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

February 27, 2006

38th Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2006-Feb-27 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Monday 27 February 2006 Lundi 27 février 2006

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

GRAPE AND WINE INDUSTRY

MIKE POST

RURAL ONTARIO

ROYAL CANADIAN LEGION

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

FIRE IN BRIGHTON

CORNWALL COMMUNITY HOSPITAL

LOCAL HEALTH

INTEGRATION NETWORKS

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON FINANCE

AND ECONOMIC AFFAIRS

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

REGULATORY

MODERNIZATION ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR LA MODERNISATION

DE LA RÉGLEMENTATION

OPTOMETRY AMENDMENT ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LES OPTOMÉTRISTES

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION AND SKILLS TRAINING /

ÉDUCATION POSTSECONDAIRE ET FORMATION PROFESSIONNELLE

GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

AND SKILLS TRAINING

GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

AND SKILLS TRAINING

VISITORS

ORAL QUESTIONS

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

LOCAL HEALTH

INTEGRATION NETWORKS

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

TENANT PROTECTION

FRENCH-LANGUAGE SERVICES

HOSPITAL FUNDING

CHILD CARE

CO-OP EDUCATION

DRIVER LICENCES

MUNICIPAL FINANCES

ELDER ABUSE

ONTARIO ECONOMY

PETITIONS

SERVICES FOR THE DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

PENSION PLANS

CHILD CARE

CANCER TREATMENT

SEXUAL HARASSMENT

PROPERTY RIGHTS

LOCAL HEALTH

INTEGRATION NETWORKS

OMERS PENSION FUND

SPECIAL CARE HOMES

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

CHILD CARE

CURRICULUM

ORDERS OF THE DAY

STRONGER CITY OF TORONTO

FOR A STRONGER ONTARIO ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 CRÉANT

UN TORONTO PLUS FORT

POUR UN ONTARIO PLUS FORT

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

GRAPE AND WINE INDUSTRY

Mr. Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln): I'd like to take this time to call on the finance minister to include in his spring budget assistance for the

Ontario grape and wine industry. I'll call to the minister's attention an

article in the Globe and Mail on February 18, 2006, that cites "thin tourist traffic, oppressive regulations, high taxes

and an all-powerful LCBO that favours big ... producers over boutique wineries."

Norm Beal, the chair of the Ontario wine council, said, "There are a number of properties on the market, and a real risk that some will go bankrupt."

I have five ideas for the finance minister. I know the Minister of Tourism, who was applauding a moment ago, is a big supporter of the industry, as well.

First, the member for Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant and I brought forward at the finance committee two motions, the first to incorporate and incentivize growth in the

VQA category as part of the LCBO business plan, and secondly, for Ontario to participate in the national replant program as promoted by the Grape Growers of Ontario. Unfortunately, these measures

were defeated in committee despite the support of the NDP, but I do hope the finance minister, nonetheless, will move forward with them.

The number three idea: Move forward with Bill 7. The Ontario VQA Wine Stores Act would open up a new channel for our boutique wineries across the province. It

has passed second reading with the support of all parties. We'd love to see it come to fruition.

In addition, the minister should examine the punishing tax burden at the LCBO that will often take high-quality VQA wines out of the system. He should explore,

as British Columbia has done, whether there are some dormant licences in the system that could be used to further the VQA wine store concept, and I hope --

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

MIKE POST

Mr. Kevin Daniel Flynn (Oakville): It's my pleasure to rise in the House today in recognition of the efforts of Mike Post and his team at Prime

Time Fitness and Boxing, who are helping Ontarians become much healthier, much fitter. Mike, the owner of Prime Time Fitness, is currently the undefeated WBE welterweight US champion and is looking

forward to making Prime Time his home base as he breaks into the international rankings.

I was honoured to be his guest at the grand opening of his Oakville fitness centre last month. The event was attended not only by Bronte community members but

also members of the business improvement area -- chairs Murray Macdonald and Laura Killip -- and also by some of the biggest names in Canadian boxing. On hand to celebrate the new facilities were

world number one ranked super bantamweight fighter Steve Molitor, former Canadian champion Brian Mackie, six-time amateur national champion Jason Douglas, as well as young up-and-comers Ray

Olubwale and Rey Morales.

Mike's goal is nothing short of ambitious. He wants to revolutionize the boxing training industry. He plans to use Prime Time to serve both the needs of

professional clientele as well as the general public, and at the same time provide opportunities for our communities' youth to work and train.

I'm proud that, after having so much professional success in Canada and the United States, Mike has decided to come back home to Oakville to pursue his dreams. I

extend my best wishes to Prime Time boxing for a long and prosperous future.

RURAL ONTARIO

Mr. Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): I stand to congratulate the OLA -- the Ontario Landowners Association -- on a successful founding

meeting this past weekend. The convention was the culmination of years of frustration and determination for rural landowners whose issues have been largely ignored and pushed aside, issues like

property and land rights; municipal restructuring; source water protection; the war on tobacco; farm regulations on eggs, cheese, chickens, farmers' markets; and, of course, the farm income

crisis.

The weekend conference featured Liberal MP Wayne Easter and Conservative MPs Scott Reid and Darryl Kramp. I was in attendance, as well as former MPP Garry

Fox.

This meeting of the minds included a debriefing on the federal election as well as strategy for municipal and, yes, provincial elections. The OLA founding

declaration will "advocate for the protection of property rights," and, "should the need arise ... create a political party." Ontario landowners will also hold elections to represent rural Ontario

in the Senate. The OLA constitution states, "To uphold our rural identity, traditions, security and prosperity ... in keeping with the principles of natural justice."

Tired of lip service to rural interests and interested in hearing more? Come out to Port Perry March 8 to hear John Tory and --

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

ROYAL CANADIAN LEGION

Mr. Dave Levac (Brant): I rise today to inform the House of a recent event that I had the privilege and honour of attending in the riding of

Brant. The event was the annual awards ceremony for the Royal Canadian Legion, Brantford Branch 90. Every year, the Legion gathers to honour the ongoing service of its members and to celebrate

their achievements not only in their branch but in the community.

Branch 90 of the Royal Canadian Legion has a rich, rich history in Brantford. The Legion handed out 11 60-year gold service pins and two 50-year gold pins for

local veterans' service to our community. The Royal Canadian Legion in Brantford has a very large and dedicated membership. Ordinary members have contributed a total of 1,565 years of service to

the Legion and the community. Associate members in total have contributed 1,030 years of service to our community. This clearly demonstrates the strength of the veteran community in Brant, as well

as their dedication and involvement within their own organization.

I understand that one of the three remaining First World War veterans, Dwight Wilson, celebrated his 105th birthday surrounded by family and friends. We all

congratulate him.

In the spirit of celebrating the sacrifices and commitments made by our veterans, we see construction of the veterans' memorial on the south lawn, the first new

monument to be built on the grounds of Queen's Park in 65 years. We are indeed indebted to the heroic service of our veterans, and I encourage all of the members to join me in showing our support

and gratitude wherever and however we can from this place. Congratulations --

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

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

Mrs. Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener-Waterloo): The McGuinty government is making post-secondary education announcements without contributing any --

or little -- capital funding to support these announcements. Recently, a satellite medical school for Kitchener was announced with only $3 million for capital construction from the province.

According to Mayor Craig of Cambridge, regional taxpayers may be asked for $20 million more.

This is becoming the norm in our community. When the creation of the University of Waterloo health sciences campus in Kitchener was announced two years ago, the

province refused to spend a dime on construction, and city taxpayers are paying $30 million. When Wilfrid Laurier University announced it was relocating its faculty of social work to downtown

Kitchener, the province contributed nothing for capital costs and Kitchener taxpayers were left with a $6.5-million bill.

Something is wrong here. Our community has always been prepared to pay its fair share, but the responsibility for post-secondary education and health care lies

with the provincial McGuinty government, not our regional taxpayers. I urge the McGuinty government to live up to its provincial responsibilities for post-secondary education and health care.

Mr. Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): On May 13, 2005, Mr. McGuinty said on post-secondary education, "By quality, we mean more faculty at

colleges and universities, to accommodate higher enrolments and help students succeed, more faculty time for students, more students completing their undergraduate programs and going on to grad

school and easier movement for students between colleges and universities."

Yet, in spite of this, as of March 7, some 9,100 teachers, counsellors and librarians at Ontario's 24 community colleges could be on strike. The number one issue

for their members is updating the workload formula. They want smaller class sizes, more teachers and more faculty time for students. The workload plan should be improved in the areas of student

evaluation and feedback, preparation time, giving teachers the right to determine the methods of evaluation and reducing class size, including looking for staffing improvements so partial-load

faculty who are teaching seven to 12 hours are treated fairly.

Negotiations are to resume on March 2, to March 6. I am hoping and we are all hoping that management is going to negotiate a fair deal so that we can indeed

reach the kind of goal and the expectations on quality that Mr. McGuinty is looking for.

FIRE IN BRIGHTON

Mr. Lou Rinaldi (Northumberland): I rise to inform my colleagues of a fire and numerous propane explosions which took place Saturday evening,

February 25, at Gerow Propane Ltd., in the municipality of Brighton in my riding of Northumberland. I commend Christine Herrington, mayor of the municipality of Brighton, as well as emergency

officials, who declared a state of emergency at 12:12 a.m. As a precaution, residents within a 1.5-kilometre radius were evacuated, affecting approximately 400 residents. I was personally on hand

at the command centre, and was impressed by the efforts of the municipality's emergency community control group as they coordinated the labour of six local fire departments, the Ministry of the

Environment, the Technical Standards and Safety Authority as well as the Ontario fire marshal's office.

We can only imagine the risk these emergency workers undertook, knowing that the blaze they were battling had the potential for further propane explosions at any

moment. I'm sure that the members of this House will join me while I congratulate and pay tribute to the more than 45 firefighters, along with OPP officers, who displayed tremendous bravery while

battling this horrific inferno.

I spoke to Bruce Davis, CAO of the municipality of Brighton, and he is proud of the quick reaction which demonstrates how well prepared they are. He also

indicated that those residents should sleep well at night, knowing their municipality has a tremendous plan in place to truly protect their community. This weekend's event indicated that the

community is well prepared for any emergency action. I want to personally thank all of the people who took part, because they put other's lives before theirs.

CORNWALL COMMUNITY HOSPITAL

Mr. Jim Brownell (Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh): I am proud to recognize an outstanding fundraising effort in my riding of

Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh. Several local radio stations under the Corus banner joined together last Friday for the Corus Cares: Our Hospital, Our Future radiothon. The intent was to keep the

momentum going on fundraising efforts for our community hospital project, for which $10.9 million has already been raised. The radiothon did far more than that. Over a 13-hour period, the event

raised $151,197. That's right: Donations poured in from all corners of the riding, from young children to seniors, from businesses large and small. Everyone has pulled together again to show how

giving, how committed to their community, the people of Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh and the city of Cornwall are.

I would like to thank our community's radio, Corus Entertainment, for organizing the event, local residents Tom and Gail Kaneb for co-chairing the hospital

fundraising campaign and working tirelessly to get the word out, and each and every person who manned a phone or put in a donation. A special thank you goes to Premier McGuinty and Minister

Smitherman for lending their voices and support to the radiothon.

I am impressed by the generosity of my constituents, but not surprised. In the words of Toronto-area businessman Mitchell Abbey, who is planning to locate an

operation in the city, "Cornwall has shown itself to be extremely resilient and entrepreneurial." The results of this radiothon are another proof that the city is the little city with the big

heart.

LOCAL HEALTH

INTEGRATION NETWORKS

Mr. Jeff Leal (Peterborough): I rise in the House today to clarify some misconceptions about our plan for local health integration networks,

otherwise known as LHINs. There is a lot of misinformation out there, and unfortunately there is also a lot of misinformation being circulated. There are some who are alleging that the LHINs are

somehow paving the way to health care privatization.

This could hardly be further from the truth. With LHINs, patients will still only use their OHIP cards to obtain services. No individual will ever get to the

front of the line because they can better afford it. The fact is, this legislation contains no provision for increased privatization or expansion of competitive bidding. Furthermore, it very

specifically prohibits the integration that would result in an individual being required to pay for a health service. This government's commitment to public medicine could not be stronger, which is

why we enshrined it in the Commitment to the Future of Medicare Act.

I am proud of this legislation because it's about giving more power to Ontario's communities. Local experts are simply the best placed to understand the health

care needs of their own communities.

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON FINANCE

AND ECONOMIC AFFAIRS

Mr. Pat Hoy (Chatham-Kent Essex): I beg leave to present a report on pre-budget consultation 2006 from the standing committee on finance and

economic affairs and move the adoption of its recommendations.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Does the member wish to make a brief statement?

Mr. Hoy: I want to thank the members of the legislative committee as well as the members of the public who attended those hearings, and all the

staff who worked so hard to produce this report.

I move adjournment of the debate.

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

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

REGULATORY

MODERNIZATION ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR LA MODERNISATION

DE LA RÉGLEMENTATION

Mr. Peters moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 69,

An Act to allow for information sharing about regulated organizations to improve efficiency in the administration and enforcement of regulatory

legislation and to make consequential amendments to other Acts / Projet de loi 69, Loi permettant l'échange de renseignements sur les organismes réglementés afin de rendre plus

efficaces l'application et l'exécution de la législation de nature réglementaire et apportant des modifications corrélatives à d'autres lois.

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

The minister may wish to make a brief statement.

Hon. Steve Peters (Minister of Labour): Speaker, I'll defer and deliver my statement during ministerial statements.

OPTOMETRY AMENDMENT ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LES OPTOMÉTRISTES

Ms. Martel moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 70,

An Act to amend the Optometry Act, 1991 / Projet de loi 70, Loi modifiant la Loi de 1991 sur les optométristes.

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

The member may wish to make a brief statement.

Ms. Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): The purpose of the bill is to amend the Optometry Act to allow optometrists to prescribe therapeutic

pharmaceutical agents, TPAs, for the treatment of certain eye diseases.

While optometrists are responsible for the majority of primary eye and vision care in Ontario, they are not permitted to prescribe treatments for patients who

present with eye diseases. Instead, patients must get a prescription from a medical doctor to access the treatment they need. This may result in delays in treatment or additional demands being made

on walk-in clinics and emergency departments for those who don't have a family doctor.

Seven other Canadian jurisdictions have passed legislation to allow optometrists to prescribe TPAs. The Health Professions Regulatory Advisory Council, HPRAC, is

reviewing the matter now. It's time for Ontario to ensure that patients can get the treatment they need for certain eye diseases when they visit their optometrists.

This is the third time the bill has been introduced, and I'd like to thank the member from Niagara South for the work that he has done in the past in this

regard.

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

Hon. James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism, minister responsible for seniors, Government House Leader): I move that, pursuant to standing

order 9(c)(i), the House shall meet from 6:45 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. on Monday, February 27, 2006, for the purpose of considering government business.

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

All in favour will say "aye."

All opposed will say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1355 to 1400.

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

Ayes

Arthurs, Wayne

Balkissoon, Bas

Bartolucci, Rick

Bentley, Christopher

Berardinetti, Lorenzo

Bradley, James J.

Brownell, Jim

Bryant, Michael

Cansfield, Donna H.

Caplan, David

Chambers, Mary Anne V.

Chudleigh, Ted

Colle, Mike

Cordiano, Joseph

Crozier, Bruce

Delaney, Bob

Dhillon, Vic

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duguid, Brad

Duncan, Dwight

Dunlop, Garfield

Flynn, Kevin Daniel

Fonseca, Peter

Gerretsen, John

Hoy, Pat

Jackson, Cameron

Jeffrey, Linda

Kular, Kuldip

Leal, Jeff

Levac, Dave

Matthews, Deborah

Mauro, Bill

McMeekin, Ted

McNeely, Phil

Meilleur, Madeleine

Miller, Norm

Milloy, John

Mitchell, Carol

Munro, Julia

Parsons, Ernie

Peters, Steve

Peterson, Tim

Phillips, Gerry

Pupatello, Sandra

Qaadri, Shafiq

Racco, Mario G.

Ramal, Khalil

Ramsay, David

Rinaldi, Lou

Ruprecht, Tony

Sandals, Liz

Smith, Monique

Sterling, Norman W.

Tory, John

Van Bommel, Maria

Watson, Jim

Wilkinson, John

Wilson, Jim

Wong, Tony C.

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Yakabuski, John

Zimmer, David

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

Nays

Bisson, Gilles

Horwath, Andrea

Kormos, Peter

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

Prue, Michael

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 63; the nays are 6.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS

Hon. Steve Peters (Minister of Labour): I rise today to present the House with details about the Regulatory Modernization Act, 2006, which I

had the honour of introducing a few minutes ago.

This act, if passed, would strengthen public protection by introducing innovative improvements to the way we inspect, investigate and enforce laws across this

great province. The legislation would, if passed, improve protection of the public by enabling staff in our 13 enforcement ministries and related agencies to achieve new levels of co-operation, use

information more effectively, and target efforts where they count. This would result in better enforcement of the laws that protect our workers, our environment, our fish, our wildlife, the public

and our farmers. At the same time, it would allow businesses to operate more effectively by reducing duplication in information collection and other compliance activities. Simply put, better

connections equal better protection.

The people of Ontario expect the government to introduce laws that will protect them. This we do. We have examined our approaches and have found a number of

ways in which we can improve. Currently, 13 different Ontario ministries and other government organizations enforce a wide variety of laws to keep the public safe. In fact, it is not uncommon in

this province for businesses to be subject to inspections from as many as seven or eight different ministries. This causes duplication of government compliance efforts and places unnecessary

burdens on businesses. I want to be perfectly clear: Individually, these ministries are doing an admirable job, yet the pressures on our field staff continue to grow, and we have to come up with

new initiatives and new tools to get the job done.

I would like to thank my fellow ministers and officials from 13 participating ministries who have been involved in the efforts for us to all work together. I

would also like to thank Minister Bentley, who, when Minister of Labour, initiated and planted the seeds for this project. Most importantly, this idea came from the government's ideas campaign, our

government's campaign to encourage members of the Ontario public service to contribute ideas to get better results for the public's money. This is an idea that came from ministry staff.

I want to thank all of those who were involved in coming up with such a bright idea. While I cannot personally name all of them, I would like to thank John

Stager, assistant deputy minister for the inspections, investigation and enforcement secretariat, or the II&E, and Jane Mallen of the Ministry of the Attorney General. Both are here today in

the gallery along with many colleagues from the various ministries, from the II&E and legal communities, so welcome them here. Welcome, all, and thank you all very much.

I'd like to summarize a few key points of the legislation. By changing the way regulatory ministries can use and share information, this legislation could make

it easier to administer and enforce about 85 statutes and 600 regulations across this province. If passed, it would:

-- allow ministries to share specific types of business-related compliance information amongst themselves;

-- introduce a "heads up" provision that would authorize staff to notify another ministry if they observe something that is likely to be under the mandate of

the other ministry;

-- authorize ministers to create teams of field staff to work together; and

-- allow ministers to publish information about an organization's compliance record.

This information would also target repeat offenders by requiring the courts to consider relevant previous convictions in sentencing.

Sharing information would allow us to reduce the burden of duplication businesses face as a result of our regulatory efforts. This would let business get back

to doing what they do best -- supporting Ontario's economy.

A big impact of the legislation would be the ability it gives to address the issue of non-compliance, targeting companies that choose to not play by the rules.

These rule breakers not only break our laws, but they undercut responsible businesses and put the public at risk. By creating teams of field staff from different ministries, we could work together

to target these repeat violators. This would remove the competitive advantage that these rule breakers seek to gain, and support responsible businesses that comply with our laws.

It is important to note that there are a number of safeguards that have been built into this legislation. While it would allow for field staff to share

information, it would not undermine the protection of personal privacy. There are specific limits in the heads-up provision that do not allow for so-called fishing expeditions. Field staff would be

limited to sharing "plain view" observations only. I've personally met with the Information and Privacy Commissioner regarding this legislation, and she is comfortable with our approach. Even with

the additional powers of this legislation, these safeguards ensure balance.

These are the key parts of the legislation that I've introduced today. In developing this legislation, we've examined the best practices for regulatory

compliance in more than 40 jurisdictions. I'm proud to say that this legislation, if passed, would make Ontario a true leader in regulatory compliance.

This legislation is but one piece of a larger modernization plan. We'll be introducing a performance-based strategy to recognize those companies with

exceptional records of compliance. We could then target enforcement efforts towards those companies that commit serious repeat violations. We've also launched a pilot project designed to assist

small business in improving their compliance by introducing easy-to-understand tool kits that will help. We have consulted with our stakeholders, small business, other business groups, ministry

field staff and the unions that represent those employees. All are in agreement with our approach.

The time has come to move forward with a bold new way of protecting the public by modernizing the way we share information and work together across government.

I urge all members of this House to support the legislation. It's good for business, it's good for government and it's good for the people of Ontario, because truly, better connections equal better

protection.

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION AND SKILLS TRAINING /

ÉDUCATION POSTSECONDAIRE ET FORMATION PROFESSIONNELLE

Hon. Christopher Bentley (Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities): We know that when we invest in post-secondary education and skills

today, we build jobs and prosperity tomorrow. The brains and know-how of a skilled workforce are the competitive edge of the 21st century.

But higher education is much more than that: It is the very foundation of an engaged citizenry and a strong democracy.

Le Canada a besoin de programmes d'éducation postsecondaire et de formation professionnelle qui comptent parmi les meilleurs au monde.

Achieving that goal will require us to build a new and successful partnership with the federal government. That's why I'm pleased to be able to report to the

Legislature on an extraordinary event I was privileged to attend last week: the historic national summit on post-secondary education and skills training, held in Ottawa.

The summit was conceived in August 2005 at the Council of the Federation. At that time, Premiers asked Premiers McGuinty and Charest to convene a summit on

post-secondary education and skills training and to lead a process to develop a Canada-wide strategy. The result was last Friday's Competing for Tomorrow summit, organized and hosted by Premiers

McGuinty and Charest. Six other Premiers also participated in the discussions. I was honoured to work with the Premier to prepare for and attend this national summit.

The summit demonstrated a new way of doing business for Canada. For the first time, Premiers from all provinces and territories worked directly with

stakeholders to create a Canada-wide strategy for post-secondary education and skills training. More than 200 leaders from across Canada came to share ideas on challenges, strategies and actions to

prepare our post-secondary education and skills training systems for the 21st century. Premiers were able to hear from leaders from across the country, including students, university and college

presidents, employers and representatives from apprenticeships, business, labour, aboriginal people, persons with disabilities and other community groups.

Delegates at the summit were asked to discuss key issues, challenges and priorities for action in seven theme areas. Here are some of the things we heard from

the leaders participating in the summit:

On access, we heard about the importance of access and the need for a commitment from all partners to support post-secondary education and skills training

opportunities for all Canadians, including aboriginal peoples, persons with disabilities and students from low-income families.

On quality and funding, participants brought their ideas about innovative ways to maintain and increase the quality of Canada's post-secondary education and

skills training systems. They agreed that new federal resources are required to support provinces and territories, and shared their ideas on the amount and types of supports that the federal

government should contribute to this national priority.

On participation in the labour force, participants recognized that high levels of participation in the workforce benefit not only individuals but the overall

prosperity of our society. They shared a concern about unfair barriers encountered by many immigrants seeking adequate jobs to match their skills. They recognize many of our people lack the

literacy skills to work and succeed in today's knowledge economy.

On skills for the 21st-century workplace, participants stressed the need for employer investment and training to build skills for the 21st-century workplace.

They told us training is key to a successful strategy for strengthening workplace skills, especially as technology continues to evolve. They agreed that employers need encouragement to invest in

the skills of their workers.

On research and innovation capacity, participants urged partners to work together to boost Canada's research and innovation capacity. They recognized that

investing in research brings multiple rewards to post-secondary learning, to economic competitiveness and to society as a whole.

What of lifelong learning? Many recognized that students and citizens need help to make transitions from one stage of learning to the next and to skills

upgrading opportunities. There was agreement that Canadians need to adopt a culture of learning that involves continuous training for all students and workers, whatever their age and wherever they

live.

On the needs of rural and northern areas, there was strong representation that people in northern and rural areas face many barriers to participating in

post-secondary education and skills training, and that governments must introduce solutions with a greater awareness of the challenges faced by those in both rural and northern areas.

In conclusion, it's clear that Canada needs leadership on this issue. Premier McGuinty provided the energy, passion and dedication that made the summit

possible and that gives us all cause for optimism. We share responsibility now to move forward.

Ontario has recognized the need for action. Through the Reaching Higher plan, we are investing $6.2 billion over the next five years, the largest investment in

post-secondary education and training in Ontario in over 40 years. Reaching Higher focuses on quality, access and accountability, and these themes form the basis for much of the discussion at the

summit. As Premier McGuinty told the summit, the most important thing we need to do is to ensure that all Canadians understand the importance and urgency of developing the skills and knowledge of

our young people.

We need to achieve excellence in research and innovation, quality of teaching, student experience and workplace outcomes. We need to provide everyone with the

opportunity to achieve their full potential. Our greatest asset in this country is our people, and we have a duty to invest to ensure that our post-secondary education and skills programs are

second to none.

We need to develop a culture of education, skills and innovation as well as a love of learning, but we can't do this alone. As the summit participants told us,

we need a partnership to provide the required level of investments, and the Premiers and participants called upon the federal government to join with the provinces and territories in committing to

a Canada-wide strategy for post-secondary education and skills training.

Premiers McGuinty and Charest will continue to take a leading role through the Council of the Federation in making post-secondary education and skills training

a top priority for all Canadians.

GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS

Mr. Jim Wilson (Simcoe-Grey): I'll just spend two and a half minutes responding to the statement and the legislation that was introduced by

the Minister of Labour to give sweeping powers to government inspectors. I'll say at the beginning that it's sad that you need to change the laws -- or you feel you need to change the laws --

because inspectors aren't able to pass on information today. I'm not sure that's totally true and I'm not sure you want to give this much power to the first inspector who walks on the premises.

I've had bad experiences with government inspectors in the past -- overzealous liquor inspectors, various overzealous labour ministry inspectors.

In response to a question from the media about, "Will this cut red tape?" you didn't do a very good job answering that. In fact, you said no. "Will this create

any more jobs in the province?" You said no, it won't create any jobs. "Will this save any money?" You said no, it's not the intent to save any money.

In fact, I think this will discourage -- I just looked at your website and you encourage self-reporting. Why would anyone self-report when one inspector shows

up and now he can call 12 of his buddies in other ministries? You're going to have an inspector love-in on your hands if you don't bring safeguards into this.

You say this is good for business. I don't see anyone -- we ran small businesses in my family and we had a heck of a time all the time with the health

inspector because we owned a tavern that had a dirt basement. The fact of the matter is, if he had had those powers in those days, he would have shut us down every day of the week. Yet there was

nothing wrong with the ice on our premises, I can tell you that.

You should have got up today -- because you didn't talk about jobs in the whole press conference -- and told us what you're going to do to reverse the trend

we've seen: 56,000 manufacturing jobs lost in 2005; 33,000 manufacturing jobs lost in January of this year alone.

So I say to you, good luck. I don't believe that you need this legislation the way you think you need it. You've not made a good case for it and I don't

believe it's as business-friendly as you say it is.

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

AND SKILLS TRAINING

Mr. Cameron Jackson (Burlington): I want to thank the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities for his comments in the House today. I

also want to thank him for reporting to this House, which is not always the case with some ministers. So I wanted to say for the record that that is appreciated, so that we can comment on it.

Obviously the minister is painfully aware of the severe cuts for post-secondary education by the federal government that we've been experiencing over the last

10 years. It was the catalyst for much of the discussion. It's clearly been commented on by many.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Order.

Mr. Jackson: I suspect the Minister of the Environment wants to hear more. They pale by comparison to the cuts that Ontarians experienced in

health care as Paul Martin attempted to balance the books on the back of Ontario health care and post-secondary education.

But Stephen Harper did indicate when he campaigned in the last election that he would make post-secondary --

Interjections.

Mr. Jackson: The government opposite really doesn't want to hear when there is co-operation between the Conservative federal government and

the Ontario Liberal government. Somehow you think this is bad news. I think you really should learn how to get onside and work with a government that says it's going to do something here.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Order. I need to be able to hear the member for Burlington.

Member for Burlington.

Mr. Jackson: When I check the websites for what the Liberals promised in the last election, it's no wonder Paul Martin didn't succeed in his

last electoral endeavour, because his website was rather sparse when it came to commitments in post-secondary. Mind you, he was the minister who cut $2.2 billion from transfers to the

provinces.

This is a new government in Ottawa that has promised to work with the provinces to increase family income thresholds for student loan eligibility -- that will

mean more students across Canada will get access to affordable education; exempt the first $10,000 of student scholarship or bursary income from taxation; provide students or their parents with a

federal tax credit on spending up to $500 per year on their textbooks; and in co-operation with the provinces, remove post-secondary education funding from the Canada social transfer, and create an

independent Canada education and training transfer to ensure that there is dedicated funding for post-secondary education and training. Clearly, this was a commitment made by the federal

government. We're delighted that the two Premiers have seen fit to come to Ottawa and through this summit determine the future for post-secondary in our country.

GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS

Mr. Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): New Democrats don't quarrel in principle with the proposition that there should not be arbitrary

prohibitions against an inspector for a given ministry reporting back observations that may be within the bailiwick or jurisdiction of yet another ministry. At the same time, we will be carefully

watching this bill as it proceeds through second reading. It strikes us as a bill that inevitably and necessarily has to be subject to public hearings.

Let me tell you some of the fears that we have. These are not foreign to the minister; he anticipates these concerns, I'm sure.

One is the creation of a generic inspector, and the abandonment of the incredible skill sets that hard-working inspectors in any number of ministries develop

over the course of years of dedication to the public sector here in Ontario. So we have concerns about the prospect of generic inspectors. We think it's imperative that inspectors from the Ministry

of the Environment remain within the MOE and that inspectors from the MTO remain within the MTO etc.

Secondly, we're concerned about the prospect of inflated data or inflated statistics. In other words, we understand that an inspection by a Ministry of Labour

inspector will be recorded as an inspection by the Ministry of Labour. But should that inspector observe infractions he or she believes of environmental laws or Ministry of Transportation laws, we

don't believe that should be counted as yet another inspection. We want to make sure that the legislation makes it clear that these inspections cannot be multiplied by virtue of the multiple

observations that could be made.

Finally, and without limiting our concerns, we're concerned about the proposition of there being checklists, in other words, of inspectors going in being

called upon to do omnibus inspections. We find that an inappropriate exercise on the part of this ministry.

At the end of the day, it's really all about good public servants: inspectors trying to do their jobs with incredibly limited resources and tools. We put to

you that during the course of the development of this legislation, we'll be calling upon this government to ensure that our ministries are adequately staffed with inspectors so that they're out

there not only doing the inspections but laying the charges, proceeding with the prosecutions and getting the convictions of any number of bad bosses and bad operators across the province.

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

AND SKILLS TRAINING

Mr. Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): I'm happy to respond to the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities, and I am very pleased to

say that all the provinces and the federal government are now debating the importance of colleges and universities. In light of the fact that 80% of the new jobs that are being created in the next

decade will require some post-secondary education or training, this is indeed a very timely debate.

Mr. Bentley speaks about quality, and adds that a tuition fee hike he will announce soon will increase the quality of education offered at community colleges

and universities. What we saw under the Conservative regime was that for every dollar in tuition hikes, the government took $2 out of the system.

I remind the minister and monsieur McGuinty that they can't use the federal government as an excuse for hiking tuition fees at colleges and universities.

The Premier wants our universities to compete with the world's best, but how can our best compete if they can't afford university? Raising tuition fees will

drive students out of school, cheat them of opportunities and weaken our province. Federal cuts have driven the cost of tuition fees up, but other provinces have maintained a freeze on tuition

rates. Monsieur McGuinty and the minister should do the same. The Premier says failure is not an option; well, it's the Premier who will be failing our students, if tuition fees rise. Manitoba,

Newfoundland and Saskatchewan have all maintained a freeze; Ontario should follow their lead.

Currently, medical school tuition fees at the University of Toronto are over $16,000 a year, while Quebec medical students pay around $3,000 per year to attend

McGill University. Both institutions are considered to be top-notch institutions, yet Toronto students pay about five times the tuition fees of McGill students. Don't you go telling me, Minister

and Monsieur McGuinty, that these costs to go to medical school -- $16,000; to go to U of T legal school here costs $16,000 -- do not affect access. They do. Students are discouraged from entering

these programs, and the government must reflect on the implications of that. Students in general programs are paying 5,000 bucks each, and the deregulated programs have been astronomical, as I

pointed out. Students graduate with debts that look like second mortgages -- in some cases, first mortgages.

What I say to the government and what I'm saying to students and the people of Ontario is this: Support my Bill 12, which calls for a freeze on tuition hikes

until 2007, and then let each party go into an election with their plans. But until then, freeze tuition fees. That's what we call on Monsieur McGuinty to do.

VISITORS

Mr. Pat Hoy (Chatham-Kent Essex): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: In the gallery opposite, we have a group of men and women,

agriculturalists and rural residents from Lambton, Middlesex, Chatham-Kent and Essex. They're here taking

part in Government 101, hosted by my colleague the member from Lambton-Kent-Middlesex.

Welcome to Queen's Park.

ORAL QUESTIONS

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the Minister of Energy. Can the minister tell us how many megawatts of new

generation capacity are under construction in the province at the present time?

Hon. Donna H. Cansfield (Minister of Energy): We have just under 9,000 megawatts that will be put into place in the next five years.

Melancthon, which is close to where you are, will be up and going in March, one of the first wind turbine farms in Ontario.

Mr. Tory: Perhaps the minister misunderstood my question. The question was, how many new projects are under construction today? I don't think

you really meant that there would be 9,000 megawatts of new projects under construction today, because the fact is, on most of these major projects that you've made such a big deal about, there

isn't a shovel in the ground: Greenfield power, 280 megawatts, cancelled; Calpine, bankrupt, 1,000 megawatts cancelled or delayed; Invenergy in Lambton, 570 megawatts, can't get zoning; Thunder

Bay, 310 megawatts, needs an environmental assessment to bring the gas pipeline to town; Greenfield South, facing delays by the host municipality, 280 megawatts. That's almost 2,500 right there

where there is not a shovel in the ground. Nothing is happening.

Your plan for energy replacement is in a shambles. When are you going to do something about it, go back to the drawing board, come up with a real plan and stop

putting families and jobs in this province at risk?

Hon. Mrs. Cansfield: I thank the Leader of the Opposition for the question. In fact, Calpine is under construction. In fact, Sithe Goreway is

under construction, and the first phase will be up in 2007. I would be very happy to sit down with the member opposite and provide an update on where each of the levels are.

Remember that a lot of our proposals are dealing with the wind. We have, for the first time, two wind manufacturers who have come into this province. So 2,800

came in. In the next five years, we have 9,000 under way. We do, in fact, have shovels in the ground. Calpine Mitsui is one of them.

Mr. Tory: The fact is that the 2007 --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Order.

Hon. Sandra Pupatello (Minister of Community and Social Services, minister responsible for women's issues): John, you need to get back to your

riding.

The Speaker: The Minister of Community and Social Services.

Mr. Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): She defies you all the time. No respect for the Speaker, Ms. Pupatello.

The Speaker: The member for Niagara Centre.

The Leader of the Opposition.

Mr. Tory: In fact, the 2007 coal promise was predicated on many of the projects I've just listed being complete by now. Dalton McGuinty wrote

to the Hamilton Spectator and said that there would be 5,500 megawatts of new natural gas projects on line and complete by 2006, which is where we now are. Of course, they're not on line; they're

not complete. He also said that the Toronto waterfront project would be complete by 2004. That was two years ago, and we know where that is today. None of these are really even under way at

all.

Will you admit that your plan isn't a plan, that we need to go back to the drawing board in terms of the dates and the times with respect to the coal promise?

Will you admit that you need to examine clean technologies and that you need to come up with some realistic dates that are not irresponsible, that are not going to put jobs and families at risk in

this province? Will you admit that?

Hon. Mrs. Cansfield: I thank you for the question. What I will admit is that nothing was done in this province for 10 years. In fact, not only

was the generation neglected, the transmission was neglected. Not only was the transmission neglected, the conservation was neglected.

We said we would build, and we have. We said we would maximize our existing transmission, and we have. We said we would maximize our existing generation, and

we have. We said we would build a conservation culture, and we are. So those projects are under way.

You're right: It takes some time to go through the processes. I'm sure you're not like the member of the other party in that you want those EAs done in a

heartbeat. There is a process to work with the communities and we are undergoing those processes. But I have to tell you that for the first time there's more than 1,345 megawatts of renewable

energy in this province that hadn't been there before.

The Speaker: New question.

Mr. Tory: My new question is to the Minister of Energy as well. Will you confirm that you asked Toronto Hydro to provide a bid for the

waterfront hydro project with a deadline of February 15, only then to turn around and award the project to the other bidder on February 10, without ever seeing the bid that you asked for from

Toronto Hydro? Will you confirm that you did that?

Hon. Mrs. Cansfield: Thank you for the question. Actually, I did not. I had nothing to do with it. I did meet with the proponents of both

earlier in the year and at such time looked at what was available. I'll say this again: One of the proponents wanted us to give them our asset and I said, "No, that asset belongs to the people of

Ontario." Another wanted us to waive the EA and I said, "Absolutely not. There is a process for the EA." There was a question of having emergency generation, which they then would tear down. I have

things that I believe ratepayers would rather do with $120 million than put up temporary generation.

So in fact the proponent was not ready and needed all of our work in order for them to move forward. As a matter of fact, it was that same proponent who in a

letter to me on January 11 indicated that we needed 550 megawatts of supply in the city by 2010.

Mr. Tory: In fact it was a deadline of February 15, set by the minister, where you invited these people to come in with a bid. Whatever

discussions or meetings you had with them in between is really not the point. The point is that you put a process in motion to have more than one bidder. The deadline for those bidders to put in

their bids was February 15, and you then turned around and awarded the contract without even seeing the second bid.

You realize that this has got you involved up to your elbows in a bidding process and really calls into question that entire process. Your predecessor said,

and made a big deal of saying, in November 2004, "This government set up an independent process, with outside consultants, overseen by a fairness commissioner. The bids were not known to the

government. The government had no involvement in the selection of the successful bidders."

In this case, there's no transparency and your hands are all over it. You actually opened the first bid and awarded it before you even had the second one.

Will you re-tender this and follow proper process, as your predecessor indicated he was doing and as you should?

Hon. Mrs. Cansfield: Thank you for the question. The simple answer is that the leader of the official opposition is mistaken. He is wrong. I

had nothing at all to do with the February 15 date. In fact, I did meet with both proponents.

The Independent Electricity System Operator wrote a letter and declared that we were in a very serious crisis for the year 2008 for downtown Toronto. We looked

at what was available in order to meet that deadline so there would not be rolling blackouts. We did it with the understanding that the asset belongs to the people of Toronto and Ontario, not to

Florida Power & Light, and that under no circumstances would we transfer, at no cost, that piece of property to a private company. I don't know how many times I have said this, but the leader

is mistaken in his date.

Mr. Tory: The one thing we're clearly not mistaken about is that you were involved, because you said you were meeting with the proponents. I

find it very interesting and would ask you to explain why, if we got this letter -- and we'll look into and will access information about the circumstances leading to the IESO letter you

mysteriously got at just the right time to declare a crisis in Toronto that others had been talking about for months. But the letter arrived declaring a crisis. Are you telling this House that to

let five more days pass by to receive the bid that you asked for from these other people so you would have a basis for comparing these bids would have made a difference? And if the process is

supposed to be, as your predecessor said, without involvement of the ministry and with fairness commissioners involved, why were you sitting down meeting with proponents, opening envelopes and

generally messing around in this before the deadline that you set? Why were you doing that?

Hon. Mrs. Cansfield: I did not open any envelopes, and I'd be very happy to give you the letter. The letter, dated January 11 this year, is by

the independent system operator, Hydro One, the Ontario Power Authority and Toronto Hydro, and told us that a minimum level of generating capacity required by 2008 is 250 megawatts, and by 2010,

550 megawatts. So we worked with that letter in dealing with a crisis for this city, because we are going to keep the lights on. Remember: The property belongs to the people of Ontario, not to

Florida Power & Light at no cost.

LOCAL HEALTH

INTEGRATION NETWORKS

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is to the Acting Premier, and it concerns the McGuinty government's health disintegration

networks.

Section 28 of your LHINs legislation gives your health minister the unprecedented power to order the shutdown of local health services. Even worse, your health minister can order the

shutdown of a local health service even if the McGuinty government is only a minority funding partner of the service. It means that even if the province funds a local health service, say, to the

tune of 5% of its overall budget, your health minister can order that local health agency to shut down completely.

My question is simply, why does the McGuinty government want to give the health minister the unfettered power to go around and shut down local health care

agencies?

Hon. Leona Dombrowsky (Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs): To the Minister of Health.

Hon. George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I find it intriguing that the honourable member, who wreaked havoc on this

province as part of a government for five years, succumbs to the temptation to use the word "disintegration," because there is a party in this House represented by a smaller number of members that

had associated with their record a reduction in the funding for hospitals, a reduction in the funding for OHIP, a reduction in the funding for the Ontario drug benefit.

The suggestion that there is some unfettered challenge here is a ridiculous assertion. The powers that the honourable member speaks about are powers that a

minister could only use upon the recommendation of local health integration networks, which stand as the voice of community. At long last, we're giving the health care system back to the people of

the province of Ontario.

Mr. Hampton: Here is the chain of events: The McGuinty government hand picks and politically appoints people who are not local

representatives. Those hand-picked political appointments then say to the Minister of Health --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Stop the clock. I need to be able to hear the leader of the third party. The rules are the same this week

as they were last; I need to be able to hear the questions as they're put, and the responses.

The leader of the third party.

Mr. Hampton: The government doesn't want to hear these questions; they certainly don't want to answer them.

Let's take a real world example here. Let's look at the Alzheimer Society of Toronto. Only 8% of the Toronto Alzheimer Society's funding comes from the

provincial government. So 8% of $1.3 million a year comes from the provincial government, yet you want to give yourself the unilateral, unfettered authority to shut down a local health service like

that. My question again is, why does the McGuinty government want to give that kind of unfettered, unilateral authority to go around shutting down local health services that you only fund in a

minority way?

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: There he goes again: "unilateral" and "unfettered." The reality is that a simple review of the bill would indicate to the

honourable member that there is, associated with the execution of any of those powers, a tremendous new mechanism: It is the mechanism of community recommendation.

The honourable member may choose to take a look at the quality of people who were appointed to those boards and disparage them with a sweep of his hand,

notwithstanding the fact that some of them are prominent members of the party that he is the leader of. We haven't been concerned about that because they all have associated with them the number

one ingredient that we seek, and that is a connection to community. That is at the heart of these mechanisms, not unilateral, not unfettered, but in partnership, and it is one that recognizes that

if the community makes a recommendation about a change, a minister ought to be in a position to be able to respond to it.

Mr. Hampton: To say again: The people who you're appointing to the LHINs boards are not community representatives; they are not elected by the

community; they're not put in place by the community. They are political appointments of your government. I think now we know why First Nations are so concerned: Most First Nation health services

are primarily funded by the federal government, yet you want the authority to shut them down.

I want to quote from the Alzheimer Society: "Section 28 gives the minister powers beyond what are required and which strike at the core of our civil

society.... This is unnecessary, unreasonable, counter-productive and, we believe, undemocratic." I repeat, Minister, answer the question. Why do you want to have the unilateral, unfettered

authority to go around the province shutting down local health agencies that may get their funding from municipalities, from the federal government or from charities, and not from the McGuinty

government?

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: Last week they were here and they said that the sky was going to fall if we gave pensioners the opportunity to have

control over their own pension funds. Now it's the assertion of the New Democratic Party that if we make the mistake of taking a significant degree of power that I have the privilege of exercising

today and to pass that on to people chosen from the local community who most certainly -- if we take a look at their resumés, if we take a look at the people who have agreed to come and join

these, who have gone to the committee, we see people who have one thing in common with one another, and it is a commitment to community.

Most of these people have been exercising their views on behalf of community in other health service provider organizations. We seek to tap them for that

expertise based on the fundamental belief that the community deserves and should enjoy the opportunity to make important decisions about the future of the health care system which is, after all,

theirs.

The Speaker: New question.

Mr. Hampton: Again to the Acting Premier, here's the pattern that's beginning to evolve: You have organizations like the Alzheimer Society of

Toronto, a good, community-based organization, who have come forward and said, "Look, there's a real problem here with the legislation." The McGuinty government says, "We're going to ignore you."

The Registered Nurses Association of Ontario warns your bill will mean privatization of key health services. They call that dangerous for patients. The McGuinty government says, "Ignore them." The

Ontario Nurses' Association says your LHINs boards are "simply an additional layer of bureaucracy under the substantive control of the health minister." The McGuinty government says, "Ignore

them."

Acting Premier, do you think all these dedicated health care organizations, all these dedicated health care providers, don't know what they're talking

about?

Hon. James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism, minister responsible for seniors, Government House Leader): Only you, Howie.

Hon. Mrs. Dombrowsky: Minister of Health and Long-Term Care.

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: The government House leader took my line.

I want to say to the honourable member that the reality is that we worked very hard to engage the process at committee to work towards the opportunity to

enhance the bill. We sought advice from a wide variety of parties. The honourable member characterizes the Registered Nurses Association of Ontario. I had a conversation very recently with the

executive director. Of course, there are points where there are differences, but at the same time, they've been very clear and understanding that we have sought to make accommodations where those

were appropriate and consistent with the values at the heart of the bill. And the values at the heart of the bill are what offends this member, because this member sees in those values a transfer

of power from government beyond the norms of the traditional stakeholder relationship, wherein we engage people from the local community and give them the opportunity, for once, to be able to

influence the evolution of their health care system.

This must proceed. Any of the kind of use of powers that the honourable member speaks about -- the pattern is clear: We believe in public health care --

The Speaker: Thank you. Supplementary.

Mr. Hampton: Yes, the pattern is clear. We have First Nations who, after trying to engage your government, have concluded that you're quite

prepared to trample on their treaty rights, their constitutional rights, and that you seek the power to shut down their health care organizations, even when the majority of funding comes from the

federal government. Or we have, for example, organizations like the Canadian Mental Health Association, who fundamentally disagree with what you're doing, or the Niagara region's francophone

community, who have raised their issues only to be told by you and your government that they don't know what they're talking about.

I say again to the McGuinty government, don't you think it's time to pause and reflect when you have community health care organization after community health

care organization after First Nations health care organization saying this is fundamentally a flawed bill? Don't you think it's time to fix it?

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: At the end of the day, it's the obligation of government to reconcile a variety of different points of view. Ours is

clear: At the heart of this bill are our values as a government. We believe fundamentally that it's about time that we brought more Ontarians into the opportunity to influence their health

care.

The honourable member doesn't like to talk about several of those items you might think he'd be proud of -- as an example, the kind of transparency that we're

bringing forward in this bill. The member likes to jump to the conclusion of dire consequence, but he does a disservice to community because he wipes away the reality of community involvement, he

wipes away the reality of engagement at the community level in the form of open public meetings and he wipes away the reality that under this bill and those provisions that he speaks to, no

Minister of Health can move forward without the voice of community, after a transparent debate, coming forward and recommending that services be merged. Accordingly, this is a bill that seeks to

transfer power to the community, and appropriately so.

Mr. Hampton: Again, you have organizations like the Registered Nurses Association of Ontario who are saying this is not a transfer to

community, that this is centralization and consolidation in the Minister of Health's office.

The minister wants to talk about community. Here we have the Ontario Health Coalition, a community-based organization that points out exactly how centralizing

this is. The Ontario Public Service Employees Union, CUPE, SEIU and, just to give an example, communities across northern Ontario see consolidation and centralization of health services in LHINs

boards that are larger than most European countries. And the McGuinty government says this is local control.

Minister, all of these organizations have pointed out the fundamental problems with your bill. Are you going to ram it through and ignore them or are you going

to pause and try to fix it?

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: I'm very pleased to address the concerns that the honourable member is raising, and two in particular, because he's got

this scattergun approach. But I think two in particular warrant the consideration of this House more particularly.

The member has spoken about the needs of our aboriginal and francophone communities. Accordingly, that's why I'm proud that at the committee we were able to

take advantage of advice from those communities and from honourable members to create, not just in the

preamble but in the legislation itself, a requirement that the Ministry of Health create a

capacity never before imagined in our province, where the government of the province of Ontario works with First Nations communities on a government-to-government basis to set the strategic

parameters for the delivery of health care, with an obligation built into the legislation for community engagement and resourcing for First Nations communities to enhance their capacity to be

involved in the important work of integrated health service plan preparation. Accordingly, our principles are sound, this bill is sound --

The Speaker: Thank you. New question.

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

Mr. John Yakabuski (Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke): My question is for the Minister of Energy. I noticed that when you announced the awarding of

the generation contract to Portlands Energy Centre, you stated with great fanfare that this was the project that would be done sooner so that the lights won't go out in the city of Toronto. You

were so certain that this was the one that you didn't even look at other bids. You assured us that this plant has all the necessary approvals needed.

Can you guarantee for us today, Minister, that this plant has all the necessary approvals such as an EA for the gas pipeline and zoning and building permits,

or is this an example of "approve the project and answer the questions later"?

Hon. Donna H. Cansfield (Minister of Energy): What I can do -- as I will tell you, this is written by the independent system operator, Hydro

One, Toronto Hydro and the Ontario Power Authority, and it's dated January 11, 2006:

"We are writing to you to enumerate the immediate initiatives required to ensure the reliability of electricity supply to central Toronto for the summer of

2008 and beyond....

"We emphasize the requirements we set forth below are based on the physical realities of Toronto's electricity infrastructure as well as the application of

internationally applied reliability standards."

It goes on to say that they need a minimum of 250 megawatts of firm capacity, over and above what we put in place for conservation, by 2008. The connection

point must be the Hearn switching station in order to allow for load transfers between the eastern and western parts. It's a tight construction

schedule and delays will make it difficult.

It goes on to say that the ultimate level of generation capacity --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you, Minister. Supplementary?

Mr. Yakabuski: Minister, we're all very well aware of the generation issues within the city of Toronto. The problem is your response to it.

Your government has consistently stated that you care deeply about energy conservation in Ontario, yet when you are provided with a proposal that would provide a $30-million trust fund for

conservation and education programs, you simply ignore it. In fact, not only did you ignore it, but you didn't even look at the full details of the proposal put forth by Toronto Hydro and

Constellation Energy because you didn't even have it when you made your decision.

Minister, in typical Liberal fashion, your actions don't meet with your commitments. Will you guarantee for us today that you will reopen the selection process

for generation in Toronto so that Toronto Hydro, a key partner in your supposed conservation plans, will get a fair hearing of their proposals? Will you guarantee us that today, Minister?

Hon. Mrs. Cansfield: Let me just conclude with one last point: "We recommend that you act on this matter expeditiously by issuing a directive"

to the Ontario Power Authority, which in fact is what we did, but let me go through this again.

When the proponent came forward, they required an EA that would be waived. They would require $120 million worth of temporary generation that would be torn

down if, in fact, they could put it where they chose to. They had to buy out a contractor with a 30-year lease on a building that said it couldn't have generation in it. In addition to that, we

would have to accelerate all of the permits, because they had nothing in place. In fact, the other proponent was much further along in the process, and working on the requirement from Toronto

Hydro, the IESO, the Ontario Power Authority themselves, who demand that we work expeditiously -- we did exactly that in order to keep the lights on.

The Speaker: Thank you. Point of order?

Mr. Yakabuski: Those answers were no answers at all. She never even dealt with --

The Speaker: Sit down. New question.

Mr. Yakabuski: I'm going to file the proper paperwork for a late show.

The Speaker: You would know, if you looked at the standing orders, it's just a matter of filing that with the table.

TENANT PROTECTION

Mr. Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): My question is to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Tenants in Ontario are afraid that your

new smart meter scheme will give landlords the power to gouge them for electricity costs. You want landlords to be able to download electricity costs to their tenants without the guarantee of a

corresponding rent reduction. You promised new tenant legislation for this spring; you are imposing smart meters on tenants today. Will you impose a corresponding rent reduction on landlords at the

same time?

Hon. John Gerretsen (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): I can well understand the concern about this particular issue, but I can also

tell the people of Ontario that we will be bringing in new tenant protection legislation that will include some of the various aspects he has mentioned. We want to be totally fair to both good

landlords and good tenants. The system has not worked all that well over the last 20 or 30 years. There have been all sorts of different rules and regulations imposed on both landlords and tenants,

and we want to get it right. We're taking our time to get it absolutely right because we think it's absolutely essential to both landlords and tenants. This particular issue will be dealt with at

that time, as it is being dealt with currently by the Minister of Energy as well.

Mr. Prue: There's absolutely nothing in the bill currently before the House that provides that guarantee. Tenants have zero control over the

energy efficiency of their building. They have no control over the insulation. They have no control over the energy efficiency of their large appliances. Yet you want landlords to be able to

download the electricity costs to tenants without the guarantee of a corresponding rent reduction, and without mandating increases in overall building efficiency. Will you guarantee to tenants that

smart metering will not be allowed unless there is a rent reduction for tenants negotiated by tenants and energy efficiency retrofits for apartment buildings?

Hon. Mr. Gerretsen: I'd like to refer the question with respect to smart metering to the Minister of Energy.

Hon. Donna H. Cansfield (Minister of Energy): Thank you for the question. In fact, the legislation does not affect the Tenant Protection Act.

There has been a directive to the conservation bureau, through the Ontario Power Authority, to put in place a low-income strategy to deal with the issues that have been addressed. In addition to

that, we actually have put in place a program for 5,000 units as a pilot in 20 communities right across this province to look at how we can deal with such things as retrofitting the appliances,

because we know that those least able to afford the cost of electricity may in fact be those who need additional support systems such as ensuring that those appliances are changed.

One of the things I can tell you is that in one of our projects where we have had smart metering, there has been a significant saving that has gone back to the

tenant. What is even more important is that we found 12 grow-ops, a reptile farm and a catering business that everybody was paying for. This way, people will not have to pay for something that is

not part of their particular livelihood.

FRENCH-LANGUAGE SERVICES

M. Phil McNeely (Ottawa-Orléans): Ma question est pour le ministre de la Santé. Monsieur le Ministre, cette fin de semaine il y

avait des articles dans le journal Welland Tribune qui ont parlé de la

loi sur l'intégration du système de santé, et de tous les soucis des fournisseurs de services de

santé francophones. Comme vous le savez, il y a une grande population de francophones dans ma circonscription d'Ottawa-Orléans. Alors, ce sujet m'intéresse beaucoup.

The concerns were from a francophone long-term-care home and community health centre that was seeking assurances that they will continue to have the ability to

provide French-language services to francophones in their community. Minister, can you speak of how the LHIN legislation deals with the provision of French-language health care services?

Hon. George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I want to thank the honourable member for his question and for his keen

interest in this issue. I think we all know that our francophone community experiences more profound challenges and difficulties with their health and with access to health care. That's why we took

the opportunity, through the committee process, to enhance in the legislation those commitments that will ensure engagement with our francophone communities.

I just want to read this from the

preamble:

"The people of Ontario and their government ... believe that the health system should be guided by a commitment to equity and respect for diversity in

communities in serving the people of Ontario and respect the requirements of the French Language Services Act in serving Ontario's French-speaking community."

We went further. Right in the body of the legislation, we established the provincial advisory council to advise the minister about health and service delivery

issues related to francophone communities. We'll be engaged with the actual francophone leadership in that. Accordingly, there will be a provision that will explicitly require local health

integration networks to engage francophone communities in the development of integrated health services plans.

We're making sure that the francophone community has access to power and access to the opportunity to influence it from the standpoint of improving health care

outcomes for --

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

Mr. McNeely: Thank you for providing clarification on this matter. It is clear that this bill enshrines in legislation the government's

respect for the delivery of health care services to those Ontarians who need services in the French language. In fact, I know our government has already demonstrated this commitment before these

new amendments to the Local Health System Integration Act.

Minister, can you speak more broadly to how our government approaches health care delivery as it pertains to the francophone population, which may face

barriers to care?

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: I had the chance to say before that we know that francophones have experienced significant barriers to care. One study of

many done in 2001 by the federation of francophone and Acadian communities of Canada found that access to health care services in French for Franco-Ontarians is severely lacking in hospital

services, community health centres, medical clinics and home care, and that 74% of Franco-Ontarians said they have either no access at all or rarely have access to hospital services in French.

That's why I think it's important, if we look at the issues with respect to the Centre de santé communautaire de l'Estrie, that we are defending its

mandate to provide French health services to the francophone population in Cornwall expressly because we've come to understand that certain communities in our population are significantly less

healthy or experiencing challenges in access to care, which warrants the application of particular resources to be able to address the population health circumstances that are occurring.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the Minister of Health. Last week, while the Minister of Health and the member

for Peterborough were having one of those love-ins on a government-inspired question, there were people waiting in the hallways at the Peterborough Regional Health Centre to get proper

accommodations. I visited the hospital on Friday, and the staff described that day as a better-than-average day. On a better-than-average day, there were six people lying on stretchers in the

emergency room, waiting for a bed.

The administration and the hospital medical people say that the only way this problem is going to be fixed is if you provide the funding for more acute care

medical beds, funding they have been asking for for three years. Minister, when are you going to approve the money for those beds to alleviate the crisis situation in that emergency room in

Peterborough? When are you going to do it?

Hon. George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): It's interesting that the honourable member made it all the way to

Peterborough on Friday but didn't have the capacity to bring back a little bit more information about the changes in the Peterborough circumstance over the last three years; for example, a great

big new hospital coming to life, which your party couldn't manage to get done, or the reality that, in this very same community, tremendous leadership supported by our government is bringing a new

family health team to life with new nurse practitioners who are already giving access to health care to people in that community who didn't have access to doctors and to health care. The honourable

member didn't mention either our more recent investment of three new ICU critical care beds or 18 interim long-term-care beds.

The point is that we're working carefully with the people in Peterborough to enhance their capacity to meet the needs and to make up for a lot of lost time

that is your legacy.

Mr. Tory: The fact is that the people of the Peterborough hospital say that what has been done is nowhere near enough, and the fact is that

there are patients today looking out the window at that construction site you talk about, lying on gurneys where they've been, sometimes, for days waiting for a bed in that hospital.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Stop the clock. Minister of Community and Social Services, come to order. Order, Minister of Finance.

Leader of the Opposition.

Mr. Tory: On my way back from Peterborough, I decided to see if I could go in and get some money from the Central East LHIN office, one of

those great world focal points of local input. I got there at 10 to 5 on a Friday afternoon. The office was shut tight. There wasn't a person in sight. The lights were off. All you could see

through the door was the new furniture that's in there, paid for with taxpayers' money. The fact is, the money you blew, the money the minister blew on that new furniture for those offices, could

have helped people like Marilyn Burrows. You see, she doesn't quite share your view about all this and all that you've done. She spent two and a half days in the hallway near the X-ray room across

from the staff lounge, waiting in the emergency room. She said, writing to the Peterborough Examiner, "On any given day there is a lineup of patients with small children who are ill and nowhere to

go.... Shame on Health Minister George Smitherman and the Ontario government."

I can attest to that because that's what I saw. You came up with $2 million for furniture in the LHIN offices that are closed and shut tight and dark on a

Friday afternoon. When are you going to come up with money for the Peterborough hospital, for the medical beds they need that are going to solve the problem?

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: When, indeed, is that honourable member either going to stand in his place or lean over to the person to his right and

ask the fundamental question, "Why is it that when we were in government we closed thousands of hospital beds and 28 hospitals in the province of Ontario?" That is your legacy, sir. That is your

legacy. And while you're at it, stand before us and tell us how it is that you're going to reconcile your desire today to increase hospital funding across the board beyond the $25 million we've

provided to Peterborough, consistent with your promised $2.4-billion cut to health care. Reconcile that, Mr. Tory.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. The government House leader, order. We have members waiting to ask questions.

New question.

CHILD CARE

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): My question is for the Minister of Children and Youth Services. You haven't made the provincial

investments that you promised to expand Ontario's child care program. Now the Ontario Municipal Social Services Association and worried municipalities have asked that you put your government's

child care funding promise in writing. Minister, will you commit to providing this written guarantee so that cities like Hamilton can proceed with their plans to create more affordable child care

spaces without worrying about the collapse of the federal deal?

Hon. Mary Anne V. Chambers (Minister of Children and Youth Services): I'm really happy that the member from Hamilton East is once again giving

I will ask once again, because I've asked this twice already in the House -- you know, the problem that I find sometimes is that we don't celebrate what we

a non-partisan fashion. Because when parents say they want child care for their kids, they don't say they want Liberal child care. They don't say they want --

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

Ms. Horwath: Minister, as you know, Quebec is in a much better position to protect its child care program because Quebec invested the

provincial dollars required for a universal program, but you have used federal dollars to replace rather than supplement your own. Ontario municipalities want to know how they can continue to both

plan for and deliver child care spaces. If you're really and truly concerned about maintaining a made-in-Ontario child care program, when will you provide municipalities with your written assurance

that your promised funding, the $300 million promised several years ago, is actually going to flow?

Hon. Mrs. Chambers: It was our government, the government of Ontario, that worked on behalf of every single riding, regardless of partisan

ideology, in this province, including Hamilton East, where what's at stake is 2,390 spaces, $93.61 million for Hamilton East. Hamilton East is also one of three demonstration sites that go well

beyond early learning and child care into the larger, more comprehensive Best Start plan that our government has introduced.

Now, if you are really serious and sincere about protecting your constituents' interests, you would be standing beside us. You would be contacting your federal

cousins, Jack Layton, Olivia Chow and all of those people who are in Ottawa, to say, "Stand by my constituents, please. We cannot afford to lose -- "

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Thank you. New question.

CO-OP EDUCATION

Mr. Jim Brownell (Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh): My question is to the Minister of Education. Minister, as you know, I'm extremely

interested in anything to do with the education of Ontario's youth. Having spent more than 32 years teaching at schools in my riding of Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh, I like to think I have some

knowledge of what's involved in transforming curriculum materials into practical knowledge for our students, knowledge that will serve them well when they leave the school system and look for spots

in the workforce.

One of the key elements in translating information into marketable skills is hands-on learning. It's the old "teach a man to fish" principle: Provide a student

with direct experience and they will not only have the skills required, but will have added an important plank to their CV and made contacts that will serve them well into the future.

I have read recently that you have initiated change in our high schools program to facilitate co-op education opportunities for students. Minister, could you

elaborate on this initiative, please?

Hon. Gerard Kennedy (Minister of Education): I want to commend the member from Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh, because he has really

understood well that what all members of this House need to advocate for is some redress for the 14,000 additional people who were dropping out under the last government who needed to have a

response.

One of the less-known things is that the co-op experience was also reduced under those terms where students got left out and were not given consideration.

Going right to the heart of that is to get at the reasons students drop out in the first place, which is quite often feeling that the school is irrelevant and that work, despite a lack of

educational attainment, is an attractive option.

By enhancing co-op programs, which we're doing now by making them part of the compulsory curriculum -- we're also putting them in as early as grade 10 -- we're

giving young adults a chance to have one step in the work world, where they can still be learning, where they can still be acquiring a tremendous amount of knowledge but also finding out what

ultimately they want to do, giving them the motivation to stay in school in the first place.

Mr. Brownell: Thank you, Minister. We can all agree that providing our youth with the experience they need to succeed increases their

opportunity for happy and productive futures, which, in turn, increases the chance that Ontario will continue to thrive for decades to come.

Our schools must be able to provide our students with the greatest diversity of experiences possible, with hands-on experiences forming an essential part of

their training. For schools to provide the opportunity is essential, but it's only half of the equation. Businesses of Ontario must be willing and prepared to accept these students and ensure the

experiences gained are beneficial to their growth as individuals.

Minister, could you explain to us what mechanisms are in place to facilitate student placement at businesses in Ontario and how we are ensuring that our

students have positive and useful experiences during co-op placements?

Hon. Mr. Kennedy: I want again to enjoin all members of this House to join with the member opposite in his advocacy on behalf of these

students, because we do. We've made a $2-billion investment in education, part of the second year of a four-year plan, but it does require the involvement of the entire community.

Recently, I was in both Kingston and Niagara. The members there have been working closely with their local communities, as the member opposite has, to

encourage businesses to take on some of these additional co-op opportunities. Conveying an education advantage to our students is conveying an economic advantage to our businesses in Ontario. It is

a unity that we need to draw upon now in terms of creating the kinds of opportunities that students require.

We are trying to expand the number of co-op placements and the quality of co-op placements in areas like tourism and hospitality, in trades and so on. It's

making a tremendous difference across the province. I would enjoin every member here to help the member from --

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

DRIVER LICENCES

Mr. Norman W. Sterling (Lanark-Carleton): My question is for the Minister of Transportation. Mr. Minister, in January you changed the rules

regarding documentation required to get a driver's licence, in response to the Auditor General's report. However, young people who are reaching the age of 16 are having problems with your new

requirements. They do not have acceptable identification with a signature. A 15-year-old does not have his own passport, he doesn't have his own health card, and student cards do not generally have

signatures.

The choice that a 15-year-old becoming 16 has is that he must then apply for a passport before he can get his driver's licence, or he must acquire a health

card before he can get his driver's licence. Both of these take time and money. Mr. Minister, what are you going to do to address this problem?

Hon. Harinder S. Takhar (Minister of Transportation): I want to thank the member for asking this question. It is important for us to protect

the integrity of the driver's licence system. These were the recommendations made by the Auditor General, and these were the recommendations that the opposition party actually advocated that we

should implement. That's exactly what we have done.

We are aware of some of the issues that our students are facing. There are other choices they can make. Some of those choices are: They can have an identity

card that can be used made by the school, with a signature on it; the other is, they can apply for a health card, and we will facilitate that process so they can do that quickly and efficiently, so

that the integrity of the driver's licence can be protected.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Supplementary? The member for Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound.

Mr. Bill Murdoch (Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound): You don't understand, Mr. Minister: This does not work in rural Ontario. Again, you've made a law

for the large urban centres. It doesn't work in rural Ontario. Just like Mr. Sterling said, they don't have a passport. You just said that they could get their health card and you would help to

expedite that. Are you now taking over the health ministry? That doesn't work that easy.

We have kids phoning our office every day. They are unable to get their licence because of your new rules. What we'll ask you today is, would you consider

looking at these rules again, and maybe the parents could sign? Something like that could work, or someone that can sign, say, for a passport, like a lawyer, an MP or an MPP -- someone like that

who could sign something that would allow them to do this.

There's just no way that they can get these licences. Mr. Minister, will you look at this again and help sort it out for rural Ontario, at least?

Hon. Mr. Takhar: We need to balance the security of the licence system with convenience, and we want to make sure that is done.

Let me say that there is only a very small number of students who are facing this kind of issue. Whatever this member is suggesting is actually part of those

13 documents that are required. There is one affidavit that can be provided to get the driver's licence. So I'm not sure what he's talking about. It would be worthwhile for him to look at the 13

requirements that we ask for the people to produce, and ask for the student to produce, but we need to protect the security of our driver's licence system. That was advocated by that party. That

was advocated by the Auditor General. Now they are changing their mind on that issue as well.

MUNICIPAL FINANCES

Mr. Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): My question is to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Mr. Minister, the McGuinty government's

refusal to pay its bills on downloaded services continues to break the backs, the hopes and the dreams of municipalities and communities across this province. The newest one is Tecumseh in

southwestern Ontario. It is proposing to cut its funding for its annual corn fest -- a tradition and a festival they've had for 31 years -- because they have to pay your bills. Southwestern Ontario

is already suffering because of your failure to address the farm income crisis and your refusal to pay your share for provincially mandated programs. Now the threat is to strip this community of an

important local festival. When are you going to pay the bills you admit are your own?

Hon. John Gerretsen (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): I find it a little hard to believe. We realize that municipalities are not

having the easiest time of it, but on the other hand, let's look at all the positive programs that this government has initiated just within the last two and a half years that we've been in

power:

We've got a COMRIF agreement to deal with the capital needs of rural Ontario that will spend up to $400 million in phase 1, and fairly soon phase 2 will be

announced, which will be another $400 million.

When you look at the gas tax, which basically went to those municipalities that had transit systems, it's a lot of money. I'm trying to find the exact amount

here.

When you look at the affordable housing programs that help those local service providers put up new affordable housing, some $602 million is being spent by the

province and the federal government.

There has been a lot of good things happening in the municipal world, and we intend to continue with that in the years to come.

Mr. Prue: I see from your answer there's no hope for Tecumseh, just as yesterday there was no hope for the town of Kenora, because yesterday

the town of Kenora had to raise its taxes and said that they cannot even do the land ambulance, when you promised to bail them out.

You continue to require municipalities across the province to fund provincially mandated programs off their limited property tax base -- something your

government vehemently opposed in opposition, something that you oppose when you're out there in the scrum outside the Legislature. Yet failure to pay your share means communities are left to cut

funding for important local services and, today, for the first time, a festival. When are you going to find the courage of your own convictions when in opposition and pay your share or, in plain

and simple words, upload the download?

Hon. Mr. Gerretsen: I will agree with this member on one thing: that the previous government left this province, and particularly its

municipalities, in one heck of a position as far as the downloading that was done. We're trying to correct that. We've started it in public health, for example. Slowly but surely, we're uploading

the cost of public health from 50% that the municipal share is to only 25% in the years to come.

The gas tax money, by the way, is $130 million that will be flowing to municipalities this year. If you include the federal gas tax money, it's another $290

million that will be flowing to all municipalities across this province this year.

Just last week, at the ROMA conference, the Premier announced that land ambulance would be funded at a rate of 50-50 between the province and the

municipalities. We are dealing with this situation, we're dealing with it in a very orderly matter and we want to make sure that the municipalities and, most of all, the people of Ontario are the

beneficiaries of this.

ELDER ABUSE

Mr. Ted McMeekin (Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Aldershot): My question is to the minister responsible for seniors. It's about elder abuse, a

very important topic. Elder abuse is often defined as any act or omission that harms a senior or jeopardizes his or her health or welfare. It's a topic that all Ontarians, particularly members in

this House, are very concerned about, and it's certainly a problem that I hear a lot about from my hard-working local senior advisory group in my own riding.

We all have an interest in ensuring that our parents, grandparents, elderly friends and relatives live in a secure and safe environment. According to Stats

Canada, somewhere between 4% and 10% of our seniors experience financial, emotional or physical abuse. Minister, these stats show us a really important issue. What type of initiative is this

government taking to combat this problem of elder abuse?

Hon. James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism, minister responsible for seniors, Government House Leader): I'd like to thank the member for his

excellent question. It's a very important issue he's dealing with, and I agree with the member that elder abuse is most certainly a serious matter and one which, over the years, has been

underreported.

Our seniors deserve to live safely with dignity and as independently as possible, and that is why our government is involved in a number of initiatives to

raise awareness and to help combat elder abuse. Last month, Monte Kwinter, the Minister of Community Safety, and I joined the Ontario Association of Crime Stoppers to launch the seniors' Crime

Stoppers initiative. This initiative will provide seniors with education on how and when to use the Crime Stoppers program. It will also train staff at the Crime Stoppers after-hours answering

service on communication with seniors and on elder abuse and neglect issues. In fact, this morning, I was at the third Ontario elder abuse conference in Mississauga being sponsored by our

secretariat, the Ministry of the Attorney General and --

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

Mr. McMeekin: Thanks very much, Minister. Having worked very closely with the staff from the Ontario Seniors' Secretariat during some time in

another post, I'm familiar with the good work they do. I want to say to all of them, thank you for that great work. It often goes unheralded.

One thing that I feel is important, Minister, is to note that elder abuse takes place in many different settings. Stats are indicating that some 68% of our

seniors who report that they were physically abused actually state that they were assaulted by a family member -- very, very serious. While I'm glad to hear that our government is responding to

this very serious matter, I also feel that the issue is so complex that we really need an overall strategy for it. Minister, can you describe for us in a bit more detail exactly what we plan to do

as a government to end the scourge of elder abuse?

Hon. Mr. Bradley: Our government is working with others who want to build safer communities for our seniors. We're doing this with our

partners at the Ontario Network for the Prevention of Elder Abuse through implementation of the Ontario strategy to combat elder abuse. This five-year strategy is designed to basically do three

things: (1) help coordinate services at the community level; (2) help train staff on the front line on how to recognize and respond to elder abuse; and (3) help to raise public awareness of this

growing problem.

Also in 2004, our government marked the first Elder Abuse Awareness Day, and I'm pleased to say that Ontario was the first province to establish an Elder Abuse

Awareness Day. This is an important step toward raising awareness of the matter and asking Ontarians to make a collective effort to make Ontario finally free of elder abuse.

ONTARIO ECONOMY

Mr. Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln): A question to the Minister of Finance: Your own ministry reports that out-migration from Ontario to other

provinces is at record levels in Dalton McGuinty's Ontario -- in fact, a factor triple that of 2004. Why are so many Ontarians leaving Dalton McGuinty's Ontario?

Hon. Dwight Duncan (Minister of Finance, Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet): Employment is up, unemployment is down. Inflation is down

and growth is up. Health care wait times are lower, and there are more nurses. More kids have access to post-secondary education at a lower cost under this government. Since we took office, 216,000

net new jobs in Ontario. Let me tell you, as long as one family, one individual in this province, wants a job, this government won't rest.

What do we know from the other side? They want to cut taxes and close hospitals. They don't share our commitment to post-secondary education -- $6.2 billion

invested to take Ontario to a leadership position. This party has a plan for the province. It's working. Jobs are up, unemployment is down. Our record is better --

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

Mr. Hudak: Minister, people are voting with their own feet. Maybe you didn't listen to the first part of the question, but record levels of

Ontarians are now leaving Dalton McGuinty's Ontario to go to better offers in other provinces and territories -- seven out of 13. I mentioned last week in the Legislature that the number of

bankruptcies growing in Ontario is the worst record in the entire country and, sadly, some 88,000 manufacturing jobs, well-paying jobs, have left Dalton McGuinty's Ontario. I heard the minister,

but people are voting with their own feet. Can we hope for some relief from your high-tax, high-energy and runaway spending budgets when you present this spring?

Hon. Mr. Duncan: Ontario got its relief in October 2003, when they chose Dalton McGuinty to be the Premier of Ontario. Let's look at the

record: 74,000 new jobs in the education sector, 62,000 in finance and insurance, 43,000 construction jobs and 21,000 professional, scientific and technical service jobs. The indices that need to

be up are up. The ones that should be down are down. This government's plan is working. We're undoing the mess they left in health care, in education, and as long as one family wants a job, as long

as one person needs help, this government will stand up for them and undo your legacy of neglect of health and neglect of education, because we have a better way and we're going to see it right

through.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. I'd like to get to petitions.

PETITIONS

SERVICES FOR THE DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

Mr. Ernie Hardeman (Oxford): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario signed by a great number of my constituents in Oxford

county, and also in counties and ridings around the province.

"Whereas, without appropriate support, people who have an intellectual disability are often unable to participate effectively in community life and are

deprived of the benefits of society enjoyed by other citizens; and

"Whereas quality supports are dependent on the ability to attract and retain qualified workers; and

"Whereas the salaries of workers who provide community-based supports and services are up to 25% less than salaries paid to those doing the same work in

government-operated services and other sectors;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to address, as a priority, funding to community agencies in the developmental services

sector to address critical underfunding of staff salaries and ensure that people who have an intellectual disability continue to receive quality supports and services that they require in order to

live meaningful lives within their community."

I affix my signature to the petition.

PENSION PLANS

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

"Whereas every Ontario worker has the right to a secure pension that is indexed to inflation and provides the dignity of a stable and sufficient income for

retirement;

"Whereas pensions represent workers' deferred wages and all pension contributions belong to the workers;

"Whereas people who work all their lives deserve the right to retire with a decent pension at age 65 without having to worry about making ends meet;

"Whereas the pension system is sorely in need of reform; it hasn't been reviewed since 1987 and many Ontario seniors have seen the value of their pensions

vastly reduced over the years;

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

"We call on the government of Ontario to form a special legislative committee on pension reform to study ways to ensure that all workers have the ability:

(1) to participate in a pension plan; (2) to have a real say in how the plan is managed and governed; and (3) to have vesting from day one, indexing, portability from job to job and absolute protection

of their pension through a much-enhanced pension benefit guarantee fund and stronger provincial legislation."

I agree with this petition. I have signed it and I send it to the Clerk's table by way of Mark.

CHILD CARE

Mr. Khalil Ramal (London-Fanshawe): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas provinces and territories negotiated agreements with the federal government to ensure Canadians would have access to early learning and child care

programs that are high quality, affordable, universally inclusive and developmental;

"Whereas parents in Ontario have demonstrated a high demand for greater access to high-quality early learning and child care programs;

regulated child care spaces in the first three years;

"Whereas Ontario's early learning and child care agreement represents a $1.9-billion investment over five years in high-quality early learning and child

care;

Ontario's early learning and child care agreement, for the sake of the thousands of Ontario families who would benefit from it."

I agree with this petition and I affix my name to it. I give it to Sarah.

CANCER TREATMENT

Mr. Cameron Jackson (Burlington): I have a petition to the Parliament of Ontario:

"Whereas Ontario has an inconsistent policy for access to new cancer treatments while these drugs are under review for funding; and

"Whereas cancer patients taking oral chemotherapy may apply for a

section 8 exception under the Ontario drug benefit plan, with no such exception policy in

place for intravenous cancer drugs administered in hospital; and

"Whereas this is an inequitable, inconsistent and unfair policy, creating two classes of cancer patients with further inequities on the basis of personal

wealth and the willingness of hospitals to risk budgetary deficits to provide new intravenous chemotherapy treatments; and

"Whereas cancer patients have the right to the most effective care recommended by their doctors;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Parliament of Ontario to provide immediate access to Velcade and other intravenous chemotherapy while these new cancer drugs

are under review and provide a consistent policy for access to new cancer treatments that enables oncologists to apply for exceptions to meet the needs of patients."

This has my signature of support as well.

Ms. Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I have a petition that's been sent to me from people in Caledonia and it reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas we are asking that access to Velcade treatment be made available in Ontario. Ontario is the only province in Canada not currently making funding

available for this drug, even though approximately 40% of people diagnosed with multiple myeloma in Canada are from Ontario;

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

"To provide immediate access to Velcade, while the review process continues, so that this treatment is available to patients in Ontario as it is in every other

province of Canada."

I agree with the petitioners and I have affixed my signature to this.

SEXUAL HARASSMENT

Mr. Pat Hoy (Chatham-Kent Essex): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Ontario Human Rights Code guarantees the right to work in an environment free from sexual harassment, and Lori Dupont was the victim of sexual

harassment by the man who murdered her at their place of employment; and

"Whereas the inquest into the workplace murder of Theresa Vince proved that sexual harassment is a dangerous workplace circumstance that can and has resulted

in death; and

"Whereas sexual harassment is a significant and widespread occupational health and safety hazard for women in the workplace, and current workplace legislation

has proven to be ineffective in preventing gendered workplace violence and murder; and

"Whereas the Occupational Health and Safety Act demands an inquest whenever a workplace death occurs, and Lori Dupont deserves no less than any other worker;

and

"Whereas the coroner's office has appointed the domestic violence death review committee to examine the death of Lori Dupont, whose murder is both an intimate

femicide and

an act of extreme workplace violence, and because the DVDRC does not have the mandate or the expertise to critically examine those aspects of her murder that pertain to the workplace,

and because the DVDRC will not conduct a public review;

"We, the undersigned Ontario residents, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to conduct a full and public inquest into the workplace murder of Lori

Dupont at Hotel-Dieu Grace Hospital in Windsor, Ontario, on Saturday, November 12, 2005. We respectfully make this petition in memory and in honour of Lori Dupont."

There are some 9,000 names on this petition, and I too have affixed my signature.

PROPERTY RIGHTS

Mr. Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): This petition is entitled "Support the Land Rights and Responsibilities Act." It was launched at

the Belleville convention of the Ontario Landowners Association.

"To the Parliament of Ontario:

"Whereas the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is silent on property rights; and

"Whereas the Alberta Bill of Rights specifically protects the right to the enjoyment of property; and

"Whereas the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms provides that `Every person has a right to the peaceful enjoyment and free disposition of his

property, except to the extent provided by law'; and

"Whereas Ontario no longer has property or land rights;

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

"To pass Bill 57, the Land Rights and Responsibilities Act, 2006."

I affix my signature to this petition.

LOCAL HEALTH

INTEGRATION NETWORKS

Ms. Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I have a petition that has been signed by hundreds of people from the Blenheim, Chatham and Leamington

areas. I want to thank Roger Renaud, SEIU Local 1.on representative, and the stewards for gathering the petitions and sending them to me. It reads as follows:

"Whereas the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care has introduced Bill 36, the Local Health Integration Act; and

"Whereas this legislation will integrate, amalgamate, restructure and privatize health care services; and

"Whereas health care workers will see their jobs put up for auction through competitive bidding; and

"Whereas many Ontarians will be forced to travel further for medical care; and

"Whereas LHIN boards are unelected, order-in-council appointments, their allegiance is not to the local communities but to the Minister of Health;

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

"The Legislative Assembly delay passage of Bill 36 until a strategic plan for health care is developed with broad public consultation. And further, Bill 36 be

amended to include a human resource plan; include all health care providers; ensure no health care providers, LHIN or the Minister of Health can privatize any health care services through a

competitive bidding process."

I agree with the petitioners, and I've affixed my signature to these.

OMERS PENSION FUND

Mr. Bob Delaney (Mississauga West): I have a petition to the Ontario Legislative Assembly that I'm going to read on behalf of some

constituents in Mississauga West. I tried to get it in last week and didn't make it, so I'll get it in this week. It reads as follows:

"Whereas no government of Ontario employees are covered by pension benefits from the Ontario municipal employees retirement system, known as OMERS; and

"Whereas the government of Ontario has proposed, through Bill 206, to pass control and management of OMERS to the municipalities and employees who pay into and

benefit from OMERS pension benefits; and

"Whereas all members of OMERS will have access to the same base pension plan; nothing in Bill 206 would affect current pension payments; and retirees will

continue to receive their pensions as usual; and

"Whereas extensive debate, consultation and amendments on Bill 206 have resulted in a fair and equitable distribution of representation, governance and dispute

resolution;

"Be it therefore resolved:

"That the government of Ontario should enact Bill 206,

An Act to revise the Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System Act."

It's my pleasure to add my signature to this petition and to ask page Michael to carry it for me.

SPECIAL CARE HOMES

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

"Whereas hundreds of vulnerable adults live in homes for special care that provide them a warm and secure, stable and friendly environment which allows them to

lead fulfilling lives; and

"Whereas the alternative for many of these individuals is a life of homelessness on the street; and

"Whereas special care homes have had only a single 3% increase since 1999, which in no way matches the rising costs they face; and

"Whereas the Liberal government promised Ontario in the election they would `significantly increase supportive housing options for those suffering from mental

illness';

"Therefore we, the undersigned, call on the government to bring in an immediate increase in funding to homes for special care."

As I am in agreement with this, I will affix my signature and give it to page Chelsi.

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

Mr. Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): I have a petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario from the Canadian Union of Public

Employees, Local 3907.

"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 amongst all provinces in terms of total PSE budget received from government grants, and has the highest percentage of total

post-secondary education revenue 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."

This was signed by hundreds of signatories, as well as myself.

CHILD CARE

Mrs. Liz Sandals (Guelph-Wellington): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas provinces and territories negotiated agreements with the federal government to ensure Canadians would have access to early learning and child care

programs that are high quality, affordable, universally inclusive and developmental;

"Whereas parents in Ontario have demonstrated a high demand for greater access to high-quality early learning and child care programs;

regulated child care spaces in the first three years;

"Whereas Ontario's early learning and child care agreement represents a $1.9-billion investment over five years in high-quality early learning and child

care;

Ontario's early learning and child care agreement, for the sake of the thousands of Ontario families who would benefit from it."

I will affix my signature, and give this petition to Mark.

CURRICULUM

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): I have a petition from students from Muskoka, and it says,

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Ministry of Education plans to remove the study of derivatives from the grade 12 mathematics curriculum; and

"Whereas the grade 12 university preparation course Advanced Functions and Introductory Calculus is designed for students intending to study university

programs that will involve calculus; and

"Whereas the course currently provides an introduction to the fundamental concepts of calculus, which are also required in grade 12 physics; and

"Whereas it contains three strands: advanced functions, in which students explore the properties and applications of polynomial, exponential and logarithmic

functions; underlying concepts of calculus, in which students develop an understanding of the basic concepts of calculus by analyzing the rates of change involved in applications; and derivatives

and applications, in which students develop, consolidate and apply to graphing and problem-solving the rules and properties of differentiation; and

"Whereas all of these strands are requirements for most university programs, and to remove any of them from the high school curriculum will leave the students

of Ontario at a disadvantage when compared to the students from other provinces;

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

"To ensure that the Ministry of Education continues to retain all parts of the current grade 12 mathematics curriculum and stop making changes that put the

future careers of Ontario students at risk."

ORDERS OF THE DAY

STRONGER CITY OF TORONTO

FOR A STRONGER ONTARIO ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 CRÉANT

UN TORONTO PLUS FORT

POUR UN ONTARIO PLUS FORT

Resuming the debate adjourned on February 13, 2006, on the motion for second reading of Bill 53,

An Act to revise the City of Toronto Acts, 1997 (Nos. 1 and

2), to amend certain public Acts in relation to municipal powers and to repeal certain private Acts relating to the City of Toronto / Projet de loi 53, Loi révisant les lois de 1997 Nos 1

et 2 sur la cité de Toronto, modifiant certaines lois d'intérêt public en ce qui concerne les pouvoirs municipaux et abrogeant certaines lois d'intérêt privé se

rapportant à la cité de Toronto.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): I understand that the member for Beaches-E