Ontario Hansard — 25 April 1977 (30th Parliament, 4th Session)

1977-04-25

Ontario — Debates (Hansard)

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

April 25, 1977

30th Parliament, 4th Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

L021 - Mon 25 Apr 1977 / Lun 25 avr 1977

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

HOME RENEWAL PROGRAMME

ORAL QUESTIONS

LAKE POLLUTION

OECA PUBLICATION

LAKE POLLUTION

BINGO REGULATIONS

AID FOR HAMILTON

QUEBEC LANGUAGE LEGISLATION

SALES TAX EXEMPTION

MULTILINGUAL TRANSLATIONS OF WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION ACT

CHILDREN IN UNLICENSED HOMES

SALES TAX EXEMPTION

NORTH PICKERING PROJECT

BINGO REGULATIONS

NUCLEAR POWER DEVELOPMENT

JOBS IN AGRICULTURE

QUEBEC MILK

RICHMOND HILL NURSING HOMES

PEEL TEACHERS’ DISPUTE

BRANT COUNTY TEACHERS’ DISPUTE

CITIZEN COMPLAINTS AGAINST POLICE

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH

ENTERTAINMENT TAX

ONTARIO MALLEABLE IRON

PETITIONS

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF DURHAM AMENDMENT ACT

CONSUMER PROTECTION AMENDMENT ACT

ANSWERS TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS

ORDERS OF THE DAY

TORONTO GENERAL BURYING GROUNDS ACT

CANADA TRUSTCO MORTGAGE COMPANY ACT

BOROUGH OF YORK ACT

WEBWOOD INVESTMENTS LIMITED ACT

BOROUGH OF EAST YORK ACT

LOMBARDO FURNITURE AND APPLIANCES LIMITED ACT

KEVALAINE CORPORATION LIMITED ACT

FRED LEBLOND CEMENT PRODUCTS LIMITED ACT

ROMAN CATHOLIC EPISCOPAL CORPORATION (DIOCESE OF ALEXANDRIA) ACT

VILLAGE OF ERIE BEACH ACT

FRANK POSTEL ENTERPRISES LIMITED ACT

BUDGET DEBATE (CONTINUED)

ROYAL ASSENT

The House met at 2 p.m.

Prayers.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

HOME RENEWAL PROGRAMME

Hon. Mr. Rhodes: Mr. Speaker, later this afternoon at the appropriate time I will be tabling a report entitled, An Evaluation of the Ontario Home Renewal Programme. This report contains the findings of an independent survey carried out by the consulting firm of Peter Barnard Associates.

In reading the report, members should note that the survey is based on statistical data gathered from the more than 400 municipalities that have participated in the Home Renewal Programme. In-depth interviews were conducted with municipal officials and other persons in 25 municipalities and a questionnaire survey of residents was carried out in six municipalities -- Cornwall, Kenora, Sarnia, Sudbury, Toronto and Windsor.

The results of the survey indicate that the Ontario Home Renewal Programme has been highly successful and has been a valuable tool in helping my ministry meet its objective to help to preserve and upgrade the existing housing stock in the province.

As with any programme, there are areas where changes can be made, and this report contains recommendations for modifications and minor refinements. It also recommends that the programme be continued.

The government announced earlier this year that the Ontario Home Renewal Programme would be extended for one more year, that is until March 31, 1978. But before any decisions are taken for beyond that date, I think it is important that those communities involved in the programme be given an opportunity to respond to and comment on this evaluation.

I will therefore be forwarding copies of this report to all municipalities which have participated in this programme and ask them to give me their comments by May 30 of this year. The report will also be provided to the members of the Provincial Municipal Liaison Committee and to the hon. members of this House.

Mr. Kerrio: How about a statement by the Premier?

Mr. Lewis: I will defer to you if you would like to make a statement.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I haven’t thought of one, but I will think of one.

Mr. Lewis: Okay. Well, we’ll still be here at 6. Don’t worry.

Mr. Reid: Just one word: “Go.”

ORAL QUESTIONS

LAKE POLLUTION

Mr.

Lewis: May I ask the Minister of the Environment the following: Does he recall that back on July 27, 1976, in a private memorandum to cabinet, the Minister of Natural Resources, dealing with fishing in waters where fish were contaminated, made the following recommendation -- and please forgive me for using his preposterous words -- I quote: “Do not prohibit angling on any water where it is known that at least some of the fish are contaminated, and continue to make available for leasing for private and commercial recreational purposes.” On September 17, 1976, the cabinet committee on resources development had a memo which indicated that it agreed with the general approach proposed by the minister.

Can the Minister of the Environment confirm that this is now government policy, and what further specifics flow from that?

Hon. Mr. Kerr: Mr. Speaker, since the hon. member asked the question of the Minister of Northern Affairs (Mr. Bernier) last Friday -- as it was issued over his signature when he was Minister of Natural Resources -- I made some inquiries and what the hon. member has indicated was generally the discussion that took place. As far as government policy is concerned, the answer to that is no, that still has to be approved by cabinet and by the government. I expect it will be dealt with very shortly, as the hon. Minister of Northern Affairs indicated on Friday.

Mr. Lewis: By way of supplementary, since the minister, according to the memorandum I have covering a number of divisions within the Northern Affairs and Natural Resources ministerial areas, appears to have taken this rather further down the road, and since obviously there is increasing concern in Ontario, will the minister not now in advance of his compendium release all of the information on the levels of contamination in various species in various lakes, since obviously he can’t wait another two months while anxiety is heightened?

Hon. Mr. Kerr: No, Mr. Speaker -- I shouldn’t say no. The answer at the present time would be that up until now, we have issued bulletins or releases dealing with approximately 90 lakes. Thas has been an ongoing release of information that was handled by the Ministry of Health until the first of this year and has subsequently been handled by my ministry.

As the hon. member no doubt has seen, a number of these releases or bulletins deal with various lakes in certain parts of the province. This information is released just as soon as we have the analyses from the Ministry of the Environment laboratories which have the responsibility of analysing fish. This has been going on now for a couple of years and I expect to release another bulletin within a week covering 23 more water- courses, which will make the total about 107.

The booklet or guide to which the hon. member is referring will contain roughly 150 to 160 lakes and rivers. I will make sure that the difference, which obviously is available now, added to what has already been released by way of bulletin, is tabled in this House within the next week.

Mr. Reid: Supplementary: In view of the fact that the fishing season opens within about three to four weeks, can the minister indicate when this booklet, with the compendium or without it, is going to be made available to the people who are fishing on these lakes?

Hon. Mr. Kerr: As has been mentioned on a number of occasions, it is not a question of releasing the booklet as some of the media indicated, it’s a question of getting it printed in sufficient quantity to distribute around the province. We’re hoping that will be available in June. But in the meantime the information we have, dealing strictly with fish levels in specific lakes, can be issued before that time.

Mr. Ferrier: Supplementary: Other than further testing of fish to determine the mercury levels that may be there, is the ministry making any study as to the source of the mercury -- whether it’s natural or whether there is an industrial or other source of it?

Hon. Mr. Kerr: Yes, Mr. Speaker. When we completed the analysis of fish from Lake Simcoe last fall and subsequently from the Muskokas, the Lake of Bays, where there are no known sources of mercury contamination by conventional industrial sources, we have undertaken a study of those areas to find out just what the possible source can be and whether it’s more than a natural source or rock formation or sources of that kind.

The study we’ve undertaken in Simcoe started in January and has been extended to the recreation lakes in Muskoka because of the findings there. I would assume that it could be very well just a matter of manpower to extend it to the Timmins area as well.

Mr. S. Smith: In view of the fact of my question of last November regarding a list of lakes that contain fish with unacceptable levels of pollutants -- in view of the fact that the fisheries branch in the Ministry of Natural Resources now says that they prepared an answer to that question last December -- could the minister tell me whether it’s his ministry or the Ministry of Natural Resources that’s suppressing the publication, or at least the giving to me of the answers that the fisheries branch provided for the minister about last December?

Hon. Mr. Kerr: That information should come from the Ministry of Natural Resources --

Mr. S. Smith: But you’re not suppressing it?

Hon. Mr. Kerr: No, we are not suppressing it, certainly.

Mr Nixon: It is the Minister of Natural Resources. Great suppressor.

Mr. Bain: Could the minister indicate what criteria he uses in judging whether mercury contamination is natural or non-natural? I use the example of Lake Timiskaming. On various occasions he has said its contamination is natural and then on other occasions he said it originates from the mills that used to be the Cobalt area. I was wondering when the people might have a definitive answer on Lake Timiskaming.

[2:15]

Hon. Mr. Kerr: I’ll have to look at that particular lake, Mr. Speaker. It’s quite possible that the early information indicated it as from a natural source. I think that a natural source may be part of the problem in the hon. member’s area; however, old mill tailings areas and old mining operations, of course, are always a possible source of mercury content.

OECA PUBLICATION

Mr. Lewis: Never knowing how much time is left around here, I must ask the government House leader this question: Does he know, or is he aware, that there is a document circulating through the Ontario Educational Communications Authority, called The Political Climate -- 1976-1980: A Planning Overview, prepared by their corporate division in May 1976, which indicates an obsessive and slightly paranoid preoccupation with politicians, the use of moulding political behaviour and opinion, gratuitous comments on politicians and on the councils that are advisory to the OECA? Has the document been brought to his attention?

Hon. Mr. Welch: No, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Lewis: By way of supplementary, might I ask the minister to read the document and comment on observations such as: “The Ministry of Education: OECA’s main difficulty in connection with this ministry is Tom Wells.” Or on the Conservative Parity: “At best, Mr. Davis will remain leader for another three or four years, which means a change in the leadership of the party within our five-year planning horizon even if the Conservatives remain in power” --

Mr. Breithaupt: It may mean a divorce for the member for Ottawa South (Mr. Bennett).

Mr. Lewis: -- and a limitless corps of observations of that kind strewn throughout the document, albeit some obviously perceptive?

Hon. Mr. Davis: We’ll be here for another four years, yes.

Mr. Lewis: I would therefore ask the minister, could he possibly follow this up fairly seriously, given the often strange and disconcerting behaviour of OECA as they deal with politicians and the public and their various advisory councils? I’ll send him a copy.

Hon. Mr. Welch: It’s obvious that I’m not on the mailing list for the brown envelopes that are distributed throughout government, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Lewis: Touché.

Hon. Mr. Welch: But, number two, I take it, we need very little further evidence of the autonomy of the board of OECA.

Hon. Mr. Rhodes: Who needs freedom of information?

Mr. Lewis: Brown envelopes have begun to flow again.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I suspect it was a friend of the Leader of the Opposition who wrote that report.

LAKE POLLUTION

Mr. S. Smith: I would ask the Minister of Natural Resources if he would please explain how it is that the fisheries branch of his own ministry had prepared an answer to my question of November regarding the polluted lakes in Ontario and that he had still written me in March saying that he and the Minister of the Environment are still working on the answer? Why has that answer not been given to me?

Hon. F. S. Miller: I believe, Mr. Speaker, there was not only a letter; I thought there had been some oral communication telling the hon. member that we were trying to prepare the whole package. And it wasn’t just two ministries; a number of ministries, including the Ministry of Health, were involved in preparing a reasonable package to inform the public, not only of the specific information about mercury levels in specific lakes but also of the risks of mercury and a number of other pieces of information which we thought would be of very real value to the people fishing or likely to be eating the fish.

This is taking a fair amount of time. In fact, it is being proceeded with as quickly as possible; that much I can tell the hon. member.

Mr. S. Smith: By way of supplementary, there’s always the chance that I don’t quite understand the answer, but let me ask the minister whether he thinks it’s reasonable that an elected member like myself should ask for information, that the information should be ready and available and yet that it should not be given to me as an elected member? Is that reasonable while the minister works on some pamphlet that he wishes for public distribution? Is that the way the minister treats the Legislature?

Mr. Lewis: Oh, contempt, indifference.

Hon. F. S. Miller: It is not, Mr. Speaker. As a matter of fact, I think my record in giving information in this Legislature is pretty good. I intend to keep it that way.

Mr. Ruston: Like closing hospitals.

Mr. Roy: In fact, it’s too good; that’s why you are there.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Hon. F. S. Miller: I thought the hon. member understood that we would have a package of information available that was useful in a very broad way for a number of people. I’ll be glad to check to see, for the member’s personal use, if some part of it may be raised at once.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Going fishing?

Mr. Reid: Supplementary: Can the minister indicate what information will be available through his offices and licence issuers to people who buy fishing licences for the season starting on May 21?

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. That has nothing to do with the original question about the polluted lakes and what have you,

Mr. Reid: If I may, Mr. Speaker, it has to do with the pollution in the lakes -- so that the people know what lakes are polluted --

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. This is an important question. We can come back to it later.

BINGO REGULATIONS

Mr. S. Smith: I will ask a question of the Minister of Culture and Recreation, Mr. Speaker. Can he explain why one of the officials in his ministry informed the church-affiliated sponsors of the nightly bingo at the International Centre on Airport Road that it must stop busing people from Hamilton, Brantford, Toronto, Acton and Collingwood to attend its charitable bingo operation?

Hon. Mr. Welch: Mr. Speaker, that question should be directed to the Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations.

Mr. Speaker: Do you redirect it?

Mr. Nixon: Does he run the bingos?

Mr. Speaker: The question is redirected by the minister.

Hon. Mr. Handleman: I don’t know about the specific instance, but there have been rules issued that those people who are running bingos must keep their expenses within a certain percentage of the gross -- I believe it is 20 per cent -- and must return 15 per cent to the charity that they are supposedly supporting by the bingo.

I don’t know that particular case. I would be glad to look into it to see whether or not that is the reason why. But the busing costs money, and if the busing brings them over the expense limit, then it may have been very well suggested that’s one way they can get within the limit.

Mr. Nixon: You let the Jockey Club bring them in from all over.

Mr. S. Smith: By way of supplementary: Would the minister kindly look into the fact that it is alleged that a Mr. Fisher and a Mr. Don Spade of his ministry informed a Mr. Doyle that it was not permitted for people in one community to play bingo in another community? Furthermore -- you know, big daddy government is getting bigger all the time --

Mr. Nixon: They can’t drink beer but they can play bingo.

Mr. S. Smith: -- they renewed the bingo licence only to June 30 on condition that buses are stopped by that time?

Mr. Lewis: Oh, shame. Resign.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: The hon. minister only, please. Order, please.

Mr. S. Smith: I recognize it isn’t as important as internal memoranda on the OCEA. I recognize that, but it does affect a number of people.

Hon. Mr. Handleman: Mr. Speaker, I will be glad to look into those allegations.

AID FOR HAMILTON

Mr. Deans: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Premier: Since Hamilton has unfortunately not been able to acquire the Pan-American Games and since the province of Ontario indicated a willingness to make up to $17 million available for the purpose of providing facilities --

Mr. S. Smith: Could we have it anyway?

Mr. Deans: -- and other matters related to the Pan-American Games --

Mr. Shore: Will you settle for $12 million?

Mr. Deans: I will settle for $12 million; is that an offer? Would the government --

An hon. member: You get Marvin as well. That’s the problem.

Mr. Deans: -- recognizing that part of the initiative surely was to create employment in the area --

Mr. S. Smith: How about $6 million and a draft choice?

Mr. Deans: -- consider three projects: A hospital in the east end of the city to meet long-standing needs --

Mr. Reid: Sounds like an election question.

Mr. Ruston: Here is his campaign speech.

Mr. S. Smith: You could call it the Pan-Am hospital.

An hon. member: And he wants to keep one choice until after the election.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Let’s get the question, and then the answer.

Mr. Deans: I am just waiting for a break. A hospital in the east that has been approved by the Ministry of Health --

Mr. S. Smith: And a partridge in a pear tree.

Mr. Deans: -- additional senior citizen accommodation in the east end which has been proven needed --

Mr. Nixon: That’s good.

Mr. Deans: -- and a stepping up of the sewer project in Winona which the minister agrees is required but for which there was no money available? Would the Premier use the money for those purposes and create the employment and meet the needs of the community in the meantime?

Mr. Breithaupt: And a new firehall in case --

Hon. Mr. Kerr: What riding is all that in?

Hon. Mr. Davis: I won’t make one observation about the Winona request that I could. In that these requests are all, of course, indirectly non-related to the hon. member’s riding, I can understand him asking the question. I can only say, Mr. Speaker, in the same general way the question was asked, this government is always prepared to look at any reasonable request from any municipality, any board. We are most reasonable people on this side of the House and certainly we look at any reasonable request.

Mr. Nixon: You gave Hamilton a new arena before the last election. What are you going to do this time? You can use the money for an election.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Any allocation of funds, of course, has to relate to the priorities and the availability of money. I should also point out to the hon. member, who wasn’t that enthusiastic about the Pan-Am Games initially --

Mr. Deans: Oh, not so.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Oh, well, I am sorry. I thought you weren’t. I can only say to the hon. member that there is no question there would have been employment created but if memory serves me correctly the design for the major facility was to be a 15,000-seat arena, I think, for most of the indoor events, and the architectural work and so on hadn’t started, so that there would not have been, in this current fiscal year, any capital expenditure. The funding, of course, was to be provided out of certain lottery proceeds.

There was no money in this year’s budget to accommodate the possibility of the Pan-Am Games in the city of Hamilton --

Mr. S. Smith: But there is for an election. It’s about the same time.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order, please.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I really can’t say to the hon. member that there is any funding there that is not now being used that we could use for other worthwhile purposes.

Mr. Deans: Supplementary: Am I to assume from what the Premier has said that if the city of Hamilton and the surrounding municipalities making up the regional municipality of Hamilton-Wentworth were to request funds for the purposes that I have asked about, since the government was prepared to spend up to $17 million on the Pan-Am Games it might be prepared to entertain such suggestions for those projects, since they would equally create employment and provide needed facilities?

Hon. Mr. Davis: I think there were three projects that the hon. member was anxious that his constituents know he had expressed an interest in, and I understand that. I think the funding for the servicing in Winona might be available, as it should be in other parts as well, on a one-third, one-third, one third basis, and I think the hon. member knows that.

Mr. Deans: You said no.

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Hon. Mr. Davis: With respect to the possibility of a Hamilton East hospital, I think that’s a matter being discussed by the health council in that community. As I pointed out, the funding for any of those projects would have to be out of general tax revenues. As I tried to explain to the member, none of the funding for the Pan-Am Games was coming from that source and none of it was in this current fiscal year.

As I say, this government is prepared to try to help wherever it can within the priorities and the financial limitations that are imposed upon all of us in this House.

QUEBEC LANGUAGE LEGISLATION

Hon. Mr. Davis: I think they are two rather distinct issues, and the hon. member, with his legal training, I’m sure would understand that. I don’t want to get into any sort of provocative discussion -- I don’t mean provocative in terms of the House -- but I made my observations as related to the option that has been presented by the Premier of Quebec and some of his ministers and, I assume, the government, as to the question of economic union or association.

I made my statement in Montreal; I repeated it here a week ago this evening, although it was somewhat lost sight of in the midst of other discussions, and I restated it very clearly. That was based on the concern that I felt that the Minister of Finance or Treasurer from the province of Quebec had really stated in so many words in this province that the debate about separation, in his view, was over.

[2:30]

I very simply stated that no Canadian has the right to make that statement or express that point of view, and that as far as I was concerned that debate was not, is not and, in my view, will not be over for some period of time.

If anybody in Quebec, in the government -- and I emphasize in the government -- felt that because there had been no prior statement, the option of economic union or association had some slight attraction, I went on to say -- I hope I’m right in this -- that the people of this province are very committed to national unity; are very committed to having Quebec as part of Confederation; and would be prepared to assess any restructuring of the constitution or how this country functions; I think that the people of this province would approach that in a very positive frame of mind.

This is my point of view and I hope I am expressing it on behalf of all of us.

I did point out at the Empire Club that I thought that frame of mind, that feeling, would not be the same if the issue we were discussing was solely that of economic union; and, as I have said -- that is not an option open, as far as I’m concerned.

The hon. member is trying to relate that to my concern with respect to the white paper. I must emphasize that the white paper, as I understand it, is in the process of being re-assessed and put into the form of potential draft legislation. I will not comment in advance of the legislation.

As I pointed out on a number of occasions, people who try to relate what we are doing in a very progressive, logical way with respect to the French language being used for the Franco-Ontarian minority in this province -- as it relates to the legal and traditional position in the province of Quebec -- are dealing with two different situations, not only in law but in terms of the tradition and practices in this province.

I understand that the member for Ottawa East is concerned that we move more expeditiously, or more rapidly in some of these areas. I see nothing contradictory in what we have been saying, in what has been and is the policy of this government; but I would point out to him that I think there is a contradiction in the question that he has asked me, and the position of his colleague, the member for Essex South (Mr. Mancini), as it relates to another issue that is before the House.

Mr. Breithaupt: Just like your candidate in Essex South.

Mr. S. Smith: Point of order. I believe the answer that the Premier just gave does not have any bearing on the precise question being asked. In fact, it was a very unfair statement to make at this time. I would draw his attention to this clipping about his candidate in that particular riding --

Mr. Ruston: Yes. Going to get a new candidate Bill?

Mr. S. Smith: -- it is headed, “Klees Condemns Wells Over French School.” Show the clipping to the Premier and bring it back to me.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. It seems to me it was quite a broad question in connection with the Judicature Act and I wasn’t sure of the connection between the two.

Mr. S. Smith: The answer certainly had nothing to do with it.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. A supplementary from the hon. member for Ottawa East?

Mr. Roy: I preface my supplementary by saying this: I had not intended to make the association between the Premier’s statement on economic association and the Judicature Act. I said I applauded his statement on economic association.

Mr. Speaker: Your supplementary, please.

Mr. Roy: My supplementary is this: Recognizing that the Premier is one of the leaders of this country fighting for Canadian unity, how does he expect to have credibility with the people of Quebec, which his predecessor Mr. Robarts had, when talking about Franco-Ontarian rights -- and in his statement he says that his commitment to Franco-Ontarian citizens, to their educational, language and social rights will not be diminished -- as long as he keeps legislation such as this on the books of this province?

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. It seems to me that’s the same question. Is there a different answer?

Mr. Roy: It wasn’t answered.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. We are wasting time when we repeat the question; the answer has to be repeated as well.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Mr. Speaker, I would like to expand on my answer to the first question. I agree with you that the second question is exactly the same.

Mr. Ruston: You didn’t answer the first question.

Mr. Nixon: Take another look at it, Bill.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I say to the hon. member, I’m really not concerned in that sense about my credibility. I am very concerned about the future of this country. I apologize to no one for the positions I have taken, and I say to the hon. member, unlike perhaps some suggestions made by others during this discussion in this province and elsewhere, that in the remote possibility --

Mr. S. Smith: Here comes another cheap shot.

Hon. Mr. Davis: -- that something were to happen in the province of Quebec, nothing is going to diminish the rights of the Franco-Ontarians in this province as long as I have anything to do with it.

Mr. S. Smith: What rights? Their rights to a trial in French maybe?

Mr. Roy: Don’t you call this a right, to a trial in French?

Hon. Mr. Davis: It was suggested the rights would diminish.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. We’re wasting time with this calling back and forth.

Mr. S. Smith: The Premier gets lower every day.

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Mr. S. Smith: What about Hatfield? Is the Premier going to bring him up next?

Mr. MacDonald: With reference to the original question and dead on it, since this government 10 years ago, following the B and B report, got a task force report on the extent to which French could or might be used in our courts, would the government now table that task force report so that the Legislature might judge the adequacy or inadequacy of what Robarts or the present Premier has done in the last 10 years in that area?

Hon. Mr. Davis: Mr. Speaker, I can’t speak with as much specific knowledge about the courts. I will look into that information. The hon. member knows what we’ve done. But I think it also would be relevant perhaps to trace, if this were to be done, the total --

Mr. MacDonald: Will you answer my question?

Hon. Mr. Davis: I won’t undertake to table it until I myself have seen it.

Mr. MacDonald: That’s all I ask.

Mr. Speaker: Order. Order, please.

Hon. Mr. Davis: But I say to the hon. member I think it is relevant that there be an understanding of all the programmes that have been developed for the Franco-Ontarians in this province, including the field of education, where somebody I know rather well had a very direct hand in bringing it about.

Mr. Lewis: What was that? Somebody you know rather well?

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order.

Mr. Lewis: That’s another gem of self- effacement.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please, the hon. Leader of the Opposition.

SALES TAX EXEMPTION

Hon. Mrs. Scrivener: Mr. Speaker, I would like to respond to the question asked by the hon. member for Perth (Mr. Edighoffer) on Thursday, April 21, concerning retail sales tax exemptions to underground utility cables.

Underground cable for electrical utilities will continue to be exempt from retail sales tax, regardless of whether the cable is to be used in-duct or is buried direct. I informed the OMEA of this decision in my letter to them of March 8, which they then acknowledged on March 24. There has been a delay in finalizing the enabling regulation due to discussions among members of my ministry, the OMEA and representatives of municipal utilities. The regulation has now been revised to incorporate their suggestions and is being processed through Management Board and cabinet. When it is approved it will be retroactive to June 1, 1977.

MULTILINGUAL TRANSLATIONS OF WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION ACT

Mr. Ferrier: I have a question, Mr. Speaker, for the Minister of Labour. In view of the concern expressed by the francophone community in my riding, will the minister see that The Workmen’s Compensation Act is translated into French and made available to them in French?

Hon. B. Stephenson: Mr. Speaker, there have been directions issued to the Workmen’s Compensation Board about multilingual translation of certain documents. I shall certainly approach them about the possible translation of the entire Act into French for their consideration.

Mr. di Santo: Supplementary: When translating them into other languages, will the minister also make sure the documents translated are understandable?

Mr. S. Smith: You don’t want them translated, you want them rewritten.

Hon. B. Stephenson: I gather there has been some newspaper discussion about the understandability, if you will, of certain of the Workmen’s Compensation Board documents.

Mr. Reid: Understandability? There’s the problem.

Hon. B. Stephenson: I have asked specifically that the documents be looked at so that indeed they will be made clear to all those individuals who have to read them. The staff of the board stands ready at any time, however, to help anyone who is having difficulty understanding the documents.

Mr. Deans: Supplementary: Is it possible to produce for the House the documents that the minister intends to have translated and to tell us into which languages she intends to have them translated? Do they include The Construction Safety Act?

Hon. B. Stephenson: We were talking about The Workmen’s Compensation Act, and that does not include The Construction Safety Act, which is

an Act under the Ministry of Labour.

Mr. Deans: I understand that.

CHILDREN IN UNLICENSED HOMES

Mrs. Campbell: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Community and Social Services.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I thought it might be.

Mrs. Campbell: Considering the fact that the minister’s answer given to me the other day regarding unlicensed children’s boarding homes suggested that many Children’s Aid Societies won’t use unlicensed homes, will the minister tell the House whether he can give the same assurance for family courts? Are there, in fact, children sent into unlicensed homes from family courts; and who, if anyone, is looking after these children’s welfare?

Hon. Mr. Norton: The hon. member, I am sure, is well aware that the family courts in this province do not come within the jurisdiction of my ministry, although the question of many of the group homes and boarding homes for children do. I cannot give the member the assurance that she asks at this point in time, but I can assure her that the whole area, as she is aware, is under review, and will be under the jurisdiction of the new children and youths services division of the ministry. One of the reasons for the reorganization was to look at precisely the kind of problem that I know concerns her and underlies the question that she has asked.

Mrs. Campbell: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker: Do I take it, then, that at this point in time this ministry cannot answer as to who is responsible for the welfare of those children in unlicensed homes; and that no such assurance will be available, at least until the minister has introduced the legislation transferring responsibility of all of these facilities in his ministry? Is that the thrust of his reply?

Hon. Mr. Norton: No, Mr. Speaker, it is not and I don’t think I really need to elaborate on that. The hon. member did in fact ask a question with regard to how many children were being placed in these homes under the jurisdiction of the court. She did not ask me the question at the time about who was concerned, who was responsible for the welfare of those children. Obviously our ministry bears the responsibility for the welfare of those children, and will continue to do so, through whatever agencies are available, Children’s Aid Societies and so on, across this province.

The question of those group homes which are presently not under the purview of the legislation is under review and we will be developing means of closer supervision.

Mrs. Campbell: A final supplementary, Mr. Speaker: I would point out to the minister that I did in fact ask who was supervising and it was as a result of his answer that I asked my supplementary. Could he, then, now tell us if he is responsible for these homes, as his answer indicates, how many of them are there, to his knowledge, which do not comply with the standards of health and safety, either of the municipality or of his ministry?

Hon. Mr. Norton: Mr. Speaker, I cannot answer that question at this point. I will try to find that information. If the hon. member has information about any or all of the standards in such group homes, I would be quite happy for her to pass that information to me and I would be quite happy to investigate it.

SALES TAX EXEMPTION

Hon. Mrs. Scrivener: Mr. Speaker, a few moments ago I referred to the retroactivity of a regulation for The Retail Sales Tax Act as being June 1 of this year, and of course it is January 1 of this year. I am afraid my mind was on other events.

Mr. S. Smith: Other events?

Mr. Reid: That’s the ninth.

Mr. Breithaupt: June 9.

Mr. Lewis: That certainly answers the question.

NORTH PICKERING PROJECT

Mr. Godfrey: Mr. Speaker, a question of the Premier with regard to North Pickering land acquisition royal commission: In view of the fact that last week the Premier promised there would be an early answer to those owners who have been dispossessed and are awaiting a decision, and in view of the fact the hearings have now been postponed, may I ask the Premier what specific steps he has taken to ensure there is a speedy answer for these people?

Hon. Mr. Davis: Mr. Speaker, we are moving expeditiously to make sure the hearings get under way very shortly and we’ll have something to say in the next day or so.

[2:45]

Mr. Godfrey: Supplementary: Perhaps the Premier did not hear what I said, I asked what specific steps were being taken. Has he approached the Lieutenant Governor to reconvene the board?

Hon. Mr. Davis: It is not a question of approaching the Lieutenant Governor to reconvene the board.

BINGO REGULATIONS

Mr. Kerrio: I have a question of the Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations. Will he tell the House when he expects the new ceilings on administrative cost for bingos to be implemented; and can we expect a report from him on the effectiveness of this new initiative in the early stages of its implementation?

Hon. Mr. Handleman: My understanding is that the administrative ceilings, the so-called cost of operation regulations, have in fact been implemented and that many people are being given an extension of their present practices so that they can phase into the new conditions of operation.

Mr. Kerrio: Supplementary: Has the minister considered speaking with the Minister of Culture and Recreation concerning the 15 per cent ceiling, not only on private enterprises but on the province’s own Wintario lottery which has administrative costs above 15 per cent?

Hon. Mr. Handleman: Yes. As a matter of fact, I have discussed this with the minister along with my other cabinet colleagues. All I can say is we found many instances where bingos were being operated for the full benefit of the promoter when it should be for the benefit of the charities. We are trying to help the existing bingo operations to meet those guidelines.

Mr. Reid: For whom is Wintario being operated?

Hon. Mr. Handleman: So far, to the best of my knowledge, no licences have been cancelled.

NUCLEAR POWER DEVELOPMENT

Mr. Moffatt: I have a question of the Minister of the Environment. In view of the statement tabled in this House about two weeks ago by the Minister of Energy (Mr. Taylor), which indicates that in the short term we are going to be more dependent upon nuclear power as a source of energy for quite some number of years, has the Ministry of the Environment any plans with regard to stating general policies and specific measures to be taken with regard to the disposal of nuclear waste, the construction of plants, the siting of plants and their adaptability and fitting in with the general industrial complex of the province of Ontario?

Hon. Mr. Kerr: Yes. My ministry works very closely with the Ministry of Energy as far as nuclear power and the disposal of waste from nuclear plants are concerned. There is an interministerial committee which involves those two ministries, as well as Health -- and there is one more that I can’t think of off the top of my head -- in long term policies. It involves also Environment Canada. So there is no question that both ministries are aware of each other’s position in respect to nuclear power and, more importantly, the disposal of waste from that source.

Mr. Moffatt: Supplementary: In light of that I would like to ask the minister what his response is going to be to the application to have the Darlington generating station exempt from the terms of The Environmental Assessment Act, in light of the fact that Ontario Hydro went to the town of Newcastle and bought an agreement with them that they would not pose any objection to that kind of application.

Hon. Mr. Kerr: I don’t understand what the hon. member says when he says Hydro bought an agreement from the town of Newcastle. There must have been a price tag on it or some sort of a document.

Mr. Moffatt: That is correct. That is exactly what it was.

Hon. B. Stephenson: What is it you are alleging?

Hon. Mr. Norton: What are you alleging?

Hon. Mr. Kerr: As far as Darlington is concerned, there has been no decision with regard to any move to exempt that project from the Act.

Mr. Speaker: A final supplementary on the subject.

Mr. Moffatt: The minister apparently does not know that Ontario Hydro extracted from the town of Newcastle a commitment that, in return for signing a document which gave them certain sums of money for the development to go ahead, the town would not ask for any environmental assessment under that Act with regard to the Darlington station.

Hon. B. Stephenson: Has the member got that document?

Hon. W. Newman: You are accusing the council of selling out to Hydro.

Mr. Speaker: There doesn’t seem to be any question to that. There’s a rebuttal of an answer.

JOBS IN AGRICULTURE

Mr. Riddell: I have a question of the Minister of Agriculture and Food. Can the minister clarify for us and give us details of the types of jobs that are to be created in the agricultural sector, as outlined in the budget, which indicated that new funding will be provided for job creation in agriculture infrastructure?

Hon. W. Newman: Yes, I can give the member a fair number on the list right now. As he knows, $2 million additional was allowed for tile drainage, which would increase the work there. There will be a certain amount of research work done at the University of Guelph by the use of students and others and in our agricultural colleges the junior agriculturalist programme will be extended. We will probably work on an abandoned orchard programme, probably in eastern and maybe northwestern Ontario.

We are also looking at some other programmes of cleaning up, removing abandoned farm buildings, the windbreaks programme and several other programmes, plus the other part of the budget that includes the summer youth programme to subsidize summer farm labour jobs; part of that is included in the overall budget.

May I just finish, Mr. Speaker, by saying there also may be other programmes we’re working on right now.

Mr. Bain: Supplementary: Could I ask the minister what specific programmes and jobs he has in mind for agriculture in the north in the light of the fact that the north has unique problems that aren’t covered by general blanket provincial programmes?

Hon. W. Newman: I would disagree with the hon. member’s comment to start with, Mr. Speaker. We have special programmes for the north and we are looking at special programmes for the north. I outlined in this house last Friday, I believe it was, many of the programmes we have for the north. We’re very much concerned about the north because we think there’s a great potential there.

Mr. Bain: What new jobs in agriculture?

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Hon. W. Newman: We will be working with the municipalities across this province to work out programmes in conjunction with them. As the hon. member knows, we have a team working right now on the water problem. And I’m aware of the problems of the north; I’m going to have a look at them later on this week, as a matter of fact.

An hon. member: Are you doing anything about them?

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. McKessock: A supplementary pertaining to jobs available to farmers for hiring youth: Is there going to be anything different to last year as to the junior agriculturalist programme, or is it just going to be the same as last year? If it is going to be different, when will we know about it?

Hon. W. Newman: The junior agriculturalist programme is already in place. There was a lot of applications this year and, as a result of the additional funds we have, we’ll be allowing more junior agriculturalists to have that great experience of going to work on a farm for the summer to find out what it is really like to work on a farm, and we’re glad we’re able to extend that programme. The students who were picked before already have been picked; we will now be extending that programme.

Mr. Speaker: I’ll allow a final supplementary.

Mr. Wildman: Supplementary: In view of the attempt to produce more jobs in the north and the water problem in northern Ontario with agriculture, can the minister explain whether the Ministry of Agriculture and Food, the Ministry of the Environment or the new ministry responsible for the overall programme will deal with the water problem if we have another dry summer in the north?

Hon. W. Newman: As I said last Friday in this House, we’re working on it right now. We have a preliminary report; it’s working through the secretariat. But the Minister of Northern Affairs and the Minister of the Environment are also involved, as the hon. member knows, in looking at ways and means to try to cope with this problem if we do not get the necessary rain that we need in northern Ontario.

QUEBEC MILK

Mr. Samis: Another question to the Minister of Agriculture and Food: Is the minister aware that 750 pounds of poor-quality milk from Granby Co-op in Huntingdon, Quebec, and 250,000 pounds from Co-operative Fédérée de Quebec, in Fédérée Mont Laurier, Quebec, are being processed weekly in eastern Ontario? Can he tell us what assurance his ministry can give the consumers of Ontario that the quality standards of Ontario will be maintained?

Hon. W. Newman: We have quality standards for all milk processed in the province of Ontario, wherever it comes from, through the Milk Marketing Board. The plants that received that milk know of our standards of quality, and the milk is tested here in the province of Ontario.

Mr. Samis: Supplementary: Since the officials of the Milk Marketing Board themselves, plus farmers in the area, have described the milk by saying, “We had dark milk coming in from Quebec all winter,” can the minister give us some indication of the extent of this importation over the past few months and his projections for the upcoming months?

Hon. W. Newman: We’re very much concerned about the high standards of milk quality in this province, and I think it augurs well for all of us that we do have very high standards.

Mr. Bain: Answer the question.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Hon. W. Newman: The specific problem that the hon. member is talking about is being looked into at this moment.

RICHMOND HILL NURSING HOMES

Mr. Stong: I have a question of the Minister of Health. Will the minister consider giving assistance, in terms of licence and funding, to two nursing homes in the town of Richmond Hill, Elmwood Manor and Country Place Nursing Home, both of which have ample space and beds available and both of which have waiting lists?

Hon. Mr. Timbrell: I will be glad to give an answer on that in a day or two. I had a complete report on that based on a newspaper report which I just happen to have in front of me, of March 16, 1977, and about the rather interesting history of those nursing homes with additions built without permission and that sort of thing. I’ll give a complete answer in a couple of days.

PEEL TEACHERS’ DISPUTE

Mr. Sweeney: A question of the Minister of Education: Given that as of this morning both the teachers and the board in Peel county seem determined to close the schools either by a strike or a lockout, is the minister prepared to see 28,000 students go without their final exams, particularly when it means that a large number of them will lose their year because they need the final mark to complement their year’s work?

Hon. Mr. Wells: Of course, the answer is no, I would not be prepared to see them lose their final year. I don’t believe that that would lose the final marks for this year and I don’t believe that will happen. I believe that solutions will be found.

My friend should know, if he read the paper this morning, that the teachers have put forward a final position suggesting “Med-Arb” -- mediation-arbitration -- a process that’s been used in other jurisdictions and has been recommended by the chairman of the Education Relations Commission for use here in several disputes -- which has been accepted by the teacher negotiators. They’re having a general meeting tomorrow afternoon to get the backing of all the teachers for this method of settling the dispute.

It then will be presented to the Peel board of education and if they will accept it as a method of settling the dispute, I think the sanctions can be lifted and things can be back to normal and a process for settling those items remaining in dispute will be in motion.

These steps are all taking place at the present time. The Education Relations Commission is very deeply involved in them and I’m hopeful that they will result in a conclusion to the problems in Peel.

Mr. Sweeney: Supplementary: While these processes are going on, regardless of what their outcome is, is the minister prepared to tell both the teachers and the board that they have an obligation to be sure that the students are evaluated -- an obligation, not a choice?

Mr. S. Smith: That’s right.

Hon. Mr. Wells: I think that what I would want to do is speak personally with the teachers in this case to find out exactly what they’re talking about. My friend is referring to some generalizations, perhaps, that have appeared in newspapers in this particular situation. It may not be exactly as it appears in the newspapers. The Peel teachers are in a legal strike position --

Mr. S. Smith: Why don’t you know?

Hon. Mr. Wells: They’re exercising what they think are their prerogatives in that strike situation. The board, on the other hand, has it within its power to do certain things also, and I think that both sides are concerned about the welfare of the students. They always are. But it is also a teacher- board labour dispute, and these kinds of side effects very often come to be. None of us like to see them but I think that we have to do everything we can to get the parties together to get the matter settled and that’s the best way to bring to an end any of the unpleasantnesses that may be being caused there.

BRANT COUNTY TEACHERS’ DISPUTE

Mr. Makarchuk: A new question of the Minister of Education regarding the fact that in the dispute between the Brant County Board of Education and the OSSTF one of the matters under dispute is the matter of increments -- whether they should be referred to the Anti-Inflation Board for consideration in the wage increase, or whether they should not be referred. Is the minister prepared to instruct the boards in Ontario to the effect that they should leave out that portion as a negotiable matter, or is he prepared to let it be a matter that can be kicked around by the two sides?

Hon. Mr. Wells: I know the matter the hon. member is referring to. I’m not sure that it matters what I think in this particular matter.

These disputes are between the teachers and their employers, the school boards. It’s incumbent upon the school boards to fill out the forms they submit to the Anti-Inflation Board, not the Ministry of Education nor the Minister of Education. Even if I might express my preference in this particular matter, it’s still the prerogative of the school boards to handle it as they see fit. Therefore, in certain cases in this province it has become an issue as to whether the increments will or will not be counted in the percentage increases they report to the AIB.

Mr. Makarchuk: Supplementary: In this case in view of the fact that if this matter was removed from the bargaining table either way, whether it was decided that it should be considered or that it should not be considered it does not become a matter for dispute. The minister would be in a position to defuse a lot of potential arguments or strikes in this province.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Your question?

[3:00]

Mr. Makarchuk: Is the minister prepared to move in that direction?

Hon. Mr. Wells: What I’m saying to my friend, Mr. Speaker -- and I’m sure my friend knows enough about labour-management relations -- is that I can’t remove anything from the bargaining table. If it’s a negotiable item and one of the sides wants to bargain over that particular item, I can’t wave a wand and remove it.

CITIZEN COMPLAINTS AGAINST POLICE

Mr. Singer: A question for the Solicitor General: I wonder if he could tell us whether we are going to see the new bill dealing with police complaint procedures? If we are likely to see it, is he going to follow the recommendation of Mr. Justice Morand and Arthur Maloney or is he going to have the view that he enunciated to the press just a few weeks ago?

Hon. Mr. MacBeth: I hope that the bill will be introduced shortly. It is presently going through the legislative procedures again.

Mr. Reid: Which Parliament?

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Ruston: Third time around.

Mr. Nixon: You are smiling, John.

Hon. Mr. MacBeth: But it will have embodied in it many of the recommendations that Mr. Arthur Maloney proposed and some of the recommendations that Mr. Justice Morand proposed. As I say, I hope it will be before the House very shortly.

Mr. Roy: I wonder if I could ask if it is the minister’s intention and the intention of the government to see this legislation passed before the next election?

Hon. Mr. Handleman: When is that?

Hon. Mr. MacBeth: That may be beyond my control, Mr. Speaker, but it’s certainly my intention.

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH

Mr. Lewis: May I ask a question of the Minister of Labour? With the new emphasis on occupational health, has the Minister of Labour endeavoured to inform the various community colleges that have courses in industrial hygiene or matters related, to provide in their advisory councils a reasonable cross-section of the community so that various voices are heard when sorting out the content for the programme?

Hon. B. Stephenson: No, Mr. Speaker, I have not communicated directly with boards of governors --

Interjections.

Mr. Reid: Mr. Conservative himself.

Mr. Nixon: In a pin-stripe.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Breithaupt: The member for Ottawa Centre (Mr. Cassidy) is getting to look like the member for Ottawa South.

Mr. Speaker: We’re wasting time now. The hon. Minister of Labour has the floor.

Hon. B. Stephenson: I’m sorry that the unexpected sartorial splendour of the hon. member for Ottawa Centre has had this disturbing effect upon the members, but as I said, I have not attempted to contact directly the boards nor the presidents of community colleges at this time. Because what we are at this point doing is to --

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. There is too much background noise.

Hon. B. Stephenson: -- establish, with the co-operation of universities, community colleges and other educational bodies, an integrated educational programme -- because we need three levels of educational programme and not simply the community college level. When we have completed that, then I am sure we will be in contact.

Mr. Singer: The member for Ottawa Centre is going to get his hair done every day.

Mr. Nixon: He’s put away his sweat shirts; no more sweat shirts.

Hon. B. Stephenson: I have communicated with some of them because they have indicated to me their interest in providing just that aspect of education in occupational health and safety. We are encouraging them, of course, to do so, making sure that they are aware that there needs to be some input from both management and labour when such courses are undertaken.

Mr. Lewis: I don’t think you should allow the ridicule of pin-stripe socialism, Mr. Speaker. That was the quid pro quo for the Treasurer’s job. May I ask a supplementary?

Mr. Roy: Did you ever think in your wildest dreams that you would ever see the member for Ottawa Centre in a pin-stripe suit?

Mr. Ruston: With a vest?

Mr. Lewis: You’ve been wearing vests all your life, Albert.

Mr. Reid: It is all right, Mr. Speaker. It comes from Syd Silver.

Mr. Breithaupt: It goes back at 6.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Breithaupt: The rates change at 6.

Mr. Lewis: Albert, you were born in a vest.

May I ask a supplementary of the Minister of Labour, Mr. Speaker?

Mr. Speaker: Order, please, we’re wasting time.

Mr. Lewis: Can I ask the minister in particular to pay close notice to the industrial Hygiene Technology Advisory Committee in Lambton College, which is the signal course of its kind in the province, where 10 out of the 13 members of the committee come from Polysar, Petrosar, Shell, Imperial Oil, Dow and Esso, not a single representative of any of the work force and three representatives from the college itself? Can the minister perhaps convey, if not displeasure at least direction that this kind of thing does not augur well for the course content we might wish in the province?

Hon. B. Stephenson: Mr. Speaker, I’m not sure that I would convey displeasure because, indeed, in the past that has been the makeup of many of the advisory committees.

Mr. MacDonald: That is the problem.

Hon. B. Stephenson: In our enthusiasm and our attempt to ensure that there is, indeed, co-operation between management and labour in this particular area, as well as in all other areas, I should most certainly convey to them my concern that there should be broader representation.

ENTERTAINMENT TAX

Mrs. Campbell: My question is to the Minister of Revenue. Is the minister aware of the confusion, both in her ministry apparently and in the minds of the public, with reference to the retail sales tax as it pertains to performances of Canadian talent, where formerly they used to have exemptions on an application basis? What is the status of those applications now?

Hon. Mrs. Scrivener: Mr. Speaker, there is no confusion in my ministry.

Mrs. Campbell: There is.

Mr. Roy: It is not in the ministry, it is in the minister.

Hon. Mrs. Scrivener: Canadian performances and productions which are produced by Canadians are, of course, exempt from retail sales tax on admissions.

ONTARIO MALLEABLE IRON

Mr. Breaugh: I have a question of the Minister of Labour. Would she provide us with a copy of whatever documents she forwarded to the UIC appeal board concerning the Ontario Malleable Iron workers in Oshawa? Would she also give us some indication of what else she might be contemplating that would help those people, who haven’t had a paycheque in going on two years, to either find another job or get some financial assistance in some way?

Hon. B. Stephenson: I’m not sure that there is any specific documentation. There have been a number of direct telephone calls and conversations about it. That I am aware of. I am not aware that there are transcripts of those calls. I shall, however, remind the hon. member that indeed there is an employment adjustment service within the Ministry of Labour which stands ready to assist any individual found in the unfortunate situation in which many of these former employees of that company are.

Mr. Speaker: The question period has expired.

PETITIONS

Mr. Breaugh: I have a petition to present to the Legislature. The petition consists of approximately 3,000 ratepayers in my riding in the region of Durham and the petition reads:

“We, the undersigned residents of the region of Durham request the following: An immediate solution to the problems of increased water and sewer rates, high taxes and duplication of services in the region of Durham. We submit the costs of simply existing in the region have increased dramatically as a direct result of the region being implemented. As an immediate solution, we require that increased funding from the province be made available in the amount requested by the region in December of 1975 of the Treasurer of Ontario.

“Secondly, as a long-range solution, a full inquiry is required into the benefits and costs of the transition to this form of municipal government”.

Mr. Speaker: Will the hon. member send it down to the desk?

Mr. Moffatt: Mr. Speaker, I also have about 2,000 names of a petition with identical wording to that submitted by the member for Oshawa, all from the residents of the region of Durham.

Mr. Godfrey: I too wish to present a petition in the same wording as the two previous ones, numbering some 2,000 residents of Durham West.

Mr. Moffatt: Mr. Speaker, with regard to the petitions, those three petitions which have been presented are merely the forerunners of others which will be coming in and we simply wanted to give you notice that they are under way.

Mr. Breithaupt: Thanks for the notice.

Mr. Speaker: We will have to check and see if these three are in order first of all.

Mr. Breaugh: They are in order.

Mr. Speaker: Fine.

Presenting reports.

Motions.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF DURHAM AMENDMENT ACT

Mr. Breaugh moved first reading of Bill 57,

An Act to amend The Regional Municipality of Durham Act, 1973.

Motion agreed to.

Mr. Breaugh: Mr. Speaker, this bill addresses itself to what is known locally as “The Great Water and Sewer Ripoff.” This bill returns control over water and sewage services in the regional municipality of Durham to the area municipality.

CONSUMER PROTECTION AMENDMENT ACT

Mr. B. Newman moved first reading of Bill 58,

An Act to amend The Consumer Protection Act.

Motion agreed to.

Mr. B. Newman: Mr. Speaker, this bill requires that every product offered for sale by a retailer that is marked with the universal product code must also be clearly marked with its individual purchase price. This would ensure the rights of the consumer to the privilege of comparison shopping.

ANSWERS TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS

Hon. Mr. Welch: Mr. Speaker, before the orders of the day, I wish to table the answers to questions 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32 standing on the notice paper.

ORDERS OF THE DAY