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

May 21, 2003

37th Parliament, 4th Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2003-May-21 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Wednesday 21 May 2003 Mercredi 21 mai 2003

ESTIMATES

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

HOME AND COMMUNITY CARE

PUBLIC SAFETY

JUVENILE DIABETES

RURAL SCHOOLS

CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL

OF EASTERN ONTARIO

EDUCATION LABOUR DISPUTE

DAVE BABBITT

PREMIER'S RECORD

SARS

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON FINANCE AND ECONOMIC AFFAIRS

STANDING COMMITTEE ON REGULATIONS AND PRIVATE BILLS

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

BACK TO SCHOOL

(TORONTO CATHOLIC ELEMENTARY) AND EDUCATION AND PROVINCIAL SCHOOLS NEGOTIATIONS AMENDMENT ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 PRÉVOYANT LE RETOUR

À L'ÉCOLE (SECTEUR ÉLÉMENTAIRE DU CONSEIL CATHOLIQUE DE TORONTO)

ET MODIFIANT LA

LOI SUR L'ÉDUCATION ET LA

LOI SUR

LA NÉGOCIATION COLLECTIVE DANS LES ÉCOLES PROVINCIALES

PEOPLE'S ACCESS

TO THE FACTS ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 SUR L'ACCÈS

DU PUBLIC AUX FAITS

ADULT PROTECTION ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003

SUR LA PROTECTION DES ADULTES

DEMOCRATIC HERITAGE ARCHAEOLOGICAL

PRESERVATION ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 SUR LA

PRÉSERVATION ARCHÉOLOGIQUE

DU PATRIMOINE DÉMOCRATIQUE

VISITORS

ONTARIO WATER RESOURCES

AMENDMENT ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LES RESSOURCES

EN EAU DE L'ONTARIO

GAS PRICE WATCHDOG ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 SUR L'AGENT

DE SURVEILLANCE DES PRIX

DU CARBURANT

REPRESENTATION AMENDMENT ACT

(WATERLOO-WELLINGTON-KITCHENER), 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LA REPRÉSENTATION ÉLECTORALE

(WATERLOO-WELLINGTON-KITCHENER)

ONTARIO WATER RESOURCES AMENDMENT ACT

(WATER SOURCE PROTECTION), 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LES RESSOURCES EN EAU

DE L'ONTARIO

(PROTECTION DES SOURCES D'ALIMENTATION EN EAU)

ONTARIO DRINKING WATER

SOURCE PROTECTION ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 SUR LA PROTECTION

DES SOURCES D'EAU POTABLE

DE L'ONTARIO

MUNICIPALITY OF

CHATHAM-KENT ACT, 2003

ONTARIO WORKERS'

MEMORIAL ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003

SUR LE MONUMENT COMMÉMORATIF

DES TRAVAILLEURS DE L'ONTARIO

TYNDALE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE

& SEMINARY ACT, 2003

CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES

AMENDMENT ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LES SERVICES À L'ENFANCE

ET À LA FAMILLE

NO HOG FACTORIES ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 INTERDISANT

LES PORCHERIES INDUSTRIELLES

MOTOR VEHICLE MANUFACTURER'S

WARRANTY ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003

SUR LA GARANTIE DES FABRICANTS

DE VÉHICULES AUTOMOBILES

MOTIONS

PRIVATE MEMBERS'

PUBLIC BUSINESS

HOUSE SITTINGS

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

EDUCATION LABOUR DISPUTE

DEFERRED VOTES

CONTEMPT OF PARLIAMENT

VISITORS

ORAL QUESTIONS

EDUCATION LABOUR DISPUTE

PENSION PLAN

MEAT INSPECTION

RENDERING INDUSTRY

VISITORS

NURSES

PRIVATE HOSPITALS

URBAN STRATEGY

HYDRO GENERATION

ORDERS OF THE DAY

THRONE SPEECH DEBATE /

DÉBAT SUR LE DISCOURS DU TRÔNE

Wednesday 21 May 2003 Mercredi 21 mai 2003

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

ESTIMATES

Hon David H. Tsubouchi (Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet, Minister of Culture): Mr Speaker, I have a message from the Honourable the

Lieutenant Governor, signed by his own hand.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): The Honourable the Lieutenant Governor transmits estimates of certain sums required for services for the province

for the year ending 31 March 2004 and recommends them to the Legislative Assembly.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

HOME AND COMMUNITY CARE

Mr John Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands): The Home and Community Care Round Table, made up of 22 different organizations, including the

Canadian Association of Retired Persons, the Alzheimer Society of Ontario, the Ontario Community Support Association, the Ontario Coalition of Senior Citizens Organizations, the Ontario Federation

of Labour, the Ontario Health Coalition, the Retired Teachers of Ontario and the Victoria Order of Nurses, recently had a meeting with the Premier and his staff to plead with the government to live

up to its solemn commitment made four years ago to increase home and community care funding by $76 million in this year's estimates. This was not included in the throne speech and was not included

in the budget fiasco.

Why? There are over 115,000 vulnerable seniors and persons with debilitating diseases who have lost services completely. The number of hours of service has

declined by 30%. Over six million hours of homemaking, personal support, nursing and therapy services have been cut. What was the government's response? The government's response was to instruct

community care access centres across this province to begin cutting service volumes by up to 37% immediately if they are to balance their budgets in the year 2003-04.

Premier and government, don't wait until the next election. Live up to the promises you made four years ago to those people in this province who need home care

and community care services the most.

PUBLIC SAFETY

Ms Marilyn Mushinski (Scarborough Centre): I rise today to speak of an important announcement made recently in Scarborough by the Premier and

the Minister of Public Safety and Security. But first I want to tell you about what my constituents have been telling me at the door as I have visited them throughout Scarborough Centre. They told

me that they want their government to crack down on crime. Simply put, they want to feel safe in their homes, on their streets and in their neighbourhoods. I agree wholeheartedly with my

constituents.

That's why I was so delighted that the Premier and the Minister of Public Safety and Security came to Scarborough on May 5 to announce that once again the

government would be funding 1,000 new police officers. This follows the 1,000 additional police officers already hired since 1998. As the Premier put it, the "announcement will mean a more visible

police presence in Ontario that will keep our communities safe, strong and vibrant."

I note that the 1,000 new police officers are but one part of the government's throne speech plan to increase public safety in our province, and particularly in

my riding of Scarborough Centre. I therefore wish to express my sincere appreciation and that of my constituents to both the Premier and Minister Runciman for first listening and then acting upon

the concerns of my constituents in Scarborough Centre.

JUVENILE DIABETES

Mr Ernie Parsons (Prince Edward-Hastings): Every day in Ontario there are citizens who suffer heart attacks -- and suffer them needlessly, in

some cases. There are citizens who experience kidney failure and have to have kidney dialysis or transplants. There are Ontarians who are experiencing vision loss, again in some cases needlessly,

and citizens who are having to undergo amputation of their limbs.

I say "needlessly" because these people are victims of juvenile diabetes. It's very difficult to manage diabetes. There is no cure for it, but there's a

wonderful device for managing juvenile diabetes called the insulin pump. It costs approximately $5,000. From a humanitarian viewpoint, it makes sense. From a cost viewpoint, a heart attack costs

the public health care system about $100,000. If we think about the $5,200 for an insulin pump and contrast that with the $400 million this government has spent on ads, those ads would have bought

77,000 insulin pumps for victims of juvenile diabetes.

We have a two-tier system where some citizens are able to access insurance plans; others simply can't afford it and put their health or their children's health

at risk. I call upon the Minister of Community, Family and Children's Services to immediately add insulin pumps to the assistive devices program. They are literally a life-saving appliance that

makes sense from a financial viewpoint and a humanitarian viewpoint. They need to be funded for Ontario's citizens now.

RURAL SCHOOLS

Mr Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant) : It gives me great satisfaction to report to this Legislature that, after many months of debate and

public meetings, the members of the Grand Erie District School Board listened to the good people of the Delhi area and voted unanimously to keep the doors to Delhi District Secondary School open.

This is a great victory for all of us who fought for the survival of Delhi high school through meetings, petitions, briefs to the board and our Minister of Education. I thank the board for

listening and making the right decision for the students in the Delhi area.

It's also a great victory for all of us throughout Ontario who have argued that rural schools are worth fighting for, that rural Ontario one-school communities

need their schools to thrive and survive. Our government understands this. That's why we've allotted $50 million and appointed Dr James Downey to develop a rural school strategy to address the

unique challenges faced by boards with rural schools. However, the fight for our rural schools is far from over. We must continue to work together, much as all sides did quite recently in this

Delhi debate.

I've been contacted by Dr Downey's office and I will be providing every assistance I can to provide insight on the rural school challenges we have faced in

Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant. I encourage all who have been involved in school closure debates to relay their experience and input to Dr Downey.

CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL

OF EASTERN ONTARIO

Mr Richard Patten (Ottawa Centre): This Harris-Eves government placed full-page partisan ads in three Ottawa daily newspapers last Saturday on

the Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario. The information contained in the ads was absolutely nothing new. The people of eastern Ontario already know that CHEO has a built-in reputation as a

centre of excellence. We already know that CHEO is a remarkable institution. We already know that until the SARS review is completed, the government is allowing CHEO to continue providing pediatric

cardiac services.

The government knows full well that the people of eastern Ontario want to be reassured that their pediatric cardiac surgery is staying in Ottawa. Just before the

last election the government told the people of London that their Children's Hospital of Western Ontario would keep all their specialized programs, but after the election, and despite the efforts

of a human outcry, the government decided to centralize pediatric surgery in Toronto at Sick Kids, shutting down the service in London and Ottawa. The people of eastern Ontario need to know that

the pediatric cardiac unit is staying at CHEO in Ottawa, now and in the future -- end of story.

The people in eastern Ontario are smart enough to see what these ads really are: partisan, promotional pieces that cost tens of thousands of dollars and should

have been paid for by the Conservative Party of Ontario, not Ontario taxpayers. It is unethical, uncouth and despicable behaviour of this government at the expense of trusting Ontario citizens.

EDUCATION LABOUR DISPUTE

Mr Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): I'm happy to have a minute and a half to talk about what's happening with the Catholic teachers here in

Toronto. We'll have another opportunity as soon as the Premier himself today will introduce a bill that will force teachers back to the schools. We're talking about a lockout, not a strike, that

teachers are engaged in. We're talking about an issue where teachers want to get back to the classroom, were in the classroom, and the Toronto Catholic school board decided to take the

extraordinary action of locking the teachers and the students out of their schools. The board decided to lock 69,000 students out of their schools when there was absolutely no reason to do so. What

the teachers want is a settlement that's negotiated and bargained in good faith --

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Please stop the clock. The member for Ottawa Centre, please come to order. You had your chance during the members'

statements. It's now the member for Trinity-Spadina. This is going to be a very hectic day, I'm sure, and we don't need to start in members' statements right off the bat.

Sorry for the interruption, member for Trinity-Spadina.

Mr Marchese: What the teachers want is a negotiated settlement. That's what we want and that's what we hope they will be able to get: a fair and

just settlement with their board. My argument is, their board is not treating these teachers in a fair and just way. By locking them out, they've done the unfair and unjust thing and have given

this government the leeway and the power to have teachers be prey to their politics and their ideology. We think it's wrong.

We urge the board, Mr Carnevale and the other board members, to get back to the table and communicate to Eves today that this bill they're about to introduce is

wrong. It's not needed. The teachers were teaching, the teachers want to teach, and the students should be back in the classroom.

DAVE BABBITT

Mr Marcel Beaubien (Lambton-Kent-Middlesex): In my riding of Lambton-Kent-Middlesex we are extremely fortunate to have many outstanding teachers

who diligently, consistently and unselfishly go above and beyond the call of duty. Today I want to share with the House one such teacher who has been singled out for recognition a couple of times

in the past year.

Mr Dave Babbitt is the music teacher at Wallaceburg District Secondary School. Mr Babbitt was born and raised in Wallaceburg, graduated from the local high

school and, after receiving his teaching degree, returned to his hometown to teach and share his love and passion for music with his students and his community.

In addition to his teaching duties, Mr Babbitt spends countless hours providing individual music instruction to students, directing school musicals, leading the

school band, and producing an outstanding community production called "Hometown Christmas," which attracts audiences of more than 1,000. He also leads his own band called The Brass Factory, which

lends its support to many community endeavours throughout the year.

This past year, Mr Babbitt was awarded the Bob Brooks award from the Ontario Secondary School Teachers' Federation for excellence in school-community relations.

But of even greater significance was his selection for the Who's Who of American Teachers, which recognizes and publishes the name of the top 5% of teachers from all across North America. Mr

Babbitt was nominated for this prestigious award by Ms Amanda Hale, a former student who earned the right to make the nomination based on her achievement as a member of the dean's list at her

university. Tragically, Amanda was killed when the car she was driving was struck by a drunk driver just weeks after nominating Mr Babbitt for this award.

I know the House will want to join me in saluting Mr Dave Babbitt, just one of the many thousands of teachers across Ontario whose dedication and professionalism

we should recognize and honour.

PREMIER'S RECORD

Mr George Smitherman (Toronto Centre-Rosedale): I have watched Ernie Eves very closely since he became Premier, and I am often reminded of that

great Shaggy song, "It Wasn't Me." Just like Stockwell Day blaming his staff for not knowing which way Niagara Falls flows, every time Ernie hits a new stumbling block, he proclaims "It wasn't me,"

and points the finger in all different directions.

When he was caught handing out millions of dollars to pro sports teams, "It wasn't me." When he was ridiculed for having an infomercial budget presentation in an

auto parts plant, he blamed the media; he blamed the Speaker. "It wasn't me," he shouted. When he was quoted in a press release calling Canadians cowards, he turned around and blamed his staff: "It

wasn't me." When it was discovered that Ernie Eves authorized $36 billion in government spending without the scrutiny of the Legislature, he blamed it on the bureaucrats: "It wasn't me." When hydro

prices skyrocketed because of his complete mismanagement, Ernie Eves blamed Mike Harris: "It wasn't me."

This is a Premier who has lost his way. The wheels are spinning but the go-kart isn't moving. Ernie's blame-game approach is tired and old. It's typical of a

government that's out of steam and out of ideas. They're out for themselves and their friends.

There is only one leader and only one party that will fix our public services, fix our schools and our hospitals, clean up our drinking water and give us air

that we can breathe. That's Dalton McGuinty and the Ontario Liberal Party.

SARS

Mr Bert Johnson (Perth-Middlesex): I rise today to congratulate Premier Eves, Minister Clement, Doctors Colin D'Cunha and Jim Young, and all

doctors, nurses and health employees and our entire medical community on a well-fought battle against SARS.

I want to recognize Dr Susan Tamblyn, medical officer of health for the Perth district health unit, who worked at the SARS provincial operations centre sharing

her expertise in epidemics and pandemics. Her days were long and stressful, and I want her to know that we appreciate her hard work.

I also want to recognize the entire staff of Listowel Memorial Hospital, who dealt with a suspected case of SARS with great professionalism and care.

Now that we've defeated SARS, we have turned our attention to the economic fallout from the disease. I hope all Ontarians will take advantage of the tax holiday

on accommodations and admissions and rediscover our great province. Next Monday is the Stratford Festival's opening night for its 51st season, and I want to remind everyone to include a trip to

Stratford in their summer plans.

Having defeated SARS, we are being confronted by another disease with the potential for equally devastating economic repercussions. With a single case of mad cow

disease in Alberta, the United States and other countries have closed their borders to Canadian beef and cattle. Last night I spoke to many farmers in my riding who are very worried. I know our

testing system works. It identified the one isolated animal, but we need to make sure other countries know that too. We need to put the same effort into proving that our beef is safe that we put

into proving that it is safe to visit Toronto.

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): I beg to inform the House that today the Clerk received the report dated May 21, 2003, of the standing committee on

government agencies. Pursuant to standing order 106(e), the report is deemed to be adopted by the House.

STANDING COMMITTEE ON FINANCE AND ECONOMIC AFFAIRS

Mr Joseph Spina (Brampton Centre): I beg leave to present a report from the standing committee on finance and economic affairs and move its

adoption.

Clerk at the Table (Mr Todd Decker): Your committee begs to report the following bill as amended:

Bill 2,

An Act to amend the Highway Traffic Act to restrict the conveyance of passengers for compensation / Projet de loi 2, Loi modifiant le Code de la route

pour restreindre le transport de passagers moyennant rémunération.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Shall the report be received and adopted? Agreed. The bill is therefore ordered for third reading.

STANDING COMMITTEE ON REGULATIONS AND PRIVATE BILLS

Mr Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): I beg leave to present a report from the standing committee on regulations and private bills and move its

adoption.

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

Bill Pr14,

An Act respecting Redeemer University College.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Shall the report be received and adopted? Agreed.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

BACK TO SCHOOL

(TORONTO CATHOLIC ELEMENTARY) AND EDUCATION AND PROVINCIAL SCHOOLS NEGOTIATIONS AMENDMENT ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 PRÉVOYANT LE RETOUR

À L'ÉCOLE (SECTEUR ÉLÉMENTAIRE DU CONSEIL CATHOLIQUE DE TORONTO)

ET MODIFIANT LA

LOI SUR L'ÉDUCATION ET LA

LOI SUR

LA NÉGOCIATION COLLECTIVE DANS LES ÉCOLES PROVINCIALES

Mr Eves moved first reading of the following bill:

amend the Education Act and the Provincial Schools Negotiations Act / Projet de loi 28, Loi visant à régler le conflit de travail opposant l'Association des enseignantes et des

enseignants catholiques anglo-ontariens et le conseil scolaire de district appelé Toronto Catholic District School Board et modifiant la

Loi sur l'éducation et la

Loi sur la

négociation collective dans les écoles provinciales.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry?

All those in favour will please say "aye."

All those opposed will please 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 1350 to 1355.

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

Ayes

Arnott, Ted

Baird, John R.

Barrett, Toby

Beaubien, Marcel

Chudleigh, Ted

Clark, Brad

Clement, Tony

Coburn, Brian

Cunningham, Dianne

DeFaria, Carl

Dunlop, Garfield

Ecker, Janet

Elliott, Brenda

Eves, Ernie

Flaherty, Jim

Galt, Doug

Gill, Raminder

Guzzo, Garry J.

Hardeman, Ernie

Hastings, John

Hudak, Tim

Jackson, Cameron

Johns, Helen

Johnson, Bert

Kells, Morley

Klees, Frank

Marland, Margaret

Martiniuk, Gerry

Mazzilli, Frank

McDonald, AL

Miller, Norm

Molinari, Tina R.

Munro, Julia

Murdoch, Bill

Mushinski, Marilyn

Newman, Dan

O'Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Runciman, Robert W.

Sampson, Rob

Spina, Joseph

Sterling, Norman W.

Stewart, R. Gary

Stockwell, Chris

Tascona, Joseph N.

Tsubouchi, David H.

Turnbull, David

Wettlaufer, Wayne

Wilson, Jim

Witmer, Elizabeth

Wood, Bob

Young, David

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

Nays

Agostino, Dominic

Bartolucci, Rick

Bisson, Gilles

Bountrogianni, Marie

Boyer, Claudette

Bradley, James J.

Brown, Michael A.

Bryant, Michael

Caplan, David

Churley, Marilyn

Cleary, John C.

Colle, Mike

Conway, Sean G.

Crozier, Bruce

Curling, Alvin

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duncan, Dwight

Gerretsen, John

Gravelle, Michael

Hampton, Howard

Hoy, Pat

Kennedy, Gerard

Kormos, Peter

Kwinter, Monte

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Levac, David

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

Martin, Tony

McGuinty, Dalton

McLeod, Lyn

McMeekin, Ted

Parsons, Ernie

Patten, Richard

Phillips, Gerry

Prue, Michael

Pupatello, Sandra

Ramsay, David

Ruprecht, Tony

Sergio, Mario

Smitherman, George

Clerk of the House (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 52; the nays are 42.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

PEOPLE'S ACCESS

TO THE FACTS ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 SUR L'ACCÈS

DU PUBLIC AUX FAITS

Mr Wood moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 29,

An Act to amend the Public Inquiries Act / Projet de loi 29, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les enquêtes publiques.

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

The member for a short statement?

Mr Bob Wood (London West): The title of this bill is the People's Access to the Facts Act. It amends the Public Inquiries Act to allow any

member of the Legislative Assembly to propose a resolution to set up an inquiry into any matter that the act allows. The Assembly is required to vote on the resolution within 60 sessional days

after it is proposed.

This in effect gives the Legislature itself the same power to call inquiries as the cabinet now has. Surely this power should rest in the hands of all the

elected representatives of the people. Democracy and transparency do work.

This bill is similar to one which I introduced earlier in this session of the Legislature, except that it requires two thirds of the MPPs to support

introduction of an inquiry resolution.

ADULT PROTECTION ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003

SUR LA PROTECTION DES ADULTES

Mr Bartolucci moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 30,

An Act to protect adults from abuse and neglect / Projet de loi 30, Loi visant à protéger les adultes contre la maltraitance et la

négligence.

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

The member for a short statement?

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): I'll make it brief. The bill provides for the appointment of the director of the adult protection office to

provide protection for abused and neglected adults who are unable to protect themselves from abuse or neglect due to physical or mental disability.

"Abuse" means one or more of the following: physical abuse, sexual abuse, emotional abuse, medication abuse, financial abuse or abuse of one's rights and

freedoms.

"Neglect" means that person is not receiving proper care and attention in the premises where he or she resides, is incapable of caring properly for himself or

herself by reason of physical or mental disability, and refuses, delays or is unable to make provision for his or her proper care and attention.

DEMOCRATIC HERITAGE ARCHAEOLOGICAL

PRESERVATION ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 SUR LA

PRÉSERVATION ARCHÉOLOGIQUE

DU PATRIMOINE DÉMOCRATIQUE

Mr Marchese moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 31,

An Act to ensure the preservation of the site of Toronto's first parliament buildings / Projet de loi 31, Loi visant à assurer la

préservation du site des premiers édifices parlementaires de Toronto.

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

The member for a short statement?

Mr Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): The bill is intended to ensure the preservation of the site of Toronto's first Parliament buildings,

built in 1798 and

Section 2 provides that the site be deemed to have been designated under

part VI of the Ontario Heritage Act.

Section 3 provides that the minister responsible for the administration of that act shall ensure that a full archaeological excavation and investigation is

conducted and shall promote the purchase of the site, including the relocation of the businesses and its donation to the city of Toronto, the construction of a museum and the provision of operating

funds for the museum.

VISITORS

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Just before we recognize the member for Mississauga South, we have with us today in the Speaker's gallery the

interns from the National Assembly of Quebec. Please join me in welcoming our special guests.

I shouldn't do this, but I will; they're joined by Mr Tom Wills from London, England, who is a goaltending buddy of mine.

We welcome all our honoured guests.

ONTARIO WATER RESOURCES

AMENDMENT ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LES RESSOURCES

EN EAU DE L'ONTARIO

Mrs Marland moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 32,

An Act to amend the Ontario Water Resources Act / Projet de loi 32, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les ressources en eau de l'Ontario.

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

The member for a short statement?

Mrs Margaret Marland (Mississauga South): This bill provides that no one may sell in Ontario for human consumption water or ice in a sealed

container or package or from a dispenser other than a water dispenser that is connected to a water distribution system of a municipality unless the water or ice meets the minimum standards

prescribed in the regulation made under the act. The regulations can also regulate dispensers of water or ice for human consumption.

GAS PRICE WATCHDOG ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 SUR L'AGENT

DE SURVEILLANCE DES PRIX

DU CARBURANT

Mr Gravelle moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 33,

An Act respecting the price of motor vehicle fuel and the appointment of a Gas Price Watchdog / Projet de loi 33, Loi concernant le prix du carburant

pour véhicules automobiles et la nomination d'un agent de surveillance des prix du carburant.

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

The member for a short statement?

Mr Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North): This legislation would establish the office of the gas price watchdog, which would have the

power to monitor pricing practices in the province with respect to motor vehicle fuel and the power also to conduct inquiries into pricing practices on the order of the minister.

While the gas price watchdog would be responsible for the monitoring of pricing across the province, I feel it will have particular relevance in northwestern

Ontario, where the price fluctuations have frequently been much more volatile than in other parts of the province. In Thunder Bay last weekend, the price of gas shot up 10 cents a litre just before

the long weekend, with no justification whatsoever. Consumers are fed up with this practice, and it is precisely for that reason that we need meaningful legislation such as this.

I want to pay particular thanks to my colleague from Eglinton-Lawrence, Mike Colle, who brought forth this legislation previously and who has been very

supportive in helping me bring it forward once again.

REPRESENTATION AMENDMENT ACT

(WATERLOO-WELLINGTON-KITCHENER), 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LA REPRÉSENTATION ÉLECTORALE

(WATERLOO-WELLINGTON-KITCHENER)

Mr Arnott moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 34,

An Act to amend the Representation Act, 1996 / Projet de loi 34, Loi modifiant la Loi de 1996 sur la représentation électorale.

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

The member for a short statement?

Mr Ted Arnott (Waterloo-Wellington): As you're aware, Mr Speaker, at present the names of provincial electoral districts are identical to

those of the federal electoral districts. This bill makes an exception to that rule by changing the name of the present provincial electoral district of Waterloo-Wellington, my constituency, to

Waterloo-Wellington-Kitchener.

I introduced a bill similar to this in the previous session, and of course all the private members' bills died on the order paper when the House was prorogued.

I would ask all members to consider supporting my bill.

ONTARIO WATER RESOURCES AMENDMENT ACT

(WATER SOURCE PROTECTION), 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LES RESSOURCES EN EAU

DE L'ONTARIO

(PROTECTION DES SOURCES D'ALIMENTATION EN EAU)

Mrs Dombrowsky moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 35,

An Act to amend the Ontario Water Resources Act with respect to water source protection / Projet de loi 35, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les ressources en

eau de l'Ontario en ce qui concerne la protection des sources d'alimentation en eau.

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

The member for a short statement?

Mrs Leona Dombrowsky (Hastings-Frontenac-Lennox and Addington): The bill amends the Ontario Water Resources Act with regard to the

availability and conservation of Ontario water resources. Specifically, the bill requires the director to consider the Ministry of the Environment's statement of environmental values when making

any decision under the act.

The bill also requires that municipalities and conservation authorities are notified of an application to take water that, if granted, may affect their water

sources or supplies.

ONTARIO DRINKING WATER

SOURCE PROTECTION ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 SUR LA PROTECTION

DES SOURCES D'EAU POTABLE

DE L'ONTARIO

Ms Churley moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 36,

An Act to protect sources of drinking water in Ontario / Projet de loi 36, Loi visant à protéger les sources d'eau potable en Ontario.

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

The member for a statement?

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): As members in the House are aware, we are marking the third anniversary of the tainted water tragedy in

Walkerton. To help prevent such a tragedy, this bill offers protection of the sources of drinking water, because the protection of sources of drinking water is integral to the multi-barrier

approach recommended in the Report of the Walkerton Inquiry. This bill sets out a framework for comprehensive watershed-based drinking water protection, as recommended by Justice O'Connor.

MUNICIPALITY OF

CHATHAM-KENT ACT, 2003

Mr Beaubien moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill Pr12,

An Act respecting the Municipality of Chatham-Kent.

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

The member for a short statement?

Mr Marcel Beaubien (Lambton-Kent-Middlesex): The restructuring order that created the municipality of Chatham-Kent specified that certain

bylaws and resolutions of the former municipalities and/or local boards ceased to be in force on December 31, 2002. This bill changes this date to December 31, 2004. The bill is made retroactive to

December 31, 2002.

ONTARIO WORKERS'

MEMORIAL ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003

SUR LE MONUMENT COMMÉMORATIF

DES TRAVAILLEURS DE L'ONTARIO

Mr Agostino moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 37,

An Act to establish the Ontario Workers' Memorial / Projet de loi 37, Loi visant à ériger le monument commémoratif en hommage aux

travailleurs de l'Ontario.

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

The member for a short statement?

Mr Dominic Agostino (Hamilton East): The purpose of this bill is to require that a memorial be established adjacent to the legislative

precinct of the Legislative Assembly to honour the memory of those workers who have died on the job. Appropriately, this Legislature has chosen a memorial to honour firefighters and police officers

who have died on the job. This would extend it to all workers, and it would be at least a small tribute to the families of and to those hundreds of Ontarians who die on the job every year, who get

up and don't come home from work that day. This would be, I think, a fitting tribute to those men and women.

TYNDALE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE

& SEMINARY ACT, 2003

Mr Dunlop moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill Pr21,

An Act respecting Tyndale College & Seminary (formerly Ontario Bible College and Ontario Theological Seminary).

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

Pursuant to private members' rules, that is ordered for third reading.

CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES

AMENDMENT ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LES SERVICES À L'ENFANCE

ET À LA FAMILLE

Mr Bartolucci moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 38,

An Act to amend the Child and Family Services Act to Allow one Children's Aid Society access to information held by another Children's Aid Society /

Projet de loi 38, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les services à l'enfance et à la famille afin de permettre à une société d'aide à l'enfance d'avoir accès aux

renseignements détenus par une autre société d'aide à l'enfance.

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

The member for a short statement?

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): This bill will amend the Child and Family Services Act to allow a society to have access to information held by

another society, unless the information is protected by solicitor-client privilege, the information may not be disclosed under the Youth Criminal Justice Act or under

section 35 of the Mental

Health Act, or this information is subject to an order of the courts.

NO HOG FACTORIES ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 INTERDISANT

LES PORCHERIES INDUSTRIELLES

Ms Churley moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 39,

An Act to restrict the operation of large hog farms and to amend the Nutrient Management Act, 2002 / Projet de loi 39, Loi visant à restreindre

l'exploitation des grosses fermes porcines et à modifier la Loi de 2002 sur la gestion des éléments nutritifs.

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

The member for a short statement?

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): Again, on the eve of the third anniversary of the tainted water tragedy in Walkerton, I'm introducing

this bill to help protect water in this province. The bill prohibits large hog farms, subject to the ability of the Lieutenant Governor in Council to make exemptions where it is appropriate to do

so.

The bill also amends the Nutrient Management Act, 2002, to provide that a regulation under the act only supersedes a municipal bylaw if the regulation provides

greater environmental protection. The Lieutenant Governor in Council may make regulations exempting any person from complying with

section 2 if the Lieutenant Governor in Council is satisfied that

Ontario legislation is in force that protects sources of drinking water from contamination that may be caused by the factory hog farm. It relates to my bill I introduced earlier on source

protection.

MOTOR VEHICLE MANUFACTURER'S

WARRANTY ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003

SUR LA GARANTIE DES FABRICANTS

DE VÉHICULES AUTOMOBILES

Mr Sampson moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 40,

An Act respecting warranties offered by manufacturers of motor vehicles / Projet de loi 40, Loi concernant les garanties offertes par les fabricants

de véhicules automobiles.

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

A short statement from the member?

Mr Rob Sampson (Mississauga Centre): This is a bill identical to the one I tabled in the third session of the 37th Parliament concerning

remedies that would be available to consumers who enter into a purchase agreement for a vehicle and find out that major defects haven't been repaired at three attempts. It gives the purchaser the

remedy to be able to say to the manufacturer, "Give me a new car or give me my money back."

The Speaker: I'm sorry to inform the members -- I didn't realize the time was going on -- that under standing order 33(f), the period for

introduction of bills shall be limited to 30 minutes. Unfortunately, we're over the 30 minutes. Tomorrow, we will get to the members who were up today first. I apologize for that.

MOTIONS

PRIVATE MEMBERS'

PUBLIC BUSINESS

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of the Environment, Government House Leader): I seek unanimous consent to put forward a motion, without notice,

regarding private members' public business.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Is there unanimous consent? Agreed.

Hon Mr Stockwell: I move that notwithstanding standing order 96(g), notice for ballot items 7, 8, 9 and 10 be waived.

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

Hon Mr Stockwell: I seek unanimous consent to put forward a motion, without notice, regarding private members' public business.

The Speaker: Unanimous consent? Agreed.

Hon Mr Stockwell: I move that notwithstanding standing order 96(d), the following changes be made to the ballot list for private members'

public business: Mr Guzzo and Mr Beaubien exchange places in order of precedence such that Mr Guzzo assumes ballot item 10 and Mr Beaubien assumes ballot item 7 --

Interjections.

Hon Mr Stockwell: As controversial as it is, I will continue -- and that Mr Beaubien and Mr Wood exchange places in order of precedence such

that Mr Beaubien assumes ballot item 15 and Mr Wood assumes ballot item 7.

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

HOUSE SITTINGS

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of the Environment, Government House Leader): In the spirit of collegiality, I say to you, Mr Speaker, I move

that pursuant to standing order 9(c)(i) -- reminding of the collegiality that's taking place -- the House shall meet from 6:45 pm to 9:30 pm on Wednesday, May 21, for the purpose of considering

government business.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry?

All those in favour of the motion will please say "aye."

All those opposed will please 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 1423 to 1428.

The Speaker: All those in favour of Mr Stockwell's motion will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

Agostino, Dominic

Arnott, Ted

Baird, John R.

Bartolucci, Rick

Beaubien, Marcel

Bountrogianni, Marie

Boyer, Claudette

Bradley, James J.

Brown, Michael A.

Bryant, Michael

Caplan, David

Chudleigh, Ted

Clark, Brad

Cleary, John C.

Clement, Tony

Coburn, Brian

Colle, Mike

Conway, Sean G.

Crozier, Bruce

Cunningham, Dianne

Curling, Alvin

DeFaria, Carl

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duncan, Dwight

Dunlop, Garfield

Ecker, Janet

Elliott, Brenda

Eves, Ernie

Flaherty, Jim

Galt, Doug

Gerretsen, John

Gill, Raminder

Gravelle, Michael

Guzzo, Garry J.

Hardeman, Ernie

Hastings, John

Hoy, Pat

Hudak, Tim

Jackson, Cameron

Johns, Helen

Johnson, Bert

Kells, Morley

Kennedy, Gerard

Klees, Frank

Kwinter, Monte

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Levac, David

Marland, Margaret

Martiniuk, Gerry

Mazzilli, Frank

McDonald, AL

McLeod, Lyn

McMeekin, Ted

Miller, Norm

Molinari, Tina R.

Munro, Julia

Murdoch, Bill

Mushinski, Marilyn

Newman, Dan

O'Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Parsons, Ernie

Patten, Richard

Phillips, Gerry

Pupatello, Sandra

Runciman, Robert W.

Ruprecht, Tony

Sampson, Rob

Sergio, Mario

Smitherman, George

Spina, Joseph

Sterling, Norman W.

Stewart, R. Gary

Stockwell, Chris

Tascona, Joseph N.

Tsubouchi, David H.

Turnbull, David

Wettlaufer, Wayne

Wilson, Jim

Witmer, Elizabeth

Wood, Bob

Young, David

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

Nays

Bisson, Gilles

Hampton, Howard

Kormos, Peter

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

Martin, Tony

Prue, Michael

Clerk of the House (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 83; the nays are 7.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

EDUCATION LABOUR DISPUTE

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Today I have introduced the Back to School (Toronto Catholic Elementary) and

Education and Provincial Schools Negotiations Amendment Act. This act represents the decisive action our government is prepared to take to ensure students in the Toronto Catholic elementary system

are able to complete their studies. They will be able to do this without further threat of school year disruptions because of lockouts or so-called work-to-rule campaigns.

Some 69,000 students are out of their classrooms. Instead of being in class and learning, they and their parents are helpless pawns in a struggle between the

teachers' union and the school board. We all know that a day of lost instruction is a lost opportunity for success.

We have heard from parents, we have heard from students and we have heard from teachers. They are disgusted with the current situation. Parents want to know

their children are getting the best education available, and they want to see report cards and results. They want to be assured that if their children need extra help in a subject, they will get

it. They want to see their hard-earned taxes pay for education, not a power struggle. Most importantly, they see their children's futures at risk.

The legislation introduced today would, if passed, end this disruption. It would protect students and their opportunity to learn and succeed.

This government has already invested almost $700 million to provide 3% increases to teachers' salary benchmarks this school year and a further 3% for next

year. Clearly the problem cannot be solved just by money. This problem needs strong and decisive action. We are doing our part. Now we expect the boards and the teachers to do their part.

Our government takes the education of our children seriously. We know that most teachers are dedicated professionals who want to be in their classrooms

teaching. They do not want to be on strike or take actions they know are detrimental to the education and safety of their students. We also know that there are activists who want nothing more than

to disrupt the system for their own reasons.

The time for classroom disruption is over. Our goal is to ensure that students receive the education they deserve without the threat of school-year disruption

because of strikes, lockouts or work-to-rule campaigns.

Our children's education is a top priority for Ontarians and for our government. That is why we have continued to invest in education. This next school year we

will be investing $15.3 billion, which will increase to $16.2 billion for the 2005-06 school year. We have also introduced Ontario students to a new and more rigorous curriculum and province-wide

standardized tests to better prepare them to compete in today's global economy. It simply doesn't make sense to allow these strides forward to be jeopardized by labour disputes.

I am asking for the Legislature's approval for our actions. I am asking for the Legislature to consider the needs and the future of the children first.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Could we stop the clock for a quick moment, please? Before we continue, we have a former member in the members'

gallery east. Speaking with the member for Kingston and the Islands is a former member for Kingston and the Islands, Mr Ken Keyes, a member of the 33rd and 34th Parliaments. Please join me in

welcoming our colleague.

Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Deputy Premier, Minister of Education): Over the past several years, our government has made a number of changes to

Ontario's education system. In making those changes, we have been guided by one goal. That goal is very simple: to ensure that all the young people --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Minister, sorry to interrupt. Stop the clock. Order.

Members will know that we fight very hard to have ministerial statements done in the House, and then when they do it, you yell and scream across at them.

You're going to have five minutes. If you expect the ministers to make statements in here, then I suspect you'd probably want to give them a little bit of courtesy to do it; otherwise, quite

frankly, they'll do it outside. I've been one of the ones fighting to do it in here and forcing them to do it in here, and then you can't even hear the minister. I would appreciate your

co-operation.

The Deputy Premier and Minister of Education.

Hon Mrs Witmer: Our goal is to ensure that all the young people in Ontario receive the best education possible, an education that enables them

to learn, experience new opportunities and reach their full potential. We want to ensure that every student achieves personal success.

Parents, educators and students have told us that they want a government that is committed to listening and responding decisively to their concerns; they want

a government that is willing to take the necessary steps to ensure that students have the tools and the resources they need to achieve success in life.

We have spent the past year listening to parents and educational stakeholders and seeking their advice on how best to move forward to provide the best

opportunities for our students.

Last April, in response to concerns about textbooks, the first action we took under Premier Eves was to announce an additional $65 million in new funding for

textbooks.

In response to concerns about the funding formula, we appointed Dr Mordechai Rozanski to review our funding for schools and make recommendations on how we

should move forward. Dr Rozanski's report confirmed that per pupil funding is providing equality to all students in this province no matter where they live. He also provided us with immediate and

long-term recommendations.

I'm very pleased to say that our government responded immediately, after the release of the report, with additional funding for special education, salaries and

transportation, as had been recommended. The recent budget committed almost $2 billion in new funding over the next three years to move forward on the rest of his recommendations.

We have made good on our commitment to make the children of this province and education a priority. That's why we set up the task force on students at risk.

Recently, in response to their recommendations, we have introduced the GOALS strategy to benefit students in grades 7 to 12 who need extra help in reading, writing and math and in their transition

from school to the workplace. That's the reason we are investing approximately $250 million annually in new special education funding to better support our students with special needs.

Unfortunately, our work is not yet complete. Recently, parents have been telling us that they want further stability in Ontario's education system. They want a

system that ensures that labour negotiations do not disrupt the quality of the education of their students. They want stability in the classroom, and so do we. They want students learning the new

curriculum in a stable learning environment. They want regular reports on how their students are doing.

Today we are again acting on behalf of our students. We, today, with this legislation, are putting our students first. Students cannot learn and teachers who

want to teach cannot teach if they are not in the classroom. That's the reason this legislation is being introduced today, to ensure that the education of the children in the Toronto Catholic

District School Board is not further disrupted by a labour dispute that keeps teachers away from their students. I have been encouraging both sides to negotiate.

It's because we want our teachers in the classroom that we have increased funding for salary benchmarks by a total of $680 million. That amounts to an increase

of 3% to the benchmark this school year and another 3% next year. We did this to provide stability.

This funding was provided to boards to ensure that they could negotiate fair and reasonable agreements with their teachers. More importantly, it was provided

to ensure that the learning environments of Ontario students are not disrupted by labour disputes. Labour negotiations belong in a boardroom. They belong in a boardroom with senior administrators

and union representatives, not on the picket lines or in Ontario's classrooms, and not at the expense of the educational experience of our students.

I believe, and our government believes, that the most important factors contributing to a child's education are excellent, outstanding teachers, such as those

we have in this province, working in a stable learning environment. Ontario today has some of the hardest working, most highly skilled and dedicated teachers in the world. We have made the

maintaining and updating of their skills essential to the success of our students.

On the occasion of World Teachers' Day last fall, I told this Legislature that we ask a lot of our teachers; in fact, we ask more of them than we have ever

asked. We ask teachers to equip students with the knowledge and skills they need for success in today's competitive global economy. We ask teachers to help our children develop the self-esteem and

confidence they need to live productive and fulfilling lives as active and responsible citizens. We ask teachers to inspire in our young people a love of learning that will last a lifetime, because

in today's changing world, the need for education never ends. We ask our teachers to be educational leaders, to work closely with their colleagues, parents, other professionals and members of the

community to improve student learning. They are doing all this and more.

In order to do what is asked, teachers now need our support. In response, we have implemented a comprehensive program to ensure teaching excellence, because

it's important that teachers have the most up-to-date skills and knowledge when they stand at the head of their class. Parents require it, and the success of our students demands it.

Because of that, we're expanding our faculties of education in Ontario. From 1999 to 2003, 6,000 new spaces for teaching students were created, a 24% increase

over the previous five years. We're also working with teachers to attract young people into the teaching profession. The recent Be the Spark campaign was a joint effort of the government, the

Ontario Teachers' Federation, the Ontario College of Teachers, the Council of Directors of Education and the Ontario Association of Deans of Education. The campaign demonstrated what I personally

know: teaching is a great profession. It allows an opportunity to make a tremendous difference in the lives of young people.

When they do enter the profession, teachers have access to a range of supports to keep their skills up to date. To facilitate professional learning, our

government recently committed $5 million for distance learning, on-line courses and other courses. We want to be sure that a sufficient number of low-cost, easily accessible professional learning

courses are available to teachers across the province.

Teachers are taking advantage of these learning opportunities. Thousands of Ontario teachers have voluntarily taken summer courses to help them teach the new

curriculum.

We're also providing resources that help teachers do their jobs on a daily basis. As we've implemented the new curriculum, we have provided teachers with real

examples of completed tasks and assignments at different grade and ability levels so that they are better able to consistently assess their students' work.

As we move forward with our GOALS strategy to ensure the success of our students in secondary school, expert panels are working to give school boards,

principals and teachers advice on the most effective strategies and resources to help students achieve success at reading, writing, math and the transition we now have in place from school to the

workplace, college or university.

Our new supports and the hard work of our teachers and students are paying dividends. Our test scores show that our teachers are helping our students be more

and more successful. In provincial, national and international tests, our students are doing better. They're showing that they can perform as well as or better than students anywhere in the world

in reading, writing, math and science. We cannot afford to let labour disruptions take away from the significant gains we have made in the last seven years.

If this legislation passes, teachers at the Toronto Catholic District School Board will not only be in the classroom, they will be there with the tools and the

support they need to ensure that our students are able to achieve success in a safe and stable learning environment.

I would encourage all members of this House today to put our students first.

Hon Brad Clark (Minister of Labour): The act we've introduced today represents the decisive action our government is prepared to take to

ensure that students are able to complete their studies without the threat of school-year disruptions because of strikes, lockouts or so-called work-to-rule campaigns.

As members are aware, the Toronto Catholic District School Board has locked out its elementary school teachers due to the inability of both parties to reach a

mutually acceptable agreement. Some 69,000 students are out of school, and this isn't the first time. Over the years, we've seen labour skirmishes occur in one board or another. Parents, teachers

and students have told us over and over again that strikes, lockouts and work-to-rule campaigns disrupt our children's education and can often create unnecessary anxiety and stress for them and

their families.

If passed, this bill would end the lockout by the Toronto Catholic District School Board. It would get the 69,000 students back in the classroom, where they

belong. At the same time, steps are being taken to protect those students and to put a halt to the harmful work-to-rule actions by the teachers.

Work-to-rule campaigns are destructive in many ways. For instance, work-to-rule hampers instruction time. Before the lockout at the Toronto Catholic District

School Board, teachers were arriving 15 minutes before class and leaving 15 minutes after the end of class.

Work-to-rule keeps parents and students in the dark. Teachers were not providing comments on report cards. As a result, parents have no idea how their children

are doing in school or what help they need.

Work-to-rule hurts a well-rounded education. Teachers were withdrawing from school trips, including a year-end traditional trip to Quebec City, which presented

an emotional and financial cost to the students. The teachers were refusing to administer the standardized test. These tests are a part of our government's commitment to better prepare our children

to compete in today's global economy.

We've heard from parents, we've heard from students, we've heard from teachers: they are all disgusted with the actions that both the board and the union are

taking. Parents want to know their children are getting the best education available. They want to see the report cards and test results. They want to be assured that if their children need extra

help in a subject, they will get it. Parents want to be able to discuss their child's education with teachers and not be told that such meetings are not a part of the teacher's job. They want to

see their hard-earned taxes pay for education, not for ongoing fights between boards and unions. Most important, they see their children's futures at risk.

The legislation today would, if passed, end this practice of using students and their parents as bargaining chips in contract negotiations. It would protect

students and safeguard their opportunity to learn and succeed. If passed by the Legislature and proclaimed by the Lieutenant Governor, this bill would provide a fair and balanced approach to the

situation at the Toronto District Catholic School Board. It would get students back in their classrooms by ordering the board to resume normal operations immediately after the act comes into force.

It would allow the school board and the union to continue to negotiate toward a fair settlement by giving the parties seven days in which to reach a mutually acceptable agreement. If the school

board and the union were unable to resolve their differences, they have the opportunity to mutually agree upon mediator or arbitrator. If they are unable to agree, the Minister of Labour would

This bill would also provide for maximum penalties of $2,000 for individuals and $25,000 for the union if they're not in compliance. Each day of non-compliance

would be a separate offence.

We want the students back in the school.

The Speaker: I know the minister wasn't finished but the time was up. Responses?

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): What we have just witnessed has to be one of the most shallow, cynical displays of political

gamesmanship that has ever, ever been witnessed in this Legislature. The Premier and the other ministers who have just spoken would have us believe that somehow this has everything to do with

ensuring that the 69,000 students who are found today outside the classroom are returned to the classroom. It has nothing to do with that. It has everything to do with political gamesmanship and

the next election. If this government, but more importantly, if this Premier, were genuinely interested in ensuring that those kids were back in their classrooms, the first thing that he would have

done, in anticipation of this lockout -- because pretty well everybody knew that this was around the corner; everybody knew this was going to happen. The first thing the Premier should have done

was pick up the phone and talk to the teachers' representatives and the school board representatives and ask what he might do to facilitate a resolution.

That kind of an exercise doesn't cost a cent and is in keeping with the true responsibilities that are attached to the Office of the Premier of Ontario. This

guy doesn't understand that. Then when the lockout had taken place, the Premier would have done the same thing. He would have invited both sides into his office and said, "What is it that we can do

by working together to facilitate a resolution and get the kids back in the classroom?" What this Premier decided to do instead, very deliberately, was to take a seat on the side, fold his arms,

smile, grin from ear to ear, watch this unfold and hope that somehow he could make this work into his plan for electioneering in Ontario.

If this Premier were genuinely interested in getting these kids back to school, then he would have introduced a bill today that would have done nothing more

and nothing less than that. What he has done --

Interjection.

Mr McGuinty: You don't know what they've roped you into. You'd better pay attention to what I'm about to say here.

What they have done --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Member, take your seat. Stop the clock. Order. Members come to order. The other side was very quiet for the Minister of

Education.

Interjections.

The Speaker: They were so. I will say this very clearly: we've got a very important vote coming up, and I will throw people out before the

vote if they misbehave. If everybody wants to stay for that vote -- and I'm sure the whips want them here -- they'd better be good or I will throw them out.

I beg to differ with a few of the members. They were good for the minister when she spoke. I listened very quietly. They started off, and then they were quiet

for her. I'm expecting the same from the leader of the official opposition.

Sorry for the interruption, leader of the official opposition.

Mr McGuinty: We had indicated our intentions to the government to support legislation. Let me say at the outset that we would have preferred

that the parties be given at least 24 more hours to resolve the differences. But failing that, we indicated we were prepared to support a bill which would have the effect of doing nothing more than

returning the kids to the classroom, bringing an end to the lockout and putting in place an arbitration process. We thought both parties would reconcile themselves to that over the course of

time.

What the government has decided to do here with this back-to-work bill is amend provincial education policy. What they are doing here is saying that the

definition of a strike is now going to include work to rule. What they're going to do is to make voluntary extracurricular activities mandatory. Coaching the basketball team is now going to become

mandatory. Coaching hockey, soccer, baseball and anything else is going to become mandatory. If you're going to act as a drama coach in the evening to help out your students, that's going to become

mandatory. If you're going to help students with the yearbook, that too is going to become mandatory.

I want to quote you something the Premier himself said not that long ago to the Pembroke Daily Observer, on March 6 just last year. He said, "I think it's time

to bury the hatchet and talk to teachers to see what they want in their education system. You can legislate anything you want, but you can't legislate goodwill and legislate respect. You have to

earn that." The Premier could not have been more right.

I want to state this again so it is clear and emphatic. This has nothing to do with returning Toronto kids to their classroom. It has everything to do with

political opportunism and preparing themselves to go into the next election. If they want to get the kids back to school, then introduce in this Legislature today a clean bill. We would be

delighted to support that.

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): First of all, I want to respond to the Premier. The Premier spoke today in terms of wanting to

"restore stability," I believe were the words he used, and that he wants to present himself as the white knight here who is somehow going to bring peace to our schools.

I just want to remind people that it wasn't so long ago that someone said, "We need to create a crisis in education in Ontario." For people who haven't been

around for a while, they might not know who that was, but in fact it was the first Conservative education minister who said, "The government needs to create a crisis in education." I say, for the

majority of parents, students, teachers and school trustees across the province, this government has certainly succeeded in that. You have succeeded in making our children's education an ongoing

political football. If your television ads aren't attacking teachers, then you're out there attacking trustees or you're out there on many occasions trying to insinuate that somehow our children

are not doing as well as they should.

The reality was disclosed by Dr Rozanski, who conducted your own task force report on education. He said, after going from one end of the province to the

other, the real problem is that, after your decision to create a crisis, after your decision to cut funding from school boards and cut funding from schools, our schools in this province are

under-funded to the tune of $2 billion a year. Now you say, on the eve of an election, that you can be trusted to put the money back in. On the eve of an election, you want to present yourselves as

somehow recreating or fixing the mess that you, in fact, are responsible for.

That's exactly the character of this legislation today. This is a government, this is a Minister of Education, who could have phoned up the chair of the

Toronto District Catholic School Board and said, "Please withdraw the lockout. Please get back to the bargaining table. Find a settlement."

Did the minister do that? Not at all. Because the minister, the Premier and the Minister of Labour are more interested in making our children's education into

a political football. You're more interested in using it as a launching pad for your election campaign. I say to you, the people of Ontario are on to you. They have watched these tactics from you

for eight years now and they're not going to fall for them, this time. They're not going to allow you to continue to use our children's education as a political football that you can kick around

whenever it suits you, whenever you think you can get a little bit of political advantage from it.

Shame on you. Shame on using those children, those teachers for nothing more than your cynical ploy to try to get some kind of leg up in advance of an

announcement of an election campaign.

Mr Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): It amazes me that it requires three ministers to deliver a simple message that says teachers are going

to have to get back into the classrooms -- three ministers, and one of them is the Premier. I've never seen that before; it's unprecedented.

I want to say to this House that this back-to-work legislation is not about students; it's about an election. We know it's pure, political, pitiful, craven,

desperate opportunism by this government which needs to get re-elected, and they need to engage in class warfare in order to maintain a third term. This is what this is about. It's class warfare

and this warfare is against the teachers.

You're not going to get away with it. It's quite clear. I feel it; I know you're not going to get away with it. What the parents want are more librarians, more

textbooks, more principals in each and every school, more ESL support, more music teachers, more art teachers. That's what they want. They don't want an interventionist and more centralist

government like yours disrupting our educational system. That's what you've done. The real disrupters are not the teachers. The one who has disrupted the system is you. You have done it for seven

or eight years, and you continue to do it. You are the problem, not them.

DEFERRED VOTES

CONTEMPT OF PARLIAMENT

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): We now have a deferred vote on the motion by Mr Conway arising from the Speaker's ruling of May 8, 2003. Call in

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

The division bells rang from 1503 to 1508.

The Speaker: Mr Conway has moved that this House declares that it is the undoubted right of the Legislative Assembly, in Parliament assembled,

to be the first recipient of the budget of Ontario.

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

Ayes

Agostino, Dominic

Bartolucci, Rick

Bisson, Gilles

Bountrogianni, Marie

Boyer, Claudette

Bradley, James J.

Brown, Michael A.

Bryant, Michael

Caplan, David

Churley, Marilyn

Cleary, John C.

Colle, Mike

Conway, Sean G.

Crozier, Bruce

Curling, Alvin

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duncan, Dwight

Gerretsen, John

Gravelle, Michael

Hampton, Howard

Hoy, Pat

Kennedy, Gerard

Kormos, Peter

Kwinter, Monte

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Levac, David

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

Martin, Tony

McGuinty, Dalton

McLeod, Lyn

McMeekin, Ted

Parsons, Ernie

Patten, Richard

Phillips, Gerry

Prue, Michael

Pupatello, Sandra

Ruprecht, Tony

Sergio, Mario

Smitherman, George

Sorbara, Greg

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

Nays

Arnott, Ted

Baird, John R.

Barrett, Toby

Beaubien, Marcel

Chudleigh, Ted

Clark, Brad

Clement, Tony

Coburn, Brian

Cunningham, Dianne

DeFaria, Carl

Dunlop, Garfield

Ecker, Janet

Elliott, Brenda

Eves, Ernie

Flaherty, Jim

Galt, Doug

Gilchrist, Steve

Gill, Raminder

Guzzo, Garry J.

Hardeman, Ernie

Hastings, John

Hudak, Tim

Jackson, Cameron

Johns, Helen

Johnson, Bert

Kells, Morley

Klees, Frank

Marland, Margaret

Martiniuk, Gerry

Mazzilli, Frank

McDonald, AL

Miller, Norm

Molinari, Tina R.

Munro, Julia

Murdoch, Bill

Mushinski, Marilyn

Newman, Dan

O'Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Runciman, Robert W.

Sampson, Rob

Spina, Joseph

Sterling, Norman W.

Stewart, R. Gary

Stockwell, Chris

Tascona, Joseph N.

Tsubouchi, David H.

Turnbull, David

Wettlaufer, Wayne

Wilson, Jim

Witmer, Elizabeth

Wood, Bob

Young, David

Clerk of the House (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 42; the nays are 53.

The Speaker: I declare the motion defeated.

VISITORS

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I know that members of the Legislative Assembly would like to welcome to

the assembly today in the gallery behind me students, teachers and parents from Prince Philip Public School in St Catharines.

ORAL QUESTIONS

EDUCATION LABOUR DISPUTE

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): My question is to the Premier. Premier, just a short while ago, your government introduced in

the House a bill that you claim would have the effect solely of returning some 69,000 Toronto schoolchildren to their classroom as soon as that bill received third reading and became law. But the

truth of the matter, as you well know, is that this bill has much more to it than that.

Part II of the bill provides for some amendments to the Education Act and the Provincial Schools Negotiations

Act.

You know, Premier, that had you introduced a bill that was clean and did nothing more than what you claimed it would do, you would have our support. But

instead, what you have chosen to do is to include an amendment to provincial education policy. I think it would be more appropriate, it would be fair and it would be responsible for you -- if you

want to make that kind of change, then you have a responsibility to get a mandate from the people of Ontario through an election.

I'll repeat the offer I made in my response to your statement, Premier: if you yank

part II from this bill, you will receive our support to get the kids back

in their classrooms. Will you do that, Premier?

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): We have introduced a piece of legislation that will return students in this

board to the classroom, where they should be. There is nothing in this bill that prevents the board and the teachers' union from continuing to negotiate. They can be negotiating today. As a matter

of fact, we have said repeatedly that a negotiated settlement is still by far the preferred option of everybody, I believe, with respect to this dispute or any other dispute.

With respect to his comment about

part II, there is nothing in

part II with respect to changing the regulations under the Education Act that teachers should

not be performing in the classroom on a day-to-day basis.

Mr McGuinty: Premier, if

part II is of no real significance, then why did you include it in a simple back-to-work bill? The fact of the matter

is that what you're trying to do is to include in your back-to-work bill a fundamental change to provincial education policy. We feel that if that's what you want to do, then you have a

responsibility to get a mandate from the people of Ontario through an election. If you were sincerely committed to doing nothing more than getting those 69,000 kids back into the classroom, then I

ask you again on their behalf, why not strip from your bill

part II, so that we have nothing more in the bill than what you purport it claims to do?

Hon Mr Eves: What the leader of the official opposition is complaining about is that teachers in the province who are not in a legal strike

position and the teachers in this particular board are going to "fully and completely fill out report cards with comments and grades." Does he object to that? "Co-operate and assist in the

administration of tests under the Education Quality and Accountability Act." Does he disagree with that? "Participate in regular meetings with the students' parents." Does he disagree with that?

"Performing duties as assigned by the principal in relation to co-operative placement of their students." Surely he can't disagree with that. "Performing duties traditionally associated with the

graduation of students." He can't disagree with that.

Those are the only things that are different. They surely fall within the definition of everyday work of any teacher in the province of Ontario, and surely the

leader of the official opposition isn't objecting that we are asking teachers to perform this work.

Mr McGuinty: Premier, I'm not sure that you even know what is found inside your bill.

Part II provides that a strike is going to include

"programs involving co-instructional activities." If you look up "co-instructional activities," the definition says they're activities "not limited to activities having to do with school-related

sports, arts and cultural activities ... letters of support for pupils" and other things. Premier, this does much more than what you are describing. You are talking, in what should be a simple

back-to-work bill, about a fundamental change to provincial education policy. You're going to make extracurricular activities, co-instructional activities, which includes voluntary activities --

which is what we're really talking about here. You're going to make those mandatory.

Premier, you yourself said not that long ago, "I think that it's time to bury the hatchet and to talk to teachers to see what they want in their education

system. You can legislate anything you want, but you can't legislate goodwill and respect. You have to earn that."

Do you honestly think that with this so-called back-to-work bill today you're going to earn the respect of teachers Ontario-wide? Is that what you honestly

think? If you're going to make that kind of fundamental change, do you not think you have a responsibility to call an election and let the people of Ontario pass judgment?

Hon Mr Eves: We are here today to take care of these 69,000 students and make sure they get back to the classroom. The leader of the official

opposition and his colleagues will have an opportunity, time enough, to discuss issues such as this before the people of the province of Ontario. He won't have to worry about having that

opportunity. But the first and foremost thing is to get these 69,000 students back into the classroom, where they should be, receiving the instruction that we know the overwhelming majority of

professional teachers want to provide to their students.

What we see here in the House today is a great demonstration of a leader of the official opposition trying to twist the logic so he can justify not putting

these students back in the classroom, where they belong. Are you in favour of the students or the teacher's union?

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): New question?

Mr McGuinty: I'm very interested: you maintain, Premier, that you're committed to putting students first and that you have nothing more that

you want to do except to get the kids back in the classroom.

I want to know what specifically you did to intervene in this matter and to help bring both sides together so that they might work this out among themselves

and, I would gather, in a much speedier way than we're now going to have in terms of dealing with this legislation here. Because I want to tell you what I did, Premier. I got hold of

representatives on behalf of teachers, I got hold of a representative at the school board, and I asked them if there was anything at all that I could do to facilitate a resolution.

Interjections.

Mr McGuinty: The other side might not think that is a worthwhile undertaking. You might think that, in these kinds of things, what you should

do is simply sit back and do nothing. But we over here feel a sense of responsibility to try to bring the sides together and get the kids back in the classroom. So what I want to know from you,

Premier, is what exactly have you done, apart from sitting on your hands and crafting this bill, which has provincial implications? What specifically did you do to reach out to both sides and bring

this matter to a resolution?

Hon Mr Eves: We, my office, contacted both the head of the union and the head of the board of education and asked them to continue

negotiating, because that is where this problem is going to be resolved: at the negotiating table.

I might say -- all these little fingers pointing over there, Mr Speaker -- that we did it without offending the integrity of either individual involved, which

is more than I can say for you.

Mr McGuinty: So I gather, Premier, that you yourself did nothing. Personally, you stayed a hundred miles away from this. Because this plays

into your agenda.

Let's be honest about what's happening here. You are absolutely delighted with this turn of events. The fact that you introduced this bill at this time is a

lot more than pure coincidence. You are delighted with this turn of events. What you intend to do is to come across as some kind of a strong-arm in Ontario, and when it comes to the interests of

children, you will do nothing more and nothing less than advance your own political interests. That's what this is all about.

What happened to the Ernie Eves who said, "You can't legislate goodwill and respect. That is something that you have to earn"? What happened to the Ernie Eves

who said that to the Pembroke Observer back in March 2002?

Hon Mr Eves: I have here a certain bill that the leader of the official opposition introduced in this Legislature on April 23, 1992, called

Bill 14, introduced in the name of Mr McGuinty, proposing to do away with teachers' strikes entirely in the province of Ontario. What happened to that Dalton McGuinty?

Mr McGuinty: Premier, you know better than that. You know what my bill did.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Sorry to interrupt. We need to have a little quiet, please. Order. The leader of the official opposition has the floor. Sorry for

the interruption, leader.

Mr McGuinty: Here's something else you'll be interested in recalling, Premier, in terms of what you said in response to these kinds of

approaches in the past. When your colleague Mr Flaherty proposed a ban on teachers' strikes, you said, "This type of dogmatic approach is the politics of the past. When we're throwing out these

neat solutions scratched on the back of an envelope, we might want to think about what the cost is and if we really want to go there."

Premier, I am wondering if you've determined what kind of cost will now be connected with mandatory volunteer services in our schools right across Ontario. How

much are you now prepared to pay for the basketball coach, the volleyball coach, the hockey coach, the soccer coach, the football coach, the drama coach, the after-school tutoring and the teachers

who stay behind and help out with putting the yearbook together? What kind of solution have you scratched on the back of your envelope so that you have, instead, avoided the issue of doing what is

right for our students, which is to introduce today in this Legislature nothing more than a clean bill, as we have done in keeping with the traditions of this House in the past? Why is it that you

have chosen instead to put a second part to this bill which has province-wide implications to all policy? Why wouldn't you do the right thing, the honourable thing and the responsible thing? If you

want to make a change to provincial education policy, then why wouldn't you stand up and call an election?

Hon Mr Eves: Yesterday cabinet passed a change to regulation 298 under the Education Act, which defines "strike." The only five activities

that we included are the five I rhymed off to him today. So he might want to know what he's talking about before he yips and yaps. The only five activities that we are asking teachers to perform

are the five I mentioned to him earlier in question period. Can he remember them? He should get a copy of Instant Hansard. Tell me which one of the five you are against, because that's all we are

asking you to do.

PENSION PLAN

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is to the Premier. Premier, sitting in the gallery are some 35 members of the

Participating Co-operatives of Ontario Trusteed Pension Plan. They represent over 2,300 employees of farm and dairy co-operatives located all over Ontario. They worked hard all their lives and they

thought they could count on a modest income in their retirement years from their employment pensions, but that hasn't happened. Their pension plan has been fatally damaged by a risky investment

strategy gone terribly wrong, accompanied by a breakdown in the regulation of pensions in this province. This month, those very modest pension benefits were cut in half, and the plan will be wound

up.

These people played by the rules, they worked hard all their lives, they met their responsibilities, and now the pension rules let them down. Will you take

immediate action and have your Minister of Finance meet with the plan's sponsors and develop an action plan to restore those benefits for people who deserve those hard-earned pension benefits?

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): The Minister of Finance will respond very directly to the leader of the third

party.

Hon Janet Ecker (Minister of Finance): I appreciate the honourable member raising this issue. As he knows, my office has been in touch with

him. I will be meeting with the representatives of the pensioners after question period.

This is certainly a very difficult situation for these individuals. The financial regulator has been working with this particular pension plan to ensure it was

on a sound footing. When the board trustees attempted to work out a resolution -- when it became evident that there were problems there, they attempted to work out a resolution. I think, as the

honourable member knows, virtually all of the board of trustees are made up of plan members or former plan members. They were not able to come to a solution. They exercised their rights to wind up

the plan. That is their right under the plan, and the regulator is working with them to try to resolve that. In the meantime, the plan members have served notice that they will be taking legal

action for breach of fiduciary duty against the board members.

Mr Hampton: I asked the Premier the question because there is a long list of government failure here and a real need for government action.

The Premier should know that multi-employer pension plans, such as this pension plan, are not covered by the pension insurance fund. The Financial Services Commission of Ontario, your government's

pension regulator, had ample warning of the investment problems, yet you chose to do nothing.

Premier, your government made mistakes, the plan trustees made mistakes, the investment manager made mistakes, but it's these innocent pensioners who are now

being forced to pay the price. What are you going to do to restore the full pensions that these people worked hard all their lives to have which have now been taken from them?

Hon Mrs Ecker: As the honourable member will know, the majority of workers do not have pension plans. The multi-employer plan, which this kind

is, was an attempt to make sure that more workers were covered, so it did provide them with pension benefits. In this case, the plan ran into financial difficulty. The regulator had been working

with them to put that plan on a solid basis. They had been able to do that until recently.

I appreciate the honourable member's concerns. We are attempting to find a resolution. There is a notice of legal action by the plan members against the board,

which is also part of what is occurring right now.

Mr Hampton: The Premier should know and the minister should know that the only reason these folks were forced to go to court is because your

government has been missing in action. We told you over a year ago that there were serious problems with Ontario's pension regulatory system and with Ontario legislation that's supposed to protect

pensions. We told you, for example, that there was no coverage for multi-employer pension plans. We told you, for example, that in other jurisdictions they already allow vesting at day one. Other

jurisdictions already allow for portability. Other jurisdictions have already put in place tougher regulations to ensure that the investment adviser doesn't take some kind of risky jaunt with other

people's money. Your government has been missing in action. You have done nothing.

My question for the Premier is this: Will you do something for these people and for all the people across Ontario who have contributed to pension plans but who

are now facing increasingly risky situations because your government has chosen to do nothing?

Hon Mrs Ecker: I appreciate the honourable member's concern but it is a good, interesting point to note here that when your party was in

government, sir, some of the things you are advocating today, you refused to do at the time.

Mr Speaker, I appreciate his point. We know we have an issue with this particular plan. The regulator is very sensitive to trying to work out a resolution

here. As I've said, I'm going to meet with the representatives of the pensioners here to resolve this issue. Again, I would caution the honourable member, there may well be legal action against the

board members. There are a number of issues that need to be resolved. The regulator has been on this case with this plan for quite some time to try to work out a resolution, and we need to do

that.

MEAT INSPECTION

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): Again to the Premier: Premier, the report of mad cow disease in Alberta has rocked Ontario's beef

cattle industry, and the people of Ontario are nervous about the quality of the food. We need to realize the importance of meat inspectors, just as we needed to realize the importance of water

inspectors in the wake of Walkerton.

It was a meat inspector who pulled the suspect cow from the line of cattle going to slaughter in Alberta and deemed it, rightfully, unfit for consumption.

In 1995, Ontario had 150 full-time, committed and well-trained meat inspectors in the province. Today, under your government, there are eight full-time

inspectors. The rest are part-time, on-contract people who lack training and lack experience. Premier, what do you intend to do to beef up the meat inspection in Ontario? Or do you think it's okay

to ask private contractors -- who do not have adequate training, many of whom move on after only a few weeks on the job -- do you think that's adequate protection for the food safety of Ontario

residents?

Hon Ernie Eves (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): The Minister of Agriculture and Food can respond very directly to the leader

of the third party and correct the misinformation he left the public with.

Hon Helen Johns (Minister of Agriculture and Food): First of all, I want to say to the people and the farmers and processors of Ontario that

we have done a thousand tests of beef in Ontario this year and not one has come back with BSE. Our research indicates that our food in Ontario is safe.

We have a number of things we do to ensure safety. We have meat inspectors who are trained adequately and full-time contract inspectors, and we do some 160,000

hours of inspections in a year. We also do more lab work than any other province for the number of cows we have in the province. With that, we have found that we have no BSE in this province.

Mr Hampton: It's about the quality of meat inspections and the quality of meat inspectors. In 1995, there were 150 full-time trained

inspectors. Today there are only eight full-time inspectors; the rest are part-time contractors. This is what the auditor said in his 2001 report, when he noted that food safety deficiencies that

could pose risks to human health were not corrected fast enough by your government. He also said that an effective meat inspection program was highly dependent upon recruitment and retention of

trained staff. Your program has failed miserably at this, with over a 30% turnover rate. In other words, of the meat inspectors you have, 30% are always leaving the job. Why? Because you've frozen

their pay, because you don't provide them with adequate training and because there's no pension and no benefits. So they leave. And what happens? Ontarians are put at risk.

I put to the Premier and to the Minister of Agriculture: in view in what has happened in Alberta, don't you think it's time to hire full-time, trained meat

inspectors in Ontario once again?

Hon Mrs Johns: First off, I'd like to say this is a really important issue in rural Ontario and I can't believe the third party; I just can't

believe it.

The meat inspectors in the province have a grievance before the grievance settlement board, and I'm not speaking to that issue today, but I want to tell you

that we have increased our inspections in Ontario. As I said, we have done 160,000 inspections. That is more than we have ever done in the province. We have 35,000 additional inspector hours. For

future processing activities we have 10 new food inspectors, scientists and technicians, the equivalent of 17,000 hours, to better target our meat inspection processes. There is not one animal

slaughtered in this province without a meat inspector being there. This province has the safest meat inspection and slaughter abilities of any province. We should be proud of that. We should be

standing here today and talking about the great job we're doing. We should be talking about the new facilities we have at the University of Guelph that we spent $500,000 --

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): I'm afraid the minister's time is up.

RENDERING INDUSTRY

Mr Pat Hoy (Chatham-Kent Essex): My question is to Minister of Agriculture. The animal rendering industry is in chaos today. Ontario produces

12,000 tonnes of dead animal stock and remnants from slaughter and restaurant grease. This is rendered into meat meal, and 40% to 60% of that is exported to the US. The border is now closed to

Canadian meat meal because of BSE. Renderers have no capacity for storage. Farmers are going to have rotting carcasses under the blazing sun. I don't need to explain the potential health hazards

from these rotting animals. The rendering industry has told your ministry there will be a crisis within days. Farmers have nowhere to take their dead animal stock.

So far, your response has been to suggest a meeting next week. That's not good enough. We need you to take action immediately. Why has your ministry been

unwilling to meet immediately to address this major public health and economic crisis in the rendering industry?

Hon Helen Johns (Minister of Agriculture and Food): Let me say that the rendering industry is a very important industry in the province, and

this government has done a great deal to ensure it has a future in the province.

I understand the border is closed, but we have every intention of working with the federal government to quickly resolve this issue. It's important for the

beef production industry, it's important for the processing industry and it's important for the customers who eat beef in Ontario to have this border open.

I was talking to the federal government today -- to Minister Vanclief and to Shirley McLellan out of Alberta -- and they both assure me they are doing

everything they can to open this border as quickly as possible. Ontario is monitoring, we're pushing and we're working to ensure that the beef industry has a strong future in Ontario.

Mr Hoy: The rendering industry wants you to talk with them. Minister, I just mentioned that 12,000 tonnes of this material is in place every

week. The economic impact of BSE will be terrible across the cattle industry. We need to act to ensure this doesn't become a public health crisis. The normal day-to-day by-products of abattoirs and

processing plants can't just be left lying around. They won't wait calmly while we try to get the border reopened. They are going to rot and be a potential source of disease to other animals and

perhaps to humans.

Your ministry has been treating this like a secondary issue. Preserving the public health of Ontarians should be the first thing on your mind. Instead of

fobbing off this issue until next week, will you commit to having the ministry take action? Will you immediately call a meeting with the key renderers and develop a strategy for dealing with this

serious economic and public health problem now?

Hon Mrs Johns: I'm surprised at the tone of the opposition on a day like this for the agricultural community. But let me say that the ministry

has been meeting with rendering companies. I'm happy to have the ministry meet. I'm happy to meet; my door is open. I've been out consulting for the last eight weeks. They could have easily come

and talked to me, and I'm happy to have them come in.

But let me say that we're doing everything possible on this side of the House to lower the concerns about this. We know there have been a thousand tests done

in Ontario. We know that none of the cows have any positive reaction or show of BSE. Our research tells us that the beef in Ontario is safe. We all need to remember that. We all need to work on

that premise. We all need to be supportive of our agriculture and agribusinesses in Ontario. It's the second-largest industry, and it makes this province tick. Our food is safe.

VISITORS

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Just before we continue, we have a former member in the members' gallery west. We have with us Barb Fisher, the

member for Bruce in the 32nd Parliament.

We also have a federal colleague, Mr Peter MacKay, the member for Pictou-Antigonish-Guysborough.

We welcome our honoured guests.

New question, the member for Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale.

NURSES

Mr Raminder Gill (Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale): My question is for the hard-working Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities, who,

despite the fearmongering of the opposition, solved the double cohort.

Minister, actually I wanted to ask you this question last week. As you are aware, last week was National Nursing Week, when we celebrate the contributions

nurses make to improve our care and standard of living. Ontario is the destination of choice for many internationally trained nurses who want to put their skills to work in our health care system.

Our government is committed to helping them become licensed to practise in Ontario. One of the excellent programs our government supports is the CARE for Nurses program. This is a partnership with

Toronto's WoodGreen Community Centre, the Kabayan community centre, St Michael's Hospital, the Yee Hong Centre for Geriatric Care and St Joseph's Health Centre. The CARE program is designed to

increase the number of internationally trained nurses who pass the licence exam and become certified to practise nursing in Ontario.

Minister, recently you announced additional support for the CARE program. Can you please tell the House about this initiative and how it will help to improve

nurses working in Ontario?

Hon Dianne Cunningham (Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities, minister responsible for women's issues): I am here, obviously, with

my colleagues in this Legislative Assembly to continue the celebration of nurses in Ontario and to congratulate them on the great job they do every day on the front lines. On April 29, I was at

George Brown College here in Toronto as we made an announcement for the CARE nursing project. This is a project that supports more internationally trained nurses in being trained and given the kind

of education they need to pass their credentials and their exams so they can get jobs. We announced $475,000.

I will say this is a model for the country, right here in Toronto. Now 115 nurses have become licensed, and 94 are working as registered nurses or registered

practical nurses since this CARE program began. It's a great success story, and I hope we'll do much more of it.

Mr Gill: Thank you, Minister, for that answer. CARE for Nurses is just one of many programs that our government is supporting to help

internationally trained professionals put their skills to work in Ontario. I understand, Minister, that we have programs to support immigrants who are pharmacists, technologists, midwives, computer

programmers and a host of other professions that are high-demand in our economy.

Can you please tell the House what the results of the CARE for Nurses program have been so far and how it fits into our government's overall agenda to help

internationally trained professionals practise their chosen profession in Ontario?

Hon Mrs Cunningham: Again, this new money will allow another 100 internationally trained nurses to be licensed and to get jobs. It's long

overdue. It's a great success story.

My colleague the Minister of Health has a program to expand opportunities for internationally trained physicians. The CARE for Nurses program has more than

doubled the success for internationally trained nurses to be successful in writing their exams, which is the most difficult part. Before this program, 33% of foreign-trained nurses passed the exam;

now 70% of participants are succeeding. We should all be celebrating on behalf of them and their families.

The internationally trained pharmacy graduate program is in its early stages, but we already have 96 people licensed as internationally trained pharmacists. I

see the former Minister of Health, who was supportive of this in the very beginning. It's a great thing to be invited to their graduation and to honour them and to share in their success with their

families.

This is just two of 13 bridge training programs in Ontario. We've invested $15 million in bridge training programs, Mr Speaker, and I know you support this as

well in your own riding. So thank you very much.

PRIVATE HOSPITALS

Ms Sandra Pupatello (Windsor West): My question is for the Minister of Health. Minister, last week we learned that a preferred bid has been

selected for the private hospital plan at William Osler Health Centre in Brampton. From this it's clear that you've decided to push forward with your plans to privatize health care in this

province. You still have not tabled any evidence to suggest that this is cheaper, faster or safer for the public in Ontario, and yet still you press forward.

I'd like to read a quote to you from Mr Romanow. He said, "Many of the so-called `new solutions' being proposed for health care -- pay-as-you-go, user and

facility fees, fast-track treatment for the lucky few and wait-lists for everyone else -- are not new at all. We've been there. They are old solutions that didn't work then, and were discarded for

that reason. And the preponderance of evidence is that they will not work today."

Minister, will you agree to stop plans to privatize our hospitals, freeze this contract process and go to the people in an election so that they will tell you

they do not want to privatize?

Hon Tony Clement (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): The Dalton McGuinty agenda is to stop a new hospital being built in Brampton,

Ontario, for the people of Brampton and for the people of Caledon and for the people of Mississauga, to stop a 608-bed modern facility helping to attract more doctors and nurses, better equipment

for our community care and hospital care, all university-accessible, all available under the Canada Health Act and the Public Hospitals Act. That's what a Dalton McGuinty government would do. It

would stop a brand new hospital in Brampton. We on this side of the House want better health care in Brampton, want better health care in Ontario. We're going to move ahead.

Ms Pupatello: Minister, what you just said is absolute nonsense, and you know it. What we're telling you today is that not only are these

private hospitals for Brampton, for Ottawa, for Markham-Stouffville, you've moved ahead with privatizing CTs and MRIs, and to this day you have tabled no evidence that it is safer, cheaper or more

accessible to the public. The only way these private companies will make money, Minister, is if they operate with a different set of rules. It's the only way they can make money.

Minister, it is incumbent on you and your government to go to the people and ask them if they want privatization in the health system. We call on you: call an

election before you let this happen. Call an election, Minister.

Hon Mr Clement: In this document, despite the honourable member's protestations, Dalton McGuinty promises to stop new hospitals being built

under a public-private formula to make sure they happen earlier, to make sure they're available for the people of Ontario.

Our leader, our Premier, has said we want more health care, we want better health care and we want health care to be universally accessible. We want to use the

private sector and the public sector to get better health care. The people of Ontario will choose. I know they'll choose the big plan, not this plan.

URBAN STRATEGY

Ms Marilyn Mushinski (Scarborough Centre): My question is for the Associate Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, who's also responsible

for urban issues. Coming from a predominantly urban riding, I'm particularly pleased to know that the government is listening to, and in turn responding to, the concerns of our urban centres. I

believe it's important for those who live in urban centres to be assured that our government has invested in strong municipalities that will remain globally competitive in the 21st century.

This government has demonstrated its commitment to cities through its responsible funding directions and decisions and sound policy initiatives. Minister,

could you please enlighten this House as to your findings from your recently released urban consultation report.

Hon Tina R. Molinari (Associate Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): I thank the member from Scarborough Centre, who is a true advocate

for her constituents, for raising the question here today. Ontario's urban centres are the lifeblood of our provincial economy. As I have said before, no two cities in this province are alike, and

as our Premier has stated, we need to respond to the challenges facing our cities. Our Smart Growth initiative and the memorandum of understanding which we have with the Association of

Municipalities of Ontario are two major examples of how we have responded effectively and in a tangible way for our cities.

I should note that our continuing discussions with cities will not focus exclusively on revenues, but rather on partnerships that will allow for more effective

and efficient ways of doing business. In my report 2003 and Beyond: A Smart Approach for Ontario's Urban Centres, I detailed the needs that were expressed to me by Ontario's urban leaders. Urban

centres are looking for long-term funding for support and infrastructure, sustainable sources of revenue --

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): I'm afraid the associate minister's time is up. Supplementary?

Ms Mushinski: I'm particularly happy to hear about the part that you're playing in improving our relationship with municipal partners. I know

it's your personal initiative that has a lot to do with this, and I believe that's to be applauded.

There was a great deal of anticipation, prior to the federal government's throne speech earlier this year, with regard to assistance for cities.

Interjections.

Ms Mushinski: Yes, I know that members on the opposite side will be very interested in the response to this, given that their federal cousins

did nothing. In fact, the result was absolutely less than satisfactory.

I would like to know what this government is doing to help urban centres deal with the ongoing challenges they face on a day-to-day basis.

Hon Mrs Molinari: What I heard from my consultations from the urban centres is that they need long-term funding and support for

infrastructure, sustainable sources of revenue and a coordinated way of responding to some of their needs. The federal government has paid lip service to supporting our urban centres and we now

need to hold them to their word and have them become a full partner and participate in helping our municipalities.

In the meantime, our government is proposing to help our cities by building and expanding Ontario's highways, supporting the growth of public transit and

resolving key challenges such as waste management, brownfield redevelopment and affordable housing as part of an integrated plan. We will also create a powerful Smart Growth board for each of

Ontario's five regions to lead the way in putting Smart Growth principles into action. It's our job as a government to provide the leadership required to meet the challenges facing cities

today.

HYDRO GENERATION

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): I have a question for the Minister of Energy. May 12 was the deadline for your proposals to put dirty

diesel generators in urban neighbourhoods across southern Ontario. I've asked that you make public these proposals so that people will know when and where they're going to have one of your dirty

diesel generators in their neighbourhood. You've refused to make your proposals public. Minister, don't you think people deserve to know whether or not you're going to put one of your

hyper-polluting diesel generators in their neighbourhood?

Hon John R. Baird (Minister of Energy, Minister responsible for francophone affairs): I have been clear in stating quite unequivocally that

there will be no dirty diesel generators going into urban areas. I know that comes as bad news for the member opposite, as he's seeking to fearmonger and continually arouse concern right across

Ontario. He might want to stand in his place and tell this House why, when he was around the cabinet table, they issued more than 500 megawatts of new dirty diesel power generators in this

province; why, when he had an opportunity, he could have stood up for the environment. I want to know, will the leader of the third party stand in his place and tell the people of Ontario why he

did nothing, not only about dirty diesel but about dirty coal, for five long years in Ontario? Will he do that? Will he come clean for the people of Ontario?

Mr Hampton: It's clear the Minister of Energy is living in his continuing fantasyland. What you refuse to tell people is that those so-called

500 megawatts of diesel generation were hospital standbys that were never used. The problem for people in Ontario this summer is, as they know from your failure of hydro privatization and

deregulation last summer, that there's every likelihood they will be used now.

But my question to the minister is this: I outlined yesterday how the state of California, when your friends at Enron were manipulating hydroelectricity supply

there, used energy conservation and energy efficiency strategies to reduce peak demand in the summer of 2001 by almost 5,500 megawatts. Why aren't you pursuing an energy conservation/energy

efficiency strategy, instead of proposing to start up dirty diesel generators across neighbourhoods in southern Ontario?

Hon Mr Baird: The member opposite wants to know where the dirty diesel generators are going in urban areas: nowhere. He continues to

perpetrate a myth.

But I thought I had seen everything. I've been in this House for eight years. I've listened continuously to questions from the leader of the third party,

talking about how those of us on this side always extol the virtues of California. I read the clippings this morning and it said, "Hampton Lauds California Energy Motto." I thought I had seen

everything. He's wanting us in this province to look to California for advice on energy. Well, I'll tell you one person who did. The person who heads Energy Probe, Tom Adams, said, "Hampton's

conservation claims are `not credible.'"

ORDERS OF THE DAY

THRONE SPEECH DEBATE /

DÉBAT SUR LE DISCOURS DU TRÔNE

Resuming the debate adjourned on May 7, 2003, on the amendment to the amendment to the motion for an address in reply to the speech of His Honour the

Lieutenant Governor at the opening of the session.

Mr Ernie Parsons (Prince Edward-Hastings): I'm pleased to speak to this. I will be sharing my time with the member for Essex.

It is difficult to know where to start. When going through this speech from the throne, it promises Ontario -- actually, it's probably more of a threat than a

promise, but I'd like to share with the people of Ontario some of the points that leapt out at me as I ran through the throne speech.

The first thing that I found rather startling was the statement made by this government that, "for the first time since 1908, an Ontario government has

introduced five consecutive balanced budgets." That may be their statement, and that may even be their perception. It may very well be that this is an innocent statement because they don't really

understand the budget process, but the people that do, such as Standard and Poor's and a number of other professional bond rating agencies, say the budget is not balanced. The budget is contingent

on selling assets of over $2 billion. That is somewhat similar to an individual saying, "My household budget balances for the year, as long as I sell the house."

What these assets are is not defined. Will they be sold at fire sale prices to actually balance the budget or will they be sold or not sold? That statement, I

think, is somewhat misleading to the people of Ontario. This is not a balanced budget, according to any of the financial experts in North America.

It says, "Your government has paid down $5 billion in provincial debt and will continue to pay down Ontario's debt to ensure long-term growth and prosperity."

I think to balance that, we need to point out that because of this government's mishandling of hydro and of the entire electricity issue, the provincial debt -- there's only one taxpayer and it may

be a debt attributed to hydro, but the fact is that the debt is going up every day to cover the energy costs for us purchasing electricity. It's in a separate budget line but I would say -- and I'm

sure they've used the line themselves but they don't accept it -- there is one taxpayer. For the people of Ontario, our debt is increasing each and every day on the electricity side.

It says here that they are wanting to work with small business to encourage job creation. My experience, from small businesses in my constituency, is that this

government -- while talking about tax cuts and talking about taking less money, the retail sales tax branch has been absolutely attacking small businesses, coming into one- and two-person

operations that do not have a high income, do not have the expertise to fight against a ministry that says, "You owe us more money. You can appeal, but first you give us some money, then we'll deal

with the appeal." I think this government has been absolutely brutal to small business, and that seems somewhat at odds with their statement about being supportive of small business.

The Ontarians with Disabilities Act was passed by this government with no teeth, with no action in it, really, that applied to the average life of an average

citizen in Ontario. As far as the Ontario disability support program, this government continues to force thousands of Ontarians with disabilities to live $7,000 below the poverty level.

The statement says, "Your government recognizes that there are some Ontarians who need extra help to cope with disabilities. It understands that people with

disabilities often have special needs that make it difficult for them to work. That's why it will increase Ontario disability support program payments to better help people with disabilities lead

happier, more productive and dignified lives." A very interesting statement -- first of all, extremely vague; no commitment to numbers. But I understand why they're not committing to numbers in the

throne speech. It's because when one examines this infobudget that they did at an auto parts plant, there's no provision in the budget for an increase in the ODSP. They can't put numbers down

because they budgeted zero in their ODSP plan.

It says, "Your government will reform support for children with special needs to ensure that parents have a greater say in how their needs are met." I talk,

and I know government members talk, to constituents who have children with major difficulties. The parents are striving, with all they can, to keep the children at home. Keeping the children at

home with them is the best for the child, best for the parents and best for the economy, but this government has been absolutely miserly on special-services-at-home agreements that allow the

children to continue to remain in the house with their parents and receive services. This won't improve that. This, again, is gobbledygook. We need to be concerned about keeping children with

disabilities in the most nurturing environment. That's what their parents said. I'm not just talking about individuals under 15, 16 or 18 years old. There are adult children who may physically be

25, 30 or 40, but they still will receive the best possible service at home with their parents. This province needs to do much better than they're doing on that side.

There is reference in here, as there is in every speech, to cracking down on welfare fraud. I would suggest that at the same time they actively pursue the

millions and millions of dollars in unpaid corporate taxes that this province is making very little or no effort to collect.

They talk about their energy supplies: "Your government will ensure that Ontarians have a supply of power today, tomorrow and into the future." This

government, with the boondoggle that they made of Ontario Hydro and electricity, has put thousands and thousands of jobs at risk in this province. Larger industries that are now paying two or three

or four or five times what they used to pay for electricity can no longer be competitive in the world market. The advantage of having a business in Ontario for generations has been electricity at

cost -- an ensured supply at a fair price. Now industry, over and over, is saying, "Our costs have escalated so much that jobs -- this government that preaches jobs doesn't actually walk the walk,

and has jeopardized thousands of good jobs in Ontario over its mismanagement of electricity." Again, those words ring hollow.

Here's a statement that hits pretty close to home: "To increase the number of nurses practising in Ontario, your government will launch an aggressive nurse

recruitment and retention program." They're going to try to attract more nurses to Ontario and keep the ones that are here. Here's the problem, folks: in my community, Quinte Healthcare, a hospital

amalgamation that consists of Picton, Trenton, Belleville and North Hastings, is reducing nursing hours and laying off nurses. Why? Because this government has underfunded Quinte Healthcare by $2

million. They are allowing nurses to be laid off and reducing the number of nursing hours.

Interjection.

Mr Parsons: For the member from Northumberland: you know that it's true that the nursing hours are being cut.

Interjection.

Mr Parsons: They do not have money to have nurses in the hospital. What kind of a hospital is it when they're forced to lay off nurses, not

because of what they want, but because this government has underfunded the operating costs? Nurses are being laid off, while at the same time this rhetoric in here says that they're going to

attract nurses.

We're seeing in Ontario half of our nurses being offered part-time hours, having to work at more than one hospital site, being given no benefits, while at the

same time other jurisdictions are absolutely luring them away. The words are extremely hollow on this one.

Cancer care: two thirds of patients in Ontario, when diagnosed with cancer, do not get the treatment within the time frame recommended by the medical

community. Within eight weeks, they do not get to start the radiation. This says, "No child, parent, senior or any citizen of a compassionate province should have to wait one moment longer than

necessary to receive care." Two thirds of individuals in this province are not receiving the care in the time frame that they need for cancer.

They talk about improving hospitals. What they're going to do is allow the private sector to build hospitals and then rent them back. Isn't it strange, in our

average, everyday life outside of this chamber, that each of us struggles to buy a residence, whether it be a condominium or a house? We want to move out of a rental apartment and into an

apartment, condominium or house that we own, because we know that it is cheaper in the long run to own it rather than to forever pay rent. This move toward having the hospitals built by the private

sector and owned by the private sector will force the government to pay rent forever on these buildings. Long after they're paid off, the rent will continue. This is taking what should be patient

money and deflecting it into profit for a corporation.

"Your government," it says under the education component, "will provide tools and resources to ensure phonics are available to all schools."

Phonics never left our school system. Phonics has always been available and is one of the approaches used in teaching. Not every child learns the same way. Not

every child benefits from the same program. Schools have used a multitude of approaches and techniques to teach reading and writing. The inference that phon