more than 100 courageous firefighters who

hail from more than 14 fire departments in Northumberland and surrounding communities, such as Peterborough, Oshawa and the Canadian Forces Base in Trenton. Their courageous efforts, accompanied by

the Cobourg fire and police services and the local OPP officers, have prevented what could have been a catastrophe.

I would also like to commend Mayor Peter Delanty of Cobourg, as well as the emergency officials, who quickly declared a state of emergency so as to guarantee the

safety of the residents of Cobourg. Mayor Delanty and Fire Chief Allen Mann should also be thanked for working with the officials from the Ministry of the Environment to provide community briefings

every half hour so that residents could access the most current information.

The House should know that on Tuesday I attended a meeting with municipal and ministry officials, and I'm pleased to announce that, while the Ministry of the

Environment is still monitoring the situation on the ground, the state of emergency has now been lifted.

DAIRY AND POULTRY FARMERS

Mrs. Maria Van Bommel (Lambton-Kent-Middlesex): I have the pleasure of extending an invitation to all members of this Legislature to a reception

this afternoon given by FarmGate5. FarmGate5 brings together people and organizations who believe that supply management is an integral part of a strong agricultural sector. The membership of over

7,000 consists of Ontarians from all walks of life, including farmers, agrifood partners and companies, financial institutions, consumer groups, unions, municipal governments, MPPs and MPs. I am a

proud member of FarmGate5, as I know many of my colleagues in this assembly are.

Because of supply management, Ontario consumers are guaranteed a nutritious basket of high-quality dairy and poultry products that are among the least expensive

in the world. In turn, their farming friends and neighbours get a stable income and a fair share of food prices. Last year's cash receipts from dairy, chicken, eggs, turkey and hatcheries were

approximately $2.5 billion at the farm gate. They are responsible for a further 60,000 jobs in this province.

Canada is committed to domestic supply management as a solution that works for consumers, food processors and the industry. Canada's position in the current

world trade talks negotiations reflects that commitment. To assist the Canadian government in these negotiations, Farmgate5 has been organized in support of Ontario's dairy and poultry farmers.

Come to the FarmGate5 reception in room 230 starting at 4 p.m., and take the opportunity to enjoy farm-fresh products, meet farmers and learn more about supply management.

CANADA-ONTARIO MUNICIPAL RURAL INFRASTRUCTURE FUND

Mr. Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): I'm pleased to make a few comments on the COMRIF program, and I'm glad to see that both the ministers

responsible for it are here. First of all, I want to say to you how thankful I am that the township of Severn in my riding received $1 million for that funding.

However, I do want to point out an interesting fact. The county of Simcoe and its member municipalities, if we include the cities of Orillia and Barrie, make up

19 municipalities. They represent about 4.2% of the population in Ontario. In my riding alone, there were nine applications for COMRIF funding for the provincial share, and it would have amounted

to $22 million. I know it's only stage one at this point. However, it's very important that I put on the record for my residents and for the folks in the county of Simcoe and the cities of Barrie

and Orillia that this is one of the fastest-growing areas of the province, and that has been compounded by your greenbelt legislation. We need to make sure that these communities have the proper

resources and the sewer and water systems and bridges etc.

Really and truly, although they received a total of $1.535 million in the COMRIF announcement the other day, there was probably $60 million or $70 million

applied for. We need to put on the record that these municipalities will be looking for substantial amounts more in the coming months, in the stage two announcements. I appreciate the opportunity

to speak to this today.

CHILDREN'S SERVICES

Mr. Mario G. Racco (Thornhill): We often hear the phrase, "Children are our future." The McGuinty government is committed to them and their

future.

That is why we created the Ministry of Children and Youth Services.

That is why we added $200 million more to children's services in our first budget.

That is why we announced our Best Start plan, which will help Ontario's children to be ready and eager to achieve success in school by the time they start grade

That is why we are investing more in children's mental health services.

That is why we are hiring more therapists to provide IBI to young children with autism and to create new supports for children and youth with autism in the

classroom.

That is why we are investing in children's treatment centres like the one in York region. The previous government failed to support the children of York region.

Our government is committed to providing them with the services they need.

To end off, I would like to share this quote from Cindy DeCarlo, a parent and organizer of rallies to bring a CTC to York region just before Christmas of last

year: "If I could have a fairy-tale ending to all of this, it would be that we had an announcement on Monday. You know what? My wish came true."

Thanks to the McGuinty government, which not only provided what I stated but, in particular, made sure that the region of York got a centre, which it did not

have under any of the other political parties.

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

COMITÉ PERMANENT DE LA JUSTICE /

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

JUSTICE POLICY

M. Shafiq Qaadri (Etobicoke-Nord): Monsieur le Président, je demande la permission de déposer un rapport du comité permanent de

la justice et je propose son adoption.

I beg leave to present a report from the standing committee on justice policy and move its adoption. I offer it to you through the page Inderraj Singh, of

Etobicoke North.

Clerk at the Table (Mr Todd Decker): Your committee begs to report the following bill without amendment:

Bill 158,

An Act to replace the Theatres Act and to amend other Acts in respect of film / Projet de loi 158, Loi remplaçant la

Loi sur les cinémas et

modifiant d'autres lois en ce qui concerne les films.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Shall the report be received and adopted?

All those in favour, please say "aye."

All those against, please say "nay."

I think the ayes have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1349 to 1354.

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

Ayes

Arthurs, Wayne

Bartolucci, Rick

Berardinetti, Lorenzo

Bountrogianni, Marie

Bradley, James J.

Broten, Laurel C.

Brown, Michael A.

Brownell, Jim

Bryant, Michael

Cansfield, Donna H.

Caplan, David

Chambers, Mary Anne V.

Craitor, Kim

Crozier, Bruce

Di Cocco, Caroline

Duguid, Brad

Duncan, Dwight

Flynn, Kevin Daniel

Fonseca, Peter

Gerretsen, John

Hoy, Pat

Hudak, Tim

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Levac, Dave

Marsales, Judy

Mauro, Bill

McMeekin, Ted

McNeely, Phil

Meilleur, Madeleine

Milloy, John

Orazietti, David

Peters, Steve

Phillips, Gerry

Qaadri, Shafiq

Racco, Mario G.

Ramsay, David

Rinaldi, Lou

Smith, Monique

Smitherman, George

Takhar, Harinder S.

Tory, John

Van Bommel, Maria

Watson, Jim

Wilkinson, John

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Zimmer, David

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

Nays

Barrett, Toby

Chudleigh, Ted

Dunlop, Garfield

Hampton, Howard

Hardeman, Ernie

Horwath, Andrea

Klees, Frank

Kormos, Peter

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

Martiniuk, Gerry

Munro, Julia

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Prue, Michael

Runciman, Robert W.

Scott, Laurie

Sterling, Norman W.

Wilson, Jim

Yakabuski, John

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 46; the nays are 19.

The Speaker: The bill is therefore ordered for third reading.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

GOOD GOVERNMENT ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005

SUR LA SAINE GESTION PUBLIQUE

Mr. Bryant moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 190,

An Act to promote good government by amending or repealing certain Acts and by enacting one new Act / Projet de loi 190, Loi visant à

promouvoir une saine gestion publique en modifiant ou en abrogeant certaines lois et en édictant une nouvelle loi.

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

Hon. Michael Bryant (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs, minister responsible for democratic renewal): The bill is a

collection of technical and housekeeping amendments to many statutes to keep them up to date and correct errors in translation and language. Seventeen ministries submitted amendments. Each

ministry's statutes are in one schedule, with the exception of two ministries which have offered more than one schedule. The commencement provisions for the content of each of the schedules are set

out in the schedules.

APPRENTICESHIP AND CERTIFICATION AMENDMENT ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR L'APPRENTISSAGE ET LA RECONNAISSANCE PROFESSIONNELLE

Ms Scott moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 191,

An Act to amend the Apprenticeship and Certification Act, 1998 / Projet de loi 191, Loi modifiant la Loi de 1998 sur l'apprentissage et la

reconnaissance professionnelle.

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

Ms. Laurie Scott (Haliburton-Victoria-Brock): This bill addresses the need for a new apprenticeship program in the province of Ontario. If

passed, this bill would be the first step in gaining recognition for a new apprenticeship program in the fuel industry. The use of natural gas and oil touches all of our lives on a daily basis. It

is imperative that we support the successful training and apprenticeship of people working in this field.

I would like to take the opportunity to thank my legislative intern, Rebecca Sciarra, in the gallery, for her extensive work on this bill.

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

Hon. Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): I move that pursuant to standing order 9(c)(i), the House shall meet from

6:45 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. on Wednesday, April 27, 2005, for the purpose of considering government business.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Mr. Duncan has moved government notice of motion 351. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion

carry?

All those in favour, please say "aye."

All those against, please say "nay."

I think the ayes have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1400 to 1405.

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

Ayes

Arthurs, Wayne

Barrett, Toby

Bartolucci, Rick

Bentley, Christopher

Berardinetti, Lorenzo

Bountrogianni, Marie

Bradley, James J.

Broten, Laurel C.

Brown, Michael A.

Brownell, Jim

Bryant, Michael

Cansfield, Donna H.

Caplan, David

Chambers, Mary Anne V.

Chudleigh, Ted

Crozier, Bruce

Di Cocco, Caroline

Duguid, Brad

Duncan, Dwight

Flynn, Kevin Daniel

Fonseca, Peter

Gerretsen, John

Hardeman, Ernie

Hoy, Pat

Hudak, Tim

Jeffrey, Linda

Klees, Frank

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Levac, Dave

Marsales, Judy

Martiniuk, Gerry

Mauro, Bill

McMeekin, Ted

McNeely, Phil

Meilleur, Madeleine

Milloy, John

Mitchell, Carol

Munro, Julia

Orazietti, David

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Peters, Steve

Phillips, Gerry

Qaadri, Shafiq

Racco, Mario G.

Ramsay, David

Rinaldi, Lou

Runciman, Robert W.

Scott, Laurie

Smith, Monique

Smitherman, George

Sterling, Norman W.

Takhar, Harinder S.

Tory, John

Van Bommel, Maria

Watson, Jim

Wilkinson, John

Wilson, Jim

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Zimmer, David

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

Nays

Hampton, Howard

Horwath, Andrea

Kormos, Peter

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

Prue, Michael

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 59; the nays are 6.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

Hon. Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, as you know, the McGuinty government is setting the pace as the

only jurisdiction in North America that is committed to replacing coal-fired electricity generation. We're doing this because we want to protect the best interests of Ontarians by reducing harmful

emissions and cleaning up the air we breathe.

I'm pleased to rise today to advise the House of a significant new study, a study that illustrates the importance of our government's commitment to replacing

coal-fired generation in the province. This study confirms that the replacement of Ontario's coal-fired plants will reduce the health and environmental costs in Ontario. This independent study

brings to light the massive hidden costs of coal-fired generation, and when the health and environmental costs are included, it is clear that coal-fired generation is not only the dirtiest option,

it's also the most expensive option.

This study indicates a relationship between increased air pollution due to coal-fired electricity generation and up to 668 premature deaths each year in

Ontario. It also indicates that 928 hospital admissions, 1,100 emergency room visits and a staggering 333,660 minor illnesses such as headaches and coughing are related to emissions from Ontario's

dirty coal-fired plants each year. In addition to health damages, emissions from coal-fired generation also cause environmental damages such as greenhouse gas emissions, which are subject to the

Kyoto treaty on climate change. That's a lot of pain and suffering, and it's simply not acceptable. The McGuinty government does not accept it, I don't believe any member of this House will accept

it and I'm sure the citizens of Ontario will not accept it.

Our government came into office with a firm commitment to end the health and environmental damage caused by coal-fired generation. The study compared the

financial health and environmental costs of four different scenarios of electricity generation in Ontario. With an annual cost of $4.4 billion, the study found that coal-fired electricity

generation is significantly more expensive than the other options considered. What astounded me was how much our seemingly cheap coal power was really costing the people of this province. There are

massive hidden costs in terms of the health and environmental damages caused by coal. This is where the true cost of coal-fired electricity lies.

Let me clarify how this study was done, because I believe members of this House will want to be sure of the due diligence and care that went into it. The study

employed well-respected techniques to forecast the change in risks that occur with the change in air quality. This includes the risk of illness and death. I'm sure members understand that it is

impossible in a study of this kind to identify which specific deaths at which specific time are attributable to air pollution from any particular source but, at the same time, I think we all

understand and accept that air pollution, like that form of emissions from coal-fired generation, does contribute to deaths and illness. And sadly, the impacts of air pollution affect the most

vulnerable Ontarians: the elderly, the young and those who are already ill.

The study I'm sharing with you today follows a model many other governments use to estimate health damages associated with air pollution. It was undertaken by

a team of experts in emissions modeling and cost-benefit analysis, and utilized a more comprehensive approach. Instead of using a time-series approach, which only accounts for short-term or acute

health impacts of air pollution, we chose to employ a cohort analysis approach. This comprehensive approach takes into account the long-term impact of exposure to air pollution. The Ontario Medical

Association is also using this approach to update their vital groundbreaking work in modelling the illness costs of air pollution.

This study examined three options for generating electricity: all gas, refurbished nuclear and new gas generation, and stringent controls. I'm pleased to

announce that all of these options have lower health and environmental costs than the status quo. However, even with stringent controls, the true cost of coal would be two and a half times more

expensive than the financial costs considered in isolation. So I am here to tell you that the lowest cost scenario for Ontario's electricity future was a combination of refurbished nuclear and gas.

Including health and environmental impacts, this option would cost $1.9 billion annually, which is half of the annual cost of existing coal generation.

The choices are clear. The McGuinty government must stand by its commitment to replace coal in a way that is responsible, protects the best interests of

Ontarians by reducing harmful emissions, protects the reliability of our electricity system and cleans up the air we breathe. We're well on our way to meeting that commitment. I'm pleased to again

say that Lakeview is being closed tomorrow as scheduled and, shortly thereafter, we'll be announcing our plan to deal with the remaining coal-fired generation plants in Ontario.

The study I bring to your attention today demonstrates our commitment to the coal goal. It illustrates that there are alternatives to coal-fired plants,

alternatives that will clear the air and make economic sense. Our time is now, so let's aim for a future we can be proud of. Let's strive to work together and deliver a cleaner, greener Ontario and

a quality of life that is second to none. Let's strive for a healthy future, a future we long for on behalf of our children and our grandchildren.

BEEF RESEARCH FACILITY

Hon. Steve Peters (Minister of Agriculture and Food): Yesterday I had the great pleasure of touring the new beef research facility in Elora,

one that is unique to Canada and will bring benefits to Ontario's beef farmers and consumers. The Elora beef research station is a great example of how government, industry leaders and the

scientific community have collaborated to create new opportunities for Ontario's beef industry and our economy.

I am proud that the McGuinty government is one of the major funding partners for this project. Our support has helped to create a new 22,000-square-foot

research barn that houses more than $2 million in specialized equipment. This includes a feedlot that can monitor the individual feed intake of nearly 200 cattle and a handling unit for ultrasound,

blood-testing and body composition measurements. It's the very first time this combination of equipment has existed in one facility. These tools will assist scientists with their current top

research priorities of feed efficiency and beef tenderness.

This type of research, coupled with efforts by the industry to create a long-term recovery strategy, will give Ontario's beef producers a competitive edge for

the future.

The new beef research facility was made possible through several provincial funding channels via the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food, the Ontario

Innovation Trust and the Ontario Realty Corp. I want to thank our other funding sponsors, the Canadian Foundation for Innovation and the Ontario Cattlemen's Association, as well as the University

of Guelph for helping make this new facility a reality. In particular, I'd like to recognize the investments that have been made by the Ontario Cattlemen's Association. At a time of short-term

uncertainty brought on by the BSE crisis, it took great courage and foresight for our beef farmers to find the funding to support long-term research.

Innovative research and development is the best way forward for a strong, prosperous future in Ontario's agri-food industry. The McGuinty government recognizes

that education, research and technology transfer are essential to a vibrant, competitive agricultural sector. In addition to the Elora Beef Research Station, we fund 16 other research and

technology transfer facilities in the province. Our government has been a strong supporter, both in the development of the new Elora barn and the ongoing research projects it houses. Through its

support for the Elora Beef Research Station, our government is providing researchers with the advanced tools and techniques they need for innovative developments in beef production. These

innovations will give Ontario beef producers access to better genetics, immunology, animal health and nutrition. Advances in these areas will translate into a stronger beef industry.

Earlier this month, I signed an amendment to the agricultural policy framework which will bring new agricultural research and development funding to Ontario.

I'm pleased that we have worked with the federal government to secure more funds for our future livestock research through the wedge-funding component of the APF. By investing in strategic research

and development, we are promoting the long-term viability and competitiveness of Ontario's agri-food industry.

I believe Ontario needs to build its reputation by attracting and retaining top-quality research professionals and providing leading-edge programs and

technology. Our province is Canada's biggest economic engine and we need to keep that engine well oiled. By creating an unparalleled environment in research and education, we will attract the best

minds and foster innovative ideas. These will be the keys to giving our agriculture and food industry a step up in a very competitive world.

The McGuinty government's support for the new facilities at the Elora Beef Research Station is helping all of us to take a step forward. On behalf of the

government of Ontario, I welcome this new facility to our agricultural and scientific communities. We all look forward to the benefits it will bring to the people of Ontario.

Speaking of beef -- I had the opportunity to speak to the Minister of Natural Resources about this -- whenever you're out in a restaurant or in a store, ask if

it's Canadian, and if it's not Canadian, say no.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Responses?

Mr. Ernie Hardeman (Oxford): I want to thank the minister for his non-announcement today. Obviously this is something that has been going on

for some time and the minister is just reiterating what has been happening. But I do, on behalf of the agricultural community, want to thank the minister and the ministry for being involved in this

project, because I think they support anything that will increase the efficiency and effectiveness of our beef industry.

As we already know, in Ontario we have the safest and best food in the world. I think it is very important that the minister stand up from time to time to

expound on that and make sure everyone in our urban community realizes it.

But what I think is more important is that we can have faith in what the minister is saying. I want to take the minister back to what's been happening in the

last few days, which kind of calls into question whether the announcement really is what it says it is. The minister will recall that two days ago I asked him when the cheques for the market

revenue would start to flow from his announcement of March 29. He said, "The cheques are flowing. The cheques started to flow last week." We called Agricorp and found out that this was not the

case, that no cheques were flowing. In your absence yesterday, when you were touring the research station, I asked the Premier, "Why would you say" -- and that's you, Minister -- "on March 30 that

the cheques would go out in two or three weeks, only to find out that they still haven't gone out?" The Premier stated yesterday that the cheques are being mailed out today and tomorrow. So what is

the truth? Two days ago you said the cheques had already gone out last week; yesterday the Premier said they were going out in the next couple of days.

Minister, farmers want to be able to trust you and have confidence in what you say. Well, this is just another broken promise. When are you going to accept

your responsibility to the farmers of Ontario, or are you going to continue with the Liberal promise-breaking tradition?

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

Mr. Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): I'll speak to what I consider to be another hot-air announcement by the Minister of Energy. I

sincerely hope this is not more Liberal spin, desperately attempting to justify their irresponsible timeline for the closing of coal plants a year and a half from now.

What would be responsible is a cost-benefit analysis of clean coal and its relative cost vis-à-vis the environment, vis-à-vis our economy and with

respect to the health of the people in Ontario. What would be responsible is a realistic timeline, and I would note that our leader, John Tory, sees a 2015 phase-out as a worthy goal. That's what

it is: It's a goal we would have had, had we formed the government.

As government, we did work to mitigate emissions with a $250-million investment in clean coal. The SCR -- selective catalytic reduction -- units that have been

applied are working. They are reducing emissions at your two favourite scapegoats: the OPG plants at both Nanticoke and Lambton.

Of course, I hear this government dismissing verified facts of emission reduction from clean coal technology because, very simply, it doesn't fit with their

"Close coal in Ontario at all costs" agenda, when the reality is, once this government figures it out, that they won't have enough power to replace coal. They'll have to import coal from coal-fired

plants in the United States, and we in return send jobs and investment to the United States, to the border states -- and we import their air.

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): On behalf of New Democrats, I want to respond. We have, yet again today, another $110,000 exercise in

media spin by the Minister of Energy. He spent $110,000 to tell the people of Ontario that there are some health and environmental problems associated with coal-fired generating stations. People

have known that for a long time. What people want to know is, what's the plan? What is the plan, for example, to replace coal? We still don't know what the plan is.

People want to know what the plan is for affordable electricity. We don't see any sign of that. People would also like to know, is there a plan for energy

efficiency? We don't see that either. It's another spin exercise, another media exercise, that shows that the McGuinty government doesn't have a plan. They simply want to tell people something they

already know.

What I find really interesting, though, when you look at what is not included in this plan, is: Was energy efficiency one of the options considered? What if

you stopped using electric heat in the thousands of apartment buildings across this province that were built cheap in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s and that use very inefficient electric heat? Did the

McGuinty government look at that? No. They wouldn't look at that. Did they look at helping low- and modest-income families who have inefficient refrigerators or appliances in their home? Did they

look at what a low-interest loan program would do in assisting those families to purchase energy-efficient appliances and reduce their consumption of electricity? No.

What the McGuinty government is interested in, and this is what people really ought to pay attention to, is natural gas and nuclear.

I invite, especially members of the media, to take a close look at this thing. Look at, for example, the presumed health costs. One of the presumed health

costs, if you look at it, is that there are very few health and environmental damages with nuclear. I invite the McGuinty government to go to Elliot Lake and talk to the widows who live there about

all of the uranium miners who died from cancer associated with mining uranium. You go talk to them.

I invite you to talk to Eric Mintz, an epidemiologist who looked at the situation at the Port Hope nuclear refinery. This is what he found:

"Many of the diseases that might be of concern in Port Hope are normally rare ones like brain cancer and leukemia."

The Premier should especially listen to this, because he likes to lecture everyone about children: "Since children generally have greater exposures and shorter

induction times, the childhood data is of particular interest.

"Brain cancer was found to be highly elevated in Port Hope children during the period of 1971 to 1985, five times the provincial average.

"Children generally have greater exposures and shorter latency periods.... That the brain cancer excesses were greatest in children and appeared earlier is

supportive of a real excess that is environmentally related.

"Ionizing radiation has been associated with brain cancer in research published worldwide.

"For all childhood cancers there was a 48% increase over expected rates and for childhood leukemia a 63% elevation over what might be expected."

The McGuinty government produces a report that tries to say that there are no environmental or few environmental and health consequences associated with

nuclear. You should stop issuing cooked reports.

Even more, they then trot out a table saying that the costs of building nuclear plants are fairly predictable and low. Was this the $4-billion estimate that

you gave for Darlington, and then, when you completed Darlington, it cost $15 billion -- an $11-billion cost overrun? Is this the billions of dollars that have been spent on refurbishing when it

was only supposed to cost a little bit?

Look, don't insult people. You want to see a real study on coal? This is a good study on coal.

This is nothing but a cooked media exercise that isn't worth the paper it's printed on.

VISITORS

Mr. Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I am sure the House will want to welcome people here from Chieti, Italy:

students on an exchange program being hosted by their counterparts at Notre Dame College School in Welland.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): While the students are very much welcome, the third party House leader knows that's not a point of

order.

ORAL QUESTIONS

MUNICIPAL FINANCES

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the Premier. Yesterday you said you were "proud of the new relationship we have

developed with Ontario's municipalities.... It is good news for all the people of Ontario."

Applause.

Mr. Tory: I notice it's just a very few who are clapping, Mr. Speaker.

I want to quote from today's London Free Press: "`Elgin county council is both shocked and appalled,' Warden James McIntyre wrote....

"The change would leave county officials with $3.7 million less by 2008, a shortfall so deep the tax hike needed to make up the difference would be 20%."

Premier, can you confirm for the people supposedly represented by your Minister of Agriculture how proud the two of you are to be handing them a 20% property

tax increase?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): We inherited a system that was broken, opaque and unfair. We have fixed

that system. It is now transparent and it is now fair.

The leader of the official opposition tells us that he prefers the status quo. He, in fact, embraces the status quo. That would mean that in Caledon, for

example, that community would receive $1.2 million less. In Kawartha Lakes, that community would receive $2.7 million less. In Port Colborne, they'd receive $1 million less. I can go on and on.

If the leader of the official opposition is telling us that he has some alternate plan; that, in addition to taking $2.4 billion out of health care and taking

money out of public education and putting that into private schools, he has now found some secret pile of money to help those communities he's advocating on behalf of, then he should stand in his

place today and tell us how much money he's going to flow to those communities.

Mr. Tory: All we're asking for is some fairness for all of the communities in Ontario. All we're asking for is some fairness for all of the

people who choose to send their children to independent schools, and all we're asking for is some fairness to taxpayers, to whom you promised you would not increase taxes at the time of the last

election.

Premier, the same London Free Press

article confirms that Chatham-Kent, St. Thomas, Stratford, Sarnia and Elgin county will see taxpayers "stung" by your

so-called fairer deal. Will you confirm that you have the full support of the member for Chatham-Kent Essex in cutting what local treasurer Stuart Wood says is about 14% of its tax base? He calls

it "a huge hit" for Chatham-Kent. Can you confirm that you and the member for Chatham-Kent Essex think that this double-digit property tax increase for the people who live there is, to use your

words, "good news" for them?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: Let me tell you, first of all, that Pat Hoy is an absolutely marvellous representative on behalf of his community --

absolutely marvellous.

I know that the leader of the official opposition will be interested in some of the comments made about this new Ontario municipal partnership fund.

Bill Murdoch, for instance, said, "I appreciate the money that Hanover is going to get: I will applaud that."

Here's the township treasurer, Margaret Black from Ramara township, who says, "With a $685,000 grant from the province, Ramara township can potentially erase a

projected 5.39% municipal tax increase and put a large sum of money in the bank.... Taxes can't go anywhere but lower."

That is the end result of this new program. It is fair, it is transparent and it was desperately needed.

Mr. Tory: We agree that the member for Chatham-Kent Essex is a good fellow. You should probably start listening to him if he's saying to you

that this is unfair that you're fleecing his taxpayers in this way.

Premier, according to municipal treasurers, St. Thomas will lose $1.4 million in annual funding, Stratford will get about $550,000 less and Sarnia will be down

$230,000. These are the numbers presented by municipal treasurers. Taxpayers in those areas, according to Sarnia Mayor Mike Bradley, one of your fellow travellers, are being "fleeced."

You said that your new program is good news for all. Can you explain to taxpayers in Chatham-Kent, St. Thomas, Stratford and Sarnia, who are being let down by

your Liberal MPPs, how getting fleeced is good news for them?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: Again, the leader of the official opposition is a defender of the status quo, and we don't accept the status quo. Remember,

the motivation for this came as a result of the supposedly neutral downloading process left to us by the Tories. We've decided to clean this up. We've introduced a new system that is fair and

transparent.

Let me tell you about some of the things it does. Mr. Tory may not like this, but in Caledon they're getting $1.2 million more; Kawartha Lakes, $2.7 million

more; Port Colborne, $1 million more; Gananoque, $302,000 more; Pembroke, $418,000 more; Wilmot, $556,000 more; Smiths Falls, $568,000 more; Wasaga Beach, $765,000 more; Gravenhurst, $674,000 more;

and Ingersoll is getting $600,000 more as a result of this new program. I can tell you that people in those communities, as well as the Ontario Municipal Association, are pleased with this

program.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): New question.

Mr. Tory: Only this Premier could describe a program that robs Peter to pay Paul as being fair.

My question is again to the Premier. Yesterday, when we asked about the funding cuts in Cobourg under this new so-called fairer program you continue to extol

today, you answered that Leeds-Grenville, almost two hours down the 401 from Cobourg, is better off. Well, Augusta township in Leeds-Grenville will lose over $150,000 in annual funding starting

next year under this new McGuinty program. The township's chief administrative officer, Sharon Wilkinson, quoted in the Brockville Recorder and Times, says that residents could face a property tax

increase of more than 120% as a result of your cuts. Premier, how can you explain that a 120% property tax increase, due to your cuts, is the good news that you keep standing here and talking

about? How could that be?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I know the Chair of the Management Board is anxious to get in on this.

Hon. Gerry Phillips (Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet): Again, I think the people of Ontario should appreciate what we have developed

here. This is a fair and transparent formula that treats all municipalities in the province fairly. It is open, it is transparent, and the people of Ontario should understand that.

Secondly, we're talking about adding $38 million. This may not seem like a lot to the Leader of the Opposition, but to the taxpayers of Ontario, it's over a 6%

increase in this fund. Every single municipality in the province will receive at least as much money in 2005 as they got in 2004. We think this is a fair and equitable formula, and it's responsible

in the interest of the taxpayers.

Mr. Tory: Again to the Premier: You keep listing the people that you claim were on the elevator; we know the people who are getting the shaft

here.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order.

Mr. Tory: Yesterday's Owen Sound Sun Times says the municipality of Grey Highlands will lose $825,000 over the next four years under your

so-called good-news-for-all program. According to Treasurer Alan Selby, that is 25% of that municipality's budget. He's quoted as saying, "We will have to raise our tax rates by 25% and/or make

expense cuts over the next four years." Across Grey county, seven of the nine municipalities are losing money under this so-called fairer program. You said this is good news for all Ontarians. Are

you proud of the good news that the 25% McGuinty property tax increase represents for residents of Grey county? Are you proud of that?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: What do the people of Ontario expect? They expect that their provincial government will treat every municipality fairly and

equitably. You have not yet indicated any concern or disagreement with the fairness of the formula. The formula is fair. It treats each municipality fairly and equitably. I repeat to the people of

Ontario: $38 million more money in this fund this year, a 6.1% increase, no municipality getting less money and I think 250 municipalities getting more money. So I say once again to the leader of

the third party, what do the people of Ontario expect from the provincial government? It's fairness, it's equity and that we treat every municipality fairly. That's exactly what this formula does.

I have yet to hear you dispute the fairness of the formula. That's what this formula gives: fairness and equity to every municipality.

Mr. Tory: I think that the residents of St. Thomas and Sarnia and Grey Highlands and Huron county -- which I'm going to talk about now --

expect some honesty from this government. That's what they expect, but they're going to be waiting a long time for that.

Premier, Huron county is set to lose every single penny in annual funding under your so-called good-news-for-all program. Incredibly, your member for

Huron-Bruce calls this good news for her riding. Huron county treasurer, David Carey, quoted in the Goderich Signal-Star said that at first glance the program sounds great, but it will cost the

county in the long term. According to the county's own numbers, over $2.4 million in funding will be phased out over the next four years. Councillor David Urlin says the provincial changes were "on

the back of rural Ontario again."

Premier, how can you and the member for Huron-Bruce describe a $2.4-million cut in funding as good news for the residents of Huron county? How can do you

that?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I don't mean to embarrass the member. I know you are attempting to speak on behalf of the municipalities in Ontario. You

put out a release the other day saying that in the riding of Perth-Middlesex, my colleague Mr. Wilkinson's riding, one of his municipalities, Southgate, was going to get a cut. Well, I should

inform the people of Ontario that Southgate is not in Perth-Middlesex; it's in the Leader of the Opposition's riding. So I wonder if a page could come over and --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. I'd just ask members to stop heckling the Chair of Management Board so he can just finish his answer in 10 seconds.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I will be sending a map over to the Leader of the Opposition, which indicates that Southgate is actually in your riding. So

if you're purporting to speak on behalf of municipalities, I think they should understand that you are not quite sure what municipalities are in your own riding.

Mr. Tory: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: The residents of Southgate, which is in my riding -- and I'm proud of that -- are appalled at this

cutback regardless of whose riding it is.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. That might be a disagreement, but it's not a point of order.

CHILDREN'S SERVICES

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Premier. The first 18 months of the McGuinty government have been difficult

and painful for Ontario's children. Some 373,000 Ontario children live below the poverty line. Nine out of 10 Ontario children lack access to adequate child care. Hundreds of Ontario's autistic

children are going without the IBI therapy they desperately need. Severely disabled children are being taken from their families, and custody is being taken by children's aid societies in order

that those children can get the services they need. I would say this is simply inexcusable and unacceptable in Ontario today.

Premier, you promised to do something about these things, and so far these children haven't seen anything from your government. When are you going to keep

these promises?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Speaker, you won't be surprised to learn that I take issue with the

leader of the NDP's statements and assertions.

No government ever before has moved more quickly when it comes to helping children in this province, and I'm very proud of our record. In our first 17 months

or so, we have invested an additional $1.7 billion to help children. We created a new ministry specifically responsible for children and youth services -- never been done before. We've invested

$156 million for free vaccines for children. That saves the family, by the way, about $600 per child. We have invested $1.1 billion in education funding alone for smaller classes, more teachers,

more training, a better learning environment and, not surprisingly, better test scores. We have invested $365 million in special education funding and $58 million to create 4,000 new affordable

child care spaces. That is the first boost in 10 years.

We are proud of our record when it comes to supporting the children of Ontario.

Mr. Hampton: It's bizarre to hear the Premier take credit for, in fact, federal money that's come to Ontario.

Premier, this is what you had to say during the election: "We will help our schools develop good citizens through character education. Character education is

about values such as respect, honesty, responsibility and fairness." But right now families are wondering: Does it show respect to refuse to meet with the parents of autistic children? Does it show

respect when you refuse to meet with children who are affected by your promise to stop the clawback of the national child benefit? Does it show responsibility to promise 300 million provincial

dollars for child care and fail to provide even a penny? Does it show fairness to discriminate against children because of age, disability and poverty? Premier, what lesson do you think children

are getting as a result of your government's lack of character and failure to keep your promises?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: Let me take the opportunity to tell you what else we are doing for Ontario children. Of course, my measure for success is

not the leader of the NDP. We speak to reasonable, objective people in Ontario. Given our circumstances, I am proud that we have found $1.7 billion for additional investment in programs that

support Ontario children.

Some of the other things we have already invested in, and there is always more to do, but let me tell you about some of the things we have already done: $25

million for children's mental health programs; that is the first significant increase in 12 years. Now, it is not enough for the leader of NDP, but we are proud of that. We have invested an

additional $64 million in our children's aid societies. Again, it is not enough for the leader of the NDP, but we're proud of that record. We've invested $8.3 million in our Healthy Babies, Healthy

Children program. It's not enough for the leader of the NDP, but we are proud of that program. I have more as well to list subsequently.

Mr. Hampton: It is interesting to hear Dalton McGuinty take credit for federal money invested in Healthy Babies, Healthy Children.

Premier, I want to ask you about just one child, who is seriously affected by one of your broken promises. She's a young girl named Natasha, who believed you

when you said you would stop clawing back the national child benefit supplement from her and her family. Here is what Natasha wrote on this postcard, and you might be interested to read this

postcard. It says, "I like to draw animé and read those books, but our school library doesn't have them and my parents can't afford to buy them. Please help us by letting us keep the

money."

Premier, where is the character in your government, when you promised to end the clawback of the national child benefit and then you do this to a little girl

like Natasha?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: Let me say that, again, I am very proud of the fact that we have stopped clawing back the national child benefit. That has

resulted in a $7-million increase this year alone. Next year's increase will grow to a $20-million investment.

We are proud of our record when it comes to supporting Ontario's children, especially given our financial circumstances. We are proud of the fact that we have

come up with an additional $1.7 billion in addition to those programs I listed earlier. We found $4.7 million in preschool speech and language programs; $1.2 million in a new infant hearing

program; $24 million over four years in capital funding for our children's treatment centres. Those are all good programs. They all speak to our fundamental values, which reflect the values of the

people of Ontario. We are there for our children when they need us, and we will continue to do more for them.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): New question.

Mr. Hampton: To the Premier: You haven't stopped clawing back the national child benefit. This is what families get: $1 a week. You keep 97%

of the money, and don't try to fool parents, like parents here, that somehow you are not doing that.

I want to ask you about another situation. Ontario's new Ombudsman, André Marin, believes there is a very serious issue that requires in effect a special

investigation into the care of children with severe disabilities. Many families, many parents across this province have to give up custody of their children to children's aid societies in order

that their children receive the services they need. They're forced to give up custody, sometimes forever.

Your government has known about this for the last 18 months, yet you've done nothing about that as well. Tell us, Premier, where is the character in your

government's behaviour on this issue?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: To the Minister of Children and Youth Services.

Hon. Marie Bountrogianni (Minister of Children and Youth Services, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration): I welcome the new Ombudsman to

his post and look forward to working with him. But we did not wait for the new Ombudsman or his comments to start working on this issue; we've already started. The truth of the matter is that for

over a decade there weren't any significant increases for children's mental health or children's treatment centres or anything for special-needs children in this province. The solution is to build

capacity so that all children can have the resources and therapies they need. We're doing that. Unfortunately it will not happen overnight, but we are well on our way to meeting the needs of the

children of this province.

Mr. Hampton: The McGuinty government wants people to believe that stopping the clawback of one loonie a week is something really important for

families who are struggling on the lowest incomes in the province. But what they're wondering about is this: They're getting a character lesson all right: the character of a Liberal government that

neglects children with the highest needs in the province, the character of a Liberal government that breaks promises to children over and over again. Some parents are forced to give up custody of

their children just to get the services they need.

Premier, it was you who said that character education is about values such as respect, honesty, responsibility and fairness. Where's the fairness to those

parents? Where's the fairness to these kids who are struggling on the lowest incomes in the province, and you're taking 90% of the child benefit away from them every month?

Hon. Mrs. Bountrogianni: I'm very proud of our government's record and the Premier's record in helping the children of this province. Last

year, in a very, very difficult budget, we increased children's services by $200 million, and that's only this ministry alone, not counting education, not counting community and social services and

not counting health. I'd like to remind the honourable member of his government's record on mental health in children: They cut funding for mental health by $23.3 million in 1992 and again by $42

million in 1994. We increased mental health money for children alone by $25 million in our first year, which grows to $38 million in our second year. I'll put my record against his record any

day.

Mr. Hampton: I've heard it said that the last refuge of a scoundrel is to try to rewrite history. This is the history of your government,

Premier. I want to remind you of three promises that you made to children. Number 1, the baby bonus: "We will end the clawback --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Could I ask the government side to come to order. I cannot hear the leader of the third party's question.

Mr. Hampton: Number 1: "We will end the clawback of the national child benefit supplement. This clawback is wrong and we will end it."

Promise number 2: "We are committing $300 million in new provincial money for Best Start; we will spend this money in the right way for child care."

Promise number 3, on autism: "I believe that the lack of government-funded IBI treatment for autistic children over six is unfair and discriminatory. The

Ontario Liberals support extending" IBI "treatment beyond the age of six."

Premier, today we are going to present a motion after question period holding you to your three promises. Are you going to show up to support and vote for your

own promises?

Hon. Mrs. Bountrogianni: I'm very proud to say that Best Start is well on its way. We've created 4,000 new spaces, the first investment in

child care in over a decade. We have --

Interjection.

Hon. Jim Watson (Minister of Consumer and Business Services): The member from Hamilton's not in her seat.

The Speaker: Order. I'm quite aware of that. I'd like some order so that the minister can respond to the question.

Hon. Mrs. Bountrogianni: I'm very proud to say that we have significantly increased the funding for IBI therapy for children with autism, we

have reduced the waiting list for assessment by 72%, and as of last month, 25% more children were receiving IBI therapy. We're the only jurisdiction in North America that actually does this on a

systematic level.

On Monday, I met with the head of special education for the US government. No federal or state government even recommends any particular therapy, and yet we

give up to 40 hour a week for children with autism under the age of six. Another comparison they don't want to hear is that in the United States, the children that do receive it, receive up to 25

hours. Again, we are the most generous in North America.

MUNICIPAL FINANCES

Mr. John Yakabuski (Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke): My question is for the Premier. Premier, your Chair of Management Board was talking about

fairness, but my warden in Renfrew county doesn't see much fairness in your Ontario municipal partnership fund formula. What looked like a reasonable, modest increase of 8.7% in 2005 turns out,

once your shell game is discovered, to be a $3.7-million decrease in 2006, a further $500,000 in 2007, and $850,000 less in 2008. This is not fair. For one of the most economically challenged areas

of the province, my county of Renfrew, it simply cannot be tolerated. Massive tax increases will have to follow to ratepayers if you do not do something to assist places like Renfrew county. This

is not fair. How do you square that with the people of Renfrew county and Warden Bob Sweet?.

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): To the Chair of Management Board.

Hon. Gerry Phillips (Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet): What is the purpose of this? It is to ensure that every single municipality is

treated fairly. I remind the people of Ontario that we are fixing a dramatic problem created by the previous Conservative government, where they downloaded enormous services on to the

municipalities and then developed a formula that made no sense. There was no logic to the formula. Municipalities told us, "We need a fair and equitable formula." So we've done what I think the

people of Ontario would expect: a fair, transparent formula. I would repeat: $38 million, over a 6% increase in 2005. I think the taxpayers will be shaking their heads. Do you not think a 6%

increase is fair? Do you not think $38 million is fair? Do you not think the fact that every single municipality in the province gets at least as much money in 2005 as it did in 2004 is

fair?

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Supplementary.

Mr. Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): Premier, travel south to tobacco country. On March 29, your government announced $15 million in

transition funding for the tobacco counties of Elgin, Oxford, Norfolk and Brant. However, less than two weeks later, you announced the same tobacco counties will now receive a CRF cut of $15.6

million. I quote Norfolk Mayor Rita Kalmbach: "Now we seem to be penalized and the heavily populated areas are getting the attention," and, "Certainly I am ready to lobby with the other mayors to

tell Dalton McGuinty ... this is not good enough." Last night Norfolk county council indicated they're shut out of COMRIF. Councillor John Wells: "We seem left out in the cold." Councillor Ted

Whitworth: "The McGuinty government seems systematically hostile to the interests of rural Ontario."

Premier, can you tell me, the mayor of Norfolk and Norfolk county councillors, why are you hostile to rural Ontario?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I go back to the inconsistencies between the facts and what the Conservative Party purports. They said there's going to be

a $47-million cut. There's no $47-million cut. There's a $38-million increase. Again the member, I think, has indicated a cut: No municipality in 2005 is getting less money than they did in 2004.

We have developed a formula to deal with our municipalities that, if you look at it, is fair, transparent and deals with the issues the municipalities come to us with: policing; social services; a

special part of the formula dealing with our smaller municipalities, our northern municipalities. It's a fair, transparent formula. I say to the people of Ontario again: $38 million more, a 6%

increase. No municipality is getting less money. I think that's what the people of Ontario would expect from us, and that's what we've delivered.

AUTISM TREATMENT

Ms. Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): My question is to the Minister of Children and Youth Services. Three moms of autistic children are in the

gallery today, wondering about IBI for their sons.

Jacob Vogels has been on the wait list at Kinark since April 2003. His family has taken out a loan and borrowed money from family to pay for his treatment.

Jonathan Cordona has been on the wait list at TPAS since May 2003. His family paid for IBI from September 2003 to December 2004 by remortgaging their home and

borrowing money from family.

Joshua Currie started on the wait list at Kinark on December 16, 2002. He finally got service two days before his sixth birthday. He needs ongoing IBI.

Justice Kiteley's decision is forcing you to do what Dalton McGuinty promised to do, which is to stop cutting off children at the age of six. It means -- just

like McGuinty's promise meant -- that you have to increase IBI to those under six and you have to start IBI in the schools for those over six to ensure that all the needs will be met.

Minister, what concrete steps are you taking to provide IBI at school and to increase IBI for those under six to ensure that the needs of Jacob, Jonathan and

Joshua will all be met?

Hon. Marie Bountrogianni (Minister of Children and Youth Services, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration): The honourable member knows well

enough that even before this decision by the judge, we had enhanced the under-six program. We had invested $10 million of new money for the IBI program for those under the age of six. We had 25%

more children under the age of six accessing IBI therapy, and we reduced significantly the wait list for assessment. The ruling has added complexities to the wait list, and we are studying the

implications of those.

We also had, before the ruling, a school-based program to supplement the already very generous program that the Minister of Education has for all special-needs

children in the schools, and I will talk about that some more in the supplementary.

Ms. Martel: Let me quote from what Justice Kiteley says about the school program:

"The Minister of Education failed to develop policy and give direction to school boards to ensure that ... IBI services are provided to children of compulsory

school age. Indeed, the actions and inactions of the Ministry of Education and the minister created a policy barrier to the availability of IBI ... in school. The absence of ... IBI means that

children with autism are excluded from the opportunity to access learning with the consequential deprivation of skills, the likelihood of isolation from society and the loss of the ability to

exercise the rights and freedoms to which all Canadians are entitled."

That's your school program, Minister. You should be ashamed of it. When Dalton McGuinty made the promise that he did, if he meant what he said -- and that is

questionable -- it meant that your government would have to provide IBI in the school and would have to increase services for those under six. I ask you again: What concrete steps are you taking to

provide IBI in the school and to provide more IBI for those under six so that these children get the IBI they need?

Hon. Mrs. Bountrogianni: Before I answer the question, a point of clarification: The judge was not referring to my ministry's school-based

program. She knew very well that it was a new program that was just being implemented.

We have some data from that program: Since September, our autism professionals have had more than 3,400 contacts with educational assistants and more than

2,200 contacts with teachers across the province. This is particularly important for the north and rural areas. We are closing the gap between the resources that are available in many urban areas

for children with special needs and those in the north. I would hope that the member opposite would care about what we are doing for the north, because 316 schools in the north are covered so far

by our new program; 600 customized resources developed for teachers and EAs to help these children. So we are moving ahead to help children in the schools.

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

Mr. Peter Fonseca (Mississauga East): My question is for the Minister of Energy. The Ontario Medical Association has long held that air

pollution in Ontario has a significant impact on human health, and numerous studies have shown that our coal plants are some of the worst polluters in North America, let alone Ontario.

Minister, I understand you released a new study today that delves into the true cost of coal, which takes into account the health and environmental costs of

coal and which better reflects the true sticker price of this form of electricity generation. I'm sure this study will be truly interesting to the members of the opposition and to this House. It

will be interesting for my residents of Mississauga East to hear of this study. For all Ontarians, can you please impart some of the details of this study?

Hon. Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): I'm pleased to respond to the question. When health and environmental

impacts are considered, coal is shown to be the most expensive electricity generation option for Ontario. The study shows the true cost of coal is in air-pollution-related illnesses, hospital

visits, and indeed, unfortunately, premature deaths. The true cost of coal is $4.4 billion annually. Some 77% of this represents hidden health and environmental damages that coal causes. Replacing

coal with mixed refurbished nuclear and natural gas generation would have total real costs, including health and environmental costs, of $1.94 billion annually, half the cost of coal. More

stringent controls on coal still result in total annual costs of $2.8 billion, a billion more than the options we have been pursuing.

Mr. Fonseca: Minister, I have to say that I feel sorry for the member for Dufferin-Peel-Wellington-Grey. You see, on Monday he was in the

Sarnia Observer, saying that the elimination of coal-fired plants is a good goal. But then, I guess, his caucus got hold of him. Perhaps dirty coal supporters like Jim Flaherty and John Baird are

still calling the shots, because the next day the official opposition's supposed leader had the Sarnia Observer issue a correction to their Monday story. Not only that, but along with the

correction a whole new story came out on Tuesday, and guess what the headline was. The headline was "Coal Not Ruled Out by Tory." That's quite a flip-flop. Even Ernie Eves supported the coal

shutdown. Minister, what type of position is the member for Dufferin-Peel-Wellington-Grey taking?

Hon. Mr. Duncan: The member is absolutely right. Let's be charitable and say the Tories have had a soft position on this issue all across the

province, and the issue changes from day to day.

Tomorrow, we will be closing Lakeview -- the first closure of a coal plant. I should tell you, even though the Tories oppose that, even though they tell us to

keep the coal plants open --

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Duncan: Here are the quotes from the House; here's Hansard. Toby Barrett: "Quite recently, this evening, the member for Halton

mentioned that shutting down coal plants would be a huge mistake." There it is. John Baird: "But for Nanticoke and Lambton and the two in northern Ontario, the shutdowns are just foolish." He says

keep it open. We say no, we won't. We say 2015 is too far off in the future. We've set a goal. We're moving to it. We're going to achieve it. We're going clean up the air and fix the mess the Tory

government left this province for so long.

ANAPHYLACTIC SHOCK

Mr. Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): My question is to the Premier. Despite pleas from patients and their families, you refuse to fund treatment for

orphan diseases such as Fabry, and notwithstanding a court order, you continue to refuse to provide funding for IBI treatment for autistic children. I want to read you another promise you made, and

this is from your election campaign platform: "The number of deaths caused by anaphylactic reactions to food is increasing every year. Without immediate attention, severely allergic children can

die from anaphylactic shock. To protect children with life-threatening allergies, we will require every school to develop an anaphylactic plan based on province-wide standards."

Mr. Premier, you have now been in government for 18 months. There is no such plan in the province to date. Have you changed your mind about this? Is it no

longer urgent? When do you intend to put this plan in place?

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

Hon. George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): The honourable member will know that, in 18 months, this has been a very

activist government with respect to efforts and initiatives to protect our children. We have a tremendous advantage, obviously, on the very specific issue the honourable member raised, and it's to

be found in the form of our government whip, who has brought forward a piece of legislation that I believe enjoys very significant support in this Legislature. It's before committee. This is a

demonstration of our government's commitment to be able to move forward and make progress on an issue.

I, like all members, am a recipient of significant interest from the community. But I just want to say to the honourable member that his attempt to signify

this issue as one of inaction is rather inappropriate, given the very long list of initiatives targeted at children that the Premier had the opportunity earlier in question period to apprise all

members of.

Mr. Klees: I'd like to remind the Minister of Health and the Premier that the member from Brant introduced his bill, Bill 3, in this House

some 18 months ago. It is not before committee. It is awaiting committee hearings. It has not been called for committee.

This Premier and this government refuse to live up to their promise to take action. In the words of the member from Brant, when he was debating this issue, he

made it very clear that this is an urgent issue, that children are at risk --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): I'll give you a chance to ask the question.

Could I ask the ministers to be quiet, please. When I say "ministers," I know there are some who are quiet in question period, but there are many who just keep

on shouting down members when they are asking a question. I would appreciate very much if you'd keep quiet so I can hear the questions from the other side.

Mr. Klees: During the time of debate on Bill 3, the member from Brant made this statement in this House: "We've had examples of young children

dying as a result of anaphylactic shock." This was an urgent matter. It was a promise by the Premier during the election campaign. We have had no action. This bill has not been called before

committee.

I'm asking the Premier: Do you consider this an urgent issue, or are you going to break this promise, as you have done many others, and insist that people

continue to beg you to look after it?

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: Government House leader.

Hon. Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): Unlike the previous government, we sent this bill to committee. That party,

when it was in office, voted against sending the bill to committee. We have offered to that party to begin calling private members' bills in committee.

I can assure you, this bill will be called in committee and it will receive the kind of hearing it deserves and, I'll remind the member, the kind of hearing it

didn't get in 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003: all years that that bill sat on the order paper and your government refused to deal with it. This government's taking action.

The member may want to refer to today's Hansard. It's on page 20, under the standing committee on general government: Bill 3, under Mr. Levac's name.

Let me tell you, if you start co-operating, we'll bring private members' bills to committees. You wouldn't even send them there.

We're proud of our record. We're proud of our member. Thank goodness he stood up on this issue.

NATIONAL CHILD BENEFIT SUPPLEMENT

Mr. Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): My question is to the Premier. Premier, you continually and almost daily break your promise to end the

clawback of the baby bonus from kids whose parents are on social assistance. To date, 115 organizations and 30 municipalities have joined the Hands Off the Baby Bonus campaign. Perhaps you've seen

some of the cards: a little boy named Dylan. His mother's in the audience today.

First Nations communities and leaders have added their voices to the campaign. Last week, Alvin Fiddler, the deputy grand chief of the Nishnawbe-Aski Nation,

said, "We will continue to apply pressure to the province to honour their campaign commitment" to end the clawback.

Your own minister is flying north to see the poverty of the First Nations. Premier, can you tell First Nations people across Ontario why you continue to break

your promise to address the endemic poverty in their communities?

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

Hon. Marie Bountrogianni (Minister of Children and Youth Services, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration): I'm extremely proud that, for the

first time in 12 years, my colleague Minister Pupatello and our government increased social assistance for the most vulnerable in the province. I'm also very proud of my colleague and my government

because we did stop going forward on the clawback from the federal government to the poorest of the poor, which is $7 million extra money for parents and children who need it most. This number will

increase to over $22 million this year.

I also have to remind the honourable member across the way that part of the money that was planned with the former government goes to children's treatment

centres and children's mental health programs, which often do help the most vulnerable and the poorest children in our province.

Mr. Prue: This government can find $400 million for gambling in Windsor; this government can only find $7 million for the poorest of poor

children.

Mr. Premier, here's what parents affected by the clawback have to say: Madeline Chokomolin of Wahgoshig First Nation, a single mother of five, says, "This is

only an effective system to keep the poor poor, while people like Premier Dalton McGuinty could dine on fine foods without giving a second thought to those children affected by the clawback."

Donna, from Keewatin, says, "I am raising three children and working. My children need the money you promised."

Maureen, from Hamilton, says, "Teenagers, as you must know, cost a fortune. How about some help? I helped elect you, so how about helping us too?"

Premier, this afternoon we will debate a motion calling on you to keep your promise to end the clawback, a promise you made and reiterated many times. Will you

be there to debate it? More importantly, will you vote yes to keep your own promises?

Hon. Mrs. Bountrogianni: I'm incredibly proud of another colleague, the Minister of Health, George Smitherman, who increased significantly

funding for the aboriginal healing wellness strategy, which was flatlined for 10 years.

Also, I'd like to remind the honourable member that we doubled, from $4 million to $8.5 million, student nutrition programs and increased the efficiency with

respect to how they will be implemented in the schools. We also invested an additional $8.3 million in Healthy Babies, Healthy Children. A lot of that money does go toward helping the poorest of

the poor in the province.

I want to reiterate that for the first time in 12 years we've increased social assistance to the most vulnerable in this province. We know we need to do more,

and we are working well together as colleagues, as a government, with the help of our municipal partners, and in future with our federal partners, to do even more for the people of this

province.

FILM CLASSIFICATION

Mr. David Zimmer (Willowdale): My question is for the Minister of Consumer and Business Services. There's been a lot of talk in the press

about Bill 158, the film classification legislation. As I understand it, the old Theatres Act was last updated in 1962, so it was obviously in desperate need of an update. Minister, how does this

legislation reflect the changing marketplace while continuing to protect and inform Ontario's citizens? And how does this new legislation respond to last year's court decision on film

classification?

Hon. Jim Watson (Minister of Consumer and Business Services): I thank the member for Willowdale for his question. At the members know, Bill

158 just appeared at committee yesterday. It deals with a court ruling that was handed down a little over a year ago. Our lawyers and the Attorney General's lawyers have reviewed the legislation

and are quite confident that it lives up to the judge's ruling from a year ago.

I also want to point out the support that this piece of legislation has from an individual who has great respect in the community, Bill Moody, an educator and

former chair of the OFRB. He said, as a result of our keeping the classification authority in the bill, "It's ludicrous to think that parents have the time, tools or expertise to preview every

movie that their children may want to see or electronic game their child may want to play. A classification system that provides a consistent manner of reporting, to which parents can refer, that

is clear and transparent has become a real necessity."

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Order. The member from Niagara Centre, could you just keep your voice down a bit.

Mr. Zimmer: Minister, parents rely on the film ratings when taking their kids to movies. I understand that video game ratings are being

enforced, which is welcome news for the many parents shocked at the graphic materials in some of these games.

Sue Lott, counsel of the Public Interest Advocacy Centre agrees. She says, "As a consumer organization, the Public Interest Advocacy Centre supports the

government's initiative, through the Film Classification Act, to provide helpful information to Ontario consumers. We are also pleased that this legislation respects the Charter of Rights'

important protections around freedom of expression."

Minister, if this legislation is passed, the power of the film board to censor mainstream films will no longer exist. How, then, does the legislation ensure

that the most vulnerable members of our society, our children, are still protected from seeing material inappropriate for children?

Hon. Mr. Watson: The member has a very good point. The fact of the matter is that under Bill 158, we still remain in the classification

business because we think that is an important public service that the OFRB does provide. I was disappointed, to be perfectly honest, that the NDP spent an awful lot more time not defending the

rights of parents, not defending the rights of children, but basically cozying up to the pornography industry and supporting their point of view that we should be out of the classification

business.

I believe that Bill 158 is on the right track. The Retail Council of Canada is supportive, as are the Entertainment Software Association of Canada, parents and

educators. I'd urge the NDP and the member from Niagara Centre to spend a little more time defending the rights of parents and children and a little less time defending the rights of the

pornography industry in Ontario.

COURT SECURITY

Mr. Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): My question today is for the Attorney General. Your government received a report on October 9, 2003, just

shortly after you were elected, which was the result of a broad consultation on court security undertaken by Hugh Thomas. That was almost 20 months ago. Now I understand you're consulting on this

issue yet again. This time the member from Guelph-Wellington is leading the review of court security issues involving municipalities and police chiefs. We believe the time for consultation has come

to an end and it's time for some action. As the minister responsible for court security in this province, please tell us exactly what options are on the table right now to resolve this issue and,

specifically, are you actually considering having the province take over court security?

Hon. Michael Bryant (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs, minister responsible for democratic renewal): I thank the

member for the question. Yes, we are continuing to not only speak with local municipalities and chiefs of police, who I regularly meet with, but with police associations on the subject of court

security. It is, obviously, partly a jurisdictional issue that involves an independent judiciary, and their administrative independence is protected under our constitution. Then the issue becomes

whether, in the courthouses themselves, the Ministry of the Attorney General is in fact going to be responsible for it or the municipalities are going to be responsible for it. It has been more

than 10 years now that it has been a local decision involving local priorities and a local perspective that permits the appropriate security for each of those courthouses.

Mr. Dunlop: The McGuinty government's lack of action has left police services asking many questions. For example, the city of Owen Sound has a

huge shortfall in the area of court security, and that's been drawn to our attention. I know that your government is floating the idea of taking the funding for the 1,000 promised police officers

and using it instead to resolve the court security issue. That's our understanding and that's what's been drawn to our attention. If you're even thinking about doing this, police services need to

know that, and they need to know now. They've already been subjected to more than their fair share of zero-dollar announcements from your government. Minister, why is your government even talking

about breaking its promise of hiring 1,000 new police officers, especially to fix a problem that falls under your ministry?

Hon. Mr. Bryant: I'm happy to answer your question. I'll say, though, that the responsibility for court security falls under the Ministry of

Community Safety and Correctional Services, and I know, as justice critic, you'd know that.

We're working with municipalities to find solutions. It's the responsibility of municipalities. It's the local perspective that deals with court facilities to

pay for these costs when they're used by neighbouring municipalities. I certainly am very interested in any suggestions the member may have with respect to how we might be doing a better job. I do

believe that the parliamentary assistant to Minister Kwinter is leading an excellent review of court security issues, and I would expect that she would want to get your input on that as well. I

thank the member for his question.

CHILD CARE

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): My question is for the Minister of Children and Youth Services. On February 17, and in fact again today,

you said that you've created over 4,000 new child care spaces in Ontario. Minister, you know you misspoke. Here's your chance to correct the record. You claim the McGuinty government funded actual

child care spaces. You know that the new spaces were created by the federal government. You had nothing to do with it. You promised to invest but, in reality, you haven't created --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Order.

Ms. Horwath: You promised to invest, but in reality, you haven't created a single new not-for-profit child care space for any of the 30,000

children on the waiting list. Why are you pretending to do something that you are not doing?

Hon. Marie Bountrogianni (Minister of Children and Youth Services, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration): I'm very disappointed that the

honourable member uses those words to ask the question, because I know that she knows me, and I know her quite well and respect her, and I believe there's mutual respect.

There's no pretence here. When we made these announcements, we readily said that this was federal money. This was the first time federal money for child care

was spent for child care in over a decade. There's no pretence there. But the lion's share of child care is still paid for by the province of Ontario. We look forward to working with Minister

Dryden toward getting more money for child care and investing in our Best Start plan.

As I said earlier, our Best Start plan has already begun. One of the three demonstration sites which will guide us are in the honourable member's riding, and

she knows that quite well, as well.

Ms. Horwath: Contrary to the flowery words of the minister, there are no new provincial dollars that are flowing for direct funding, nor

Ontario dollars for more non-profit child care spaces -- no investment in the issues that she describes for zero to threes, nothing for the over sixes. What kind of game is being run here,

Minister? The expansion that you talk about is a waiting game. Direct funding of non-profit child care is a simple, clear and immediate solution.

When you were in opposition, you told advocates that you were committed to a directly funded model. Why have you changed your tune? There's no direct funding.

Your model is about as seamless as a patchwork quilt. Admit that your approach is full of holes.

Will you commit to expanding the number of non-profit child care spaces by providing direct, stable core funding, and vote for our opposition motion today?

Will you commit to fixing at least the 10 problems that the child care experts said you need to fix?

Hon. Mrs. Bountrogianni: First, let me clarify. When I was in opposition, I respected both the not-for-profit and the for-profit centres,

because they are under the same regulations and provide excellent services for children across this province.

Having said that, 95% of our child care centres in schools are not-for-profit. We don't anticipate that to change for our Best Start plan. The member knows

quite well, because I told her this last week, last Thursday -- whenever we ate with the chamber here and in the Legislature -- that the demonstration site monies are provincial money. The healthy

babies is provincial money. The infant hearing is provincial money. So the member is wrong, and I'd be very happy to arrange for a briefing from my ministry.

FOREST INDUSTRY

Mr. Bill Mauro (Thunder Bay-Atikokan): My question is to the Minister of Natural Resources. As you know, today Abitibi Consolidated announced

the putting up for sale of their mill in Thunder Bay. The company believes that this operation could create more immediate value to another party and is therefore preparing to sell the operation,

whose fibre needs are met by associated crown licences. A freehold of more than 500,000 acres of privately owned timber lands near Thunder Bay is also going to be marketed for sale during the

second quarter.

This is potentially bad news for the community of Thunder Bay and the employees of the Abitibi mill. Minister, can you tell us today what you are doing to help

Abitibi Consolidated maintain their workforce?

Hon. David Ramsay (Minister of Natural Resources): I'd like to thank the member from Thunder Bay-Atikokan for the concern that I know he has.

He has spoken to me many times about the consolidation that is going on in the pulp and paper industry, and I know how dependent Thunder Bay is on this particular sector of the forest industry.

I and my ministry have met with this particular company three times and are working with them on their plans. We think there's a tremendous opportunity here in

Thunder Bay, as they realize more value in that plant and put it on the market. I'd ask the member to work with the community, to help attract investors to make sure that this mill goes on to be a

strong contributor to the economy of that particular plant.

I'd like to thank my colleagues the Minister of Northern Development and Mines and the Minister of Energy for their co-operation. They have sent a fact-finder

to these companies right now, examining what the cogen opportunities are for these companies. Together, we're going to make sure we have a strong northern economy.

PETITIONS

FREDERICK BANTING HOMESTEAD

Mr. Jim Wilson (Simcoe-Grey): To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas Sir Frederick Banting was the man who discovered insulin and was Canada's first Nobel Prize recipient; and

"Whereas this great Canadian's original homestead located in the town of New Tecumseth" -- Alliston -- "is deteriorating and in danger of destruction because

of the inaction of the Ontario Historical Society; and

"Whereas the town of New Tecumseth, under the leadership of Mayor Mike MacEachern and former Mayor Larry Keogh, has been unsuccessful in reaching an agreement

with the Ontario Historical Society to use part of the land to educate the public about the historical significance of the work of Sir Frederick Banting;

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

"That the Minister of Culture and the Liberal government step in to ensure that the Banting homestead is kept in good repair and preserved for generations to

come."

I want to thank Larry Whitemore of Loretto for circulating that petition, and of course I've signed it in support.

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

Mr. Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): A petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario: "Whereas rebuilding our post-secondary education

system is critical to the future of our communities and our province; and

"Whereas high tuition user fees are resulting in massive student debt; and

"Whereas Ontario ranks second-last among all provinces in terms of total PSE budget received from government grants and has the highest percentage of total

post-secondary education revenues from private sources; and

"Whereas working and learning conditions must be healthy and safe, because working conditions are learning conditions; and

"Whereas the deferred maintenance cost at Ontario university campuses is estimated to have already reached the $2-billion mark;

"We, the undersigned, support the Canadian Union of Public Employees' call on the provincial government to invest sufficient public funds that will:

"

(1) Restore public money cut from operating funds since 1995 and bring Ontario up to the national average for funding post-secondary education;

"

(2) Finance the $1.98 billion needed for deferred maintenance; and

"

(3) Provide the funding needed to continue the tuition freeze beyond 2006 and increase grants to working-class families."

I support this petition.

HALTON RECYCLING PLANT

Mrs. Julia Munro (York North): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas noxious odours from the Halton recycling plant in Newmarket are adversely affecting the health and quality of life of residents and working people in

Newmarket; and

"Whereas local families have lost the enjoyment of their properties for themselves and their children, face threats to their health and well-being and risk a

decline in the value of their homes; and

"Whereas for the 300 members of the nearby main RCMP detachment, as well as other workers in the area, the odours are making their working conditions

intolerable;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, demand that the Minister of the Environment take immediate action to halt all noxious emissions and odours from the Halton

recycling plant, and take all steps necessary to force Halton Recycling to comply with environmental rules, including closing the plant if the odour problems continue."

I affix my signature as I am in complete agreement with this petition.

REGIONAL CENTRES FOR THE

DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas Dalton McGuinty and the Liberal government were elected based on their promise to rebuild public services in Ontario; and

"Whereas the Minister of Community and Social Services has announced plans to close Ontario's three remaining regional centres for people with developmental

disabilities, located in Smiths Falls, Orillia and Blenheim, Ontario;

"Whereas the regional centres are home to more than 1,000 disabled adults, many of whom have multiple diagnoses and severe problems that cannot be met in the

community;

"Whereas closing the regional centres will have a devastating impact on people with developmental disabilities, their families, the developmental services

sector and the economies of the local communities; and

"Whereas Ontario could use the professional staff and facilities of the regional centres to extend specialized services, support and professional training to

thousands more clients who live in the community, in partnership with families and community agencies;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to direct the government to keep Ontario's regional centres for people with developmental

disabilities open, and to transform them into `centres of excellence' to provide specialized services and support to Ontarians with developmental needs, no matter where they live."

I'm sending it down by way of Owen.

HEALTH CARE SERVICES

Mr. Jerry J. Ouellette (Oshawa): I have a petition that reads:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the current government has eliminated OHIP coverage for chiropractic services; and

"Whereas the current government has eliminated and reduced OHIP coverage for optometry services; and

"Whereas the current government has eliminated and reduced OHIP coverage for physiotherapy services; and

"Whereas the current government has refused to fund treatment for autistic children even after the courts and human rights commission ruled it should; and

"Whereas the current government has now decided to fund sex change operations, even though the Canada Health Act deems it not an essential health service;

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

"That the government of Ontario does not fund sex change operations and reinstates funding for delisted health services."

I affix my name in full support.

REGIONAL CENTRES FOR THE DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

Mr. Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): I have a petition here to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, which reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas Dalton McGuinty and the Liberal government were elected based on their promise to rebuild public services in Ontario;

"Whereas the Minister of Community and Social Services has announced plans to close Ontario's three remaining regional centres for people with developmental

disabilities, located in Smiths Falls, Orillia and Blenheim, Ontario;

"Whereas the regional centres are home to more than 1,000 disabled adults, many of whom have multiple diagnoses and severe problems that cannot be met in the

community;

"Whereas closing the regional centres will have a devastating impact on people with developmental disabilities, their families, the developmental services

sector and the economies of the local communities; and

"Whereas Ontario could use the professional staff and facilities of the regional centres to extend specialized services, support and professional training to

thousands more clients who live in the community, in partnership with families and community agencies;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to direct the government to keep Ontario's regional centres for people with developmental

disabilities open, and to transform them into `centres of excellence' to provide specialized services and support to Ontarians with developmental needs, no matter where they live."

It is signed by people from northern Ontario. I'm in agreement and would affix my signature thereto.

ANTI-SMOKING LEGISLATION

Mr. Phil McNeely (Ottawa-Orléans): I have a petition here submitted on behalf of Minister Watson. It's from Laurentian High School, J. S.

Woodsworth Secondary School, St. Paul's High School, Deslauriers school and Woodroffe High School.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas smoking and exposure to second-hand smoke is the number one preventable killer in Ontario today, and there is overwhelming evidence that retail

displays of tobacco products (power walls), in plain view of children and adults, increase the use of tobacco, we have collected ... postcards signed by persons from our school and community

supporting a smoke-free Ontario in 2005 and banning the use of power walls which promote tobacco use.

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to support the Smoke-Free Ontario Act to make all public places and workplaces smoke-free

and to ban the use of power walls. The city of Ottawa has been smoke-free since August 2001. All of Ontario deserves clean air."

I'm very pleased to submit this on behalf of Minister Watson.

Mr. Gerry Martiniuk (Cambridge): I have a petition signed by good citizens of Cambridge.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the current government has proposed province-wide legislation that would ban smoking in public places; and

"Whereas the proposed legislation will also prohibit smoking in private, non-profit clubs such as Legion halls, navy clubs and related facilities as well;

and

"Whereas these organizations have elected representatives that determine the rules and regulations that affect the membership of the individual club and

facility; and

"Whereas by imposing smoke-free legislation on these clubs disregards the rights of these citizens and the original intentions of these clubs, especially with

respect to our veterans;

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

"That the Parliament of Ontario exempt Legion halls, navy clubs and other non-profit, private or veterans' clubs from government smoke-free legislation."

I agree with this petition, and sign my name thereon.

HEALTH CARE SERVICES

Mr. Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): I have a petition that reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the McGuinty Liberal government is cutting provincial funding for essential health care services like optometry, physiotherapy and chiropractic

care;

"Whereas this privatization of health care services will force Ontarians to pay out-of-pocket for essential health care;

"Whereas Ontarians already pay for health care through their taxes and will be forced to pay even more through the government's new regressive health tax;

"Whereas the Liberals promised during the election that they would not cut or privatize health care services in Ontario;

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

"We demand the McGuinty Liberal government keep its promises and guarantee adequate provincial funding for critical health services like eye, physiotherapy and

chiropractic care."

I'm in agreement and will affix my signature thereto.

SCHOOL CLOSURES

Mr. John Yakabuski (Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke): I have a petition from parents and concerned residents with regard to the pending closure of

Ross Mineview school.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Renfrew county district board of education trustees voted March 29, 2005, to close Ross Mineview Public School in September 2005; and

"Whereas the Liberal government promised in their press release of February 17, 2005: `Final decisions about changes to operating funds will be made later this

spring. Revisions will be made to improve support for small schools, boards with smaller average school size and high declining enrolment jurisdictions. The revisions' objectives will be to make

all schools serving single communities operationally viable'; and

"Whereas Ross Mineview is the only elementary school in the rural community, formerly Ross township (northwest of Renfrew);

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

"To reverse the decision of the Renfrew County District School Board and to provide the funding to keep Ross Mineview Public School open and make it

operationally viable."

I affix my name to this and send it to the table.

HEALTH CARE SERVICES

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): This petition is to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, and it reads:

"Whereas the McGuinty Liberal government is cutting provincial funding for essential health care services like optometry, physiotherapy and chiropractic

care;

"Whereas this privatization of health care services will force Ontarians to pay out-of-pocket for essential health care;

"Whereas Ontarians already pay for health care through their taxes and will be forced to pay even more through the government's new regressive health tax;

"Whereas the Liberals promised during the election that they would not cut or privatize health care services in Ontario;

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

"We demand the McGuinty Liberal government keep its promises and guarantee adequate provincial funding for critical health services like eye, physiotherapy and

chiropractic care."

I agree with this petition. I've signed it, and I'm sending it to the Clerk's table by way of Alexandra.

ANTI-SMOKING LEGISLATION

Mr. Jim Wilson (Simcoe-Grey): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the current government has proposed province-wide legislation that would ban smoking in public places; and

"Whereas the proposed legislation will also prohibit smoking in private, non-profit clubs such as Legion halls, navy clubs and related facilities as well;

and

"Whereas these organizations have elected representatives that determine the rules and regulations that affect the membership of the individual club and

facility; and

"Whereas imposing smoke-free legislation on these clubs disregards the rights of these citizens and the original intentions of these clubs, especially with

respect to our veterans;

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

"That the Legislative Assembly exempt Legion halls, navy clubs and other non-profit, private or veterans' clubs from government smoke-free legislation."

I want to thank Edward Beaven, veterans' services officer of the Royal Canadian Legion, Tottenham Branch 329, for circulating this petition.

REGIONAL CENTRES FOR

THE DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

Mr. Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): I have another petition similar to the first one from today, but this is from the good people in the

Barrie-Orillia-Newmarket-Bracebridge area. It reads as follows:

"Whereas Dalton McGuinty and his Liberal government were elected based on their promise to rebuild public services in Ontario;

"Whereas the Minister of Community and Social Services has announced plans to close Ontario's three remaining regional centres for people with developmental

disabilities, located in Smiths Falls, Orillia and Blenheim, Ontario;

"Whereas the regional centres are home to more than 1,000 disabled adults, many of whom have multiple diagnoses and severe problems that cannot be met in the

community;

"Whereas closing the regional centres will have a devastating impact on people with developmental disabilities, their families, the developmental services

sector and the economies of the local communities; and

"Whereas Ontario could use the professional staff and facilities of the regional centres to extend specialized services, support and professional training to

thousands more clients who live in the community, in partnership with families and community agencies;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to direct the government to keep Ontario's regional centres for people with developmental

disabilities open, and to transform them into centres of excellence to provide specialized services and support to Ontarians with developmental needs, no matter where they live."

I'm in agreement and would affix my signature thereto.

OPPOSITION DAY

CHILDREN'S SERVICES

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): I have an opposition day motion on behalf of New Democrats. It reads:

That, in the opinion of this House, the McGuinty government must keep its promises to Ontario children.

Regarding the baby bonus: "We will end the clawback of the national child benefit supplement. The clawback is wrong and we will end it."

Regarding early learning and child care: "We are committing $300 million in new provincial money for Best Start." "We will spend the money offered by the

federal Liberals on regulated, centre-based child care."

Regarding autism treatment: "I believe that the lack of government-funded IBI treatment for autistic children over six is unfair and discriminatory. The

Ontario Liberals support extending autism treatment beyond the age of six." And that the McGuinty government must not appeal the Ontario Superior Court ruling regarding the rights of autistic

children to receive this treatment.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Mr. Hampton has moved opposition day motion number 2.

Mr. Hampton: New Democrats have brought this motion today because Premier McGuinty, before and during the election campaign, made these

promises to children and parents across Ontario. In fact, these promises were widely distributed and repeated over and over again. The McGuinty government said to parents and children that these

promises were things that this government would implement. We are now into the second year of the McGuinty government and these promises haven't been fulfilled, and it has created great hardship

for children and parents who believed these promises.

I want to deal just briefly with the first promise, the promise to end the clawback of the national child benefit supplement. I want people at home to

understand what this is. When I was growing up, as a child, we had something known as the family allowance. The family allowance cheque came every month. A family received a certain amount of

money, through the family allowance, per child in the family. In my family, the family allowance was something my mother looked forward to every month. That's when I maybe got a new pair of running

shoes, or maybe I got a pair of skates so I could play hockey that year, or maybe I got some new clothes or a winter jacket. The family allowance was very important for virtually all families

across Ontario.

In 1997, it was changed to the national child benefit supplement, and something unfortunate happened. The poorest families in Ontario, the lowest-income

families in Ontario -- families who have to rely upon social assistance or families who have to rely upon the disability support plan -- had this money clawed back from them. This money that

virtually every family would look forward to in terms of their children, the McGuinty government clawed back from the lowest-income families.

What does this mean? For those lowest-income families, it means an awful lot. It means, for the first child, taking $1,500 away from that family. For the

second child, it means taking $1,300 away from that child. For a single-parent mom with two children, it's almost $3,000 a year that the McGuinty government is clawing back, taking away from those

poor kids.

Recently -- we just heard him today -- Premier McGuinty tried to pretend that he'd ended the clawback. What this government did was end 3% of the clawback. For

a lowest-income family with one child, it means they get one loonie a week and the McGuinty government keeps all the rest. For a low-income family with two children, it means that, thanks to the

generosity of Premier McGuinty, they get $2 a week, a toonie a week, but the McGuinty government keeps all the rest of the money.

I think this is shameful. I think it is shameful to take advantage of people in this way, to make such a promise before the election and not have a plan to

implement it, and not implement it.

Then there's the issue of autistic children and IBI treatment for children who suffer the affliction of autism. Let me tell you what is so heartbreaking about

this for parents. Parents who are fortunate enough to receive IBI treatment for their children under age six see a dramatic change in their children. For the first time, they see their children

able to be communicative. They see their children learn toilet training. They see their children able to interact. They see their children learning to read. They see their children learning to

speak and carry on a conversation. They realize that this is very effective treatment for their children.

Premier McGuinty said before the election that it was wrong to eliminate this treatment as soon as a child turns age six. But what did he do right after the

election? He forgot about his promise. In fact, this government has spent tens of millions of dollars fighting these parents in court -- tens of millions of dollars of public money for the Premier

not only to break his promise, but then to go to court to defeat these parents.

Now that the Ontario Superior Court has ruled in favour of these parents, what's the Premier going to do? He's going to spend tens of millions of dollars of

public money again to appeal that decision, when the courts have told him he's wrong to break his promise. Not only is he wrong to break his promise; it is dishonest. And it's heartbreaking for

these parents for the Premier to do what he has done to them.

Then there's the issue of child care. Go to any community across this province and see the number of parents -- he's working, she's working, or she's a single

mom and is working to try to support the family -- who need access to good-quality, regulated, not-for-profit child care. The Premier said before the election that his government would put $300

million a year into a child care strategy like that.

What's happened after the election? Has there been $300 million of provincial money? No. Has there been $200 million of provincial money? No. Has there been

$100 million of provincial money? How about even $50 million, $25 million or $10 million of provincial money into that child care strategy? No. Nothing.

New Democrats are here today to hold Premier McGuinty accountable and responsible for the promises he made before the election and the promises, now, that he

wants to pretend never happened. We're here to hold him accountable for the way in which he's treated these children.

What I think is perhaps the worst situation of all is that it seems as if Dalton McGuinty never, ever intended to keep these promises. There is no plan. There

is no strategy. It looks as if these were promises made when the Premier was trolling for votes; these are things that were said to get people to vote for him. But there is no plan, and there is no

indication of there ever having been a plan, to implement these promises.

So we are here to hold the McGuinty government and Premier McGuinty accountable for these promises: promises made over and over again to vulnerable children;

promises made over and over again to children who live in poverty; promises made to children who need good-quality, not-for-profit, regulated child care, and promises that have been broken day in

and day out by Premier McGuinty and his government.

I have several colleagues who want to speak to this resolution. I simply say that I wish we had more members of the McGuinty government here, including the

Premier, to address the promises the Premier made.

The Deputy Speaker: I remind the member that you don't refer to anyone's absence, please.

Further debate?

Mr. Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): It seems that the government is not interested in debating this at all.

I would like to quote the Premier